Model Jodie Marsh attacks Co-op ban on ‘lads mags’

3:27 pm - September 9th 2013

by Newswire    

      Share on Tumblr

Following the decision by Coop to take Lads mags off their shelves entirely, the fitness model Jodie Marsh launched an impassioned defence of the controversial publications on Twitter.

Here is the multiple-tweet point she made. Do you agree?

















Jodie Marsh is biased here though, as she earns money from those magazines.

But what about the women who are impacted from those mags?

Writer Vicky Beeching pointed out earlier how Lads mags affected her

– It damaged my understanding of what it means to be a woman; the lie that we are only worth as much as the attractiveness of our bodies.

– It taught me from a tiny age that to get men’s attention, women “have” to look a certain way and that becoming physically attractive should be our all-consuming task.

– It hit me with the reality that women are sex objects within culture and this must just be accepted not challenged. Even though this deeply upset me as a little girl I already felt like I was faced with the need to accept this as the norm.

– It actually made me not want to be a woman as I felt like my ‘lot’ in life was a terrible one: that I was destined to spend my days fighting to look attractive only in order to be used as some kind of object.

Both sides have a point?

    Share on Tumblr   submit to reddit  

About the author

· Other posts by

Story Filed Under: News

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Reader comments

Wow. Vicky Beeching got all that just from being exposed to the covers of FHM and the like?

Like any market, the Co-Op can choose what it sells just as consumers can choose what they buy(within the law) Jodie Marsh can choose to pose for anything she likes, but this empowerment is not a monopoly.

Er, Sunny – there’s a definite feel of ‘You’re sacked!’/’I resign!’ about this. The Co-op asked the publishers of Nuts and Zoo to use ‘modesty bags’, and they said they would rather not be sold in Co-op stores than comply:

Zoo and Nuts magazines are to boycott one of Britain’s biggest retailers, the Cooperative Group, over the supermarket’s demand for lads’ magazines to mask explicit pictures on their front covers.

The weekly titles announced on Thursday that they have refused the Co-op’s ultimatum to put the magazines in modesty bags to shield pictures of naked women from shoppers. Paul Williams, managing director of the Nuts publisher IPC Inspire, said the magazine would now be pulled from the Co-op’s 4,000 stores in the UK. He added: “Co-op’s knee-jerk attempt to restrict access to a product that consumers have enjoyed for nearly a decade is wrong.”

Still, Jodie Marsh in LibCon – well I never.

PS: Plus, for the record, I suggested that going after ‘lad mags’ would end in a mess years ago in response to this article by Rowan Davies (see comments). It looks like I was right.

Sunny: ‘Jodie Marsh is biased here though, as she earns money from those magazines.’

So an employee isn’t entitled to have a view about people trying to put her out of a job? (Incidentally, you try telling sex workers who are in favour of decriminalisation that they’re ‘biased’ because of how they earn their living, and see where it gets you.)

It’s as if the feminist sex wars never really went away.

Some very powerful sounding arguments on both sides, though I’d give Jodie the edge. I think these mags are generally pitiful, but in a liberal society that should mean I don’t buy them, not that I cry for them to be banned.

I find the arguments for the harm they cause rather contrived. The most they should cause is for the mags to be put away from the normal sight line.

Of course, it’s up to the Co-op to choose what it wants to sell. They know who they’re marketing to and the image they want to project.

The retail side of the Co-operative organisation requires that magazines sold in their shops meet a “modesty standard”. The standard can be met by placing magazines in a bag which obscures the cover photo but displays the magazine title.

Theoretically, this will discourage casual purchasers of lad mags, because they cannot view before buying. Apart from Lewis, 14 year old son of a friend, I have never seen anyone previewing Nuts in my local Co-op shop. Or any other magazine — cheapskates who think that magazine counters are a public library don’t shop at my local Co-op.

“And FYI I’d rather my daughter see naked women being CELEBRATED in lads mags than being called too fat or too skinny in women’s mags!!”

… yes, because of course the women in lads’ mags are so diverse, some fat, some thin, some unfit, some athletic. A true celebration of the variety and beauty of women.

… I don’t think.

A man walks down the same street three days in a row, each day he smiles and winks at a passing female.

> The first female blanks him yet sends no negative energy towards him, its almost as if she did not see him.

> The second female smiles at him.

> The third female becomes very angry, to her this is clear evidence she lives in a patriarchy and that women are sex objects in our culture, whats more this man thinks he has the right to communicate with her.

Some things are harmful in our society there for they are banned on the back of objective evidence, other things however can cause harm but its subjective. When I was younger I heard a group of women talking about men or rather the size of their genitals. Mocking those in their tales who were not up to the standards they set whilst talking about those who were as if they only existed and had value for one reason, to please them, I felt empty for a moment, do women really treat men like a piece of meat?

Then I realized no, but these particular ones do. Society is composed of many different attitudes and to grow up as a well adjusted balanced person good parenting is required. While a women on the cover of a magazine may be enough to trigger bad feelings in some they need to be taught they are not the person on the magazine, it in no way reflects upon them just because they happen to be of the same gender. If that can not be dealt with the attitudes one must navigate in life never will be and they will exist if these magazines are around or not.

The vast majority have no problem with them, banning something due to the subjective opinions of a few is wrong, society is owned collectively.

R Coldbreath, missing the point there amigo, lads mags generally don’t have columns dedicated to slating how a woman looks unlike Heat or Closer. Good on Jodie Marsh, particularly for pointing out the class issue

I’d argue at best Vicky Beeching’s points are post hoc reasoning. At worst utter rubbish made up to support her intellectual arguments.

Or she could just be oversensitive to the point of being an anomaly.

Most of the time the majority of criticism comes from fashion mags women are much more likely to see and look at in depth etc.

I hate to side with Jodie Marsh

Also not all lads mags are the same, where do you draw the line? What about those tech mags that advertise with women on the front? Why are you judging nuts and zoo with the same brush as GQ, Esquire or even Front? What about the gay equivalent Attitude?

I don’t accept the point about modesty bags etc, it’s pointless, they aren’t naked (which would apparently be awful) and it’d never be applied equally.

Also if you decide on modesty bags then modesty bag everything that shows flesh or nothing, no arbitrary half measures.

You don’t like it, don’t buy it. It’s not as if they are thrust in your face, they are

Same with page 3, if you don’t like the Sun don’t buy it, don’t try to make it illegal or ban it. Let the market decide.

Like so many things in politics and life you can’t just give in to the people with the loudest voice with a particular vested interest or ideological bent because they often do not represent the people. Probably far more people support lads mags but they wouldn’t campaign in the same way.

Also finally one problem feminists often have (and it’s a common thing in such ideological stances) is that they’ve taken their particular interpretation of feminism and it becomes an moral ideology not a practical issue. They then can’t understand that other women, identifying as feminist or not, might fundamentally disagree with them on things particularly things like images of the female form, pornography, sex work etc etc. It isn’t just about creating an equal society. These things become moral issues they won’t compromise on, they won’t allow room for those opinions on their side let alone air them in a positive manner, and thus you get division and infighting and a lot of women who think feminism doesn’t represent them or they actively oppose yet if you asked them do you support a more equal society etc they’d of course say yes.

11. CJ Down Under

I love that “On further analysis…”

I’d have to agree with Greg, it does look like Vicky Beeching is significantly over-egging the pudding at best with her claims. Moreover it’s a simplistic analysis on her part, given that the male body and male beauty is also increasingly becoming commodified, for exactly the same reasons. Ie to sell stuff.

The co op prides itself on being ethical, so it would ban certain products.

Vicky Beeching is being quite oversensitive and is over intellectualizing the effect that lads mags have on women. Do most women give them more than a passing thought? I doubt it, unless their husbands actually buy them.

Jodie Marsh’s livelihood depends on lads mags so her opinion is just as valid as Vicky Beeching. I don’t really like them but I like bans less.

Whilst nobody can gainsay Vicky Beeching’s feelings, the extract you published above reads like something from Milly Tant in Viz. Can seeing lad’s mags really have made her not wish to be a woman?

That aside, Jody Marsh’s contribution is based on the false premise that the Co-Op banned them. As has been pointed out the owners of the mags themselves decided they didn’t want them to be sold with a modesty panel. So it’s more of a boycott by the publishers.

One things is for sure: Ms J Marsh and Ms V Beeching are consummate self-publicists.

For me, the issue isn’t that Vicky Beeching is being ‘oversensitive’. Rather, it’s the idea that her experience gets to determine policy (i.e. a ban), whereas Jodie Marsh’s is ‘biased’ and a woman whose ideas of body image were shaped by, say, Grazia and Kate ‘Nothing looks as good as skinny feels’ Moss doesn’t lead to social media campaigns against magazines like Vogue…unless they’re next on the hit-list.

16. Colin Butterworth

Lets not get dragged back to the fifties. Well said Jodie.

I don’t understand what Beeching means by “tiny age”. It suggests about five years old to me, but I think she would have been about 12 when lads mags started to be published in Britain.

In any case, I imagine the greater effect on a woman in her formative years in terms of “having to look a certain way” would be the magazines and newspapers her mother reads and the ones that tend to appear at eye level on the rack. I find it hard to believe that weekly or monthly lads mags, with circulations in the tens of thousands, would have as much effect as the Daily Mail, with circulation in the millions, which consistently bangs on, usually critically, about how women look.

As for Co-op, it should be free to sell magazines in or out of modesty bags as it decides. Magazine publishers should be free to sell Co-op their magazines.

@11, “I love that “On further analysis…””.


I think it fair to say that Beeching is indulging in a bit of rhetorical license here.

Wikipedia puts her as being born in 1979.

The oldest men’s lifestyle mags (excluding Playboy, which has always been top shelf) are GQ, which started in the 1930’s in the US, and FHM which first appeared as ‘For Him’ in 1985 and, as I recall, For Him was originally positioned as a more upmarket title to compete with GQ.

It wasn’t until the mid 1990’s, when it was sold to EMap and retitled FHM that it moved down market into what became the Lad’s Mags sector.

That would make Beeching’s concept of ‘very tiny’ a teenager and I rather suspect that anything she may learned about women having to look a certain way to attract men, up to an including her teenage years, is likely to have had rather more to do with the pernicious influence of Smash Hits, Just 17 and Cosmo than anything she might have encountered by running across a copy of GQ in her dentist’s waiting room.

To put it mildly, I suspect she’s confabulating based on her opinions of the magazines she’s seen during her adult life, few of which even existing when she was ‘very tiny’.

20. Richard Carey

@ 19 Jack C,


I understood it to be a snide remark about Jodie, implying she’s not smart enough to analyse.

The supposed impact that men’s magazines have had on Vicky Beeching is, even if true, blatantly atypical. What sort of person would be moulded to such an extent by magazines they don’t even read anyway?

I’m shocked to see the Co-op giving in to censorship and prudery in this way, frankly. We need to remember that you’re either in favour of free expression and sexual freedom or you’re not and there really is very little in the way of grey area in between.

The conservative impulse can express itself in many ways, including through supposedly “progressive” ideas. Remember that too.

22. Richard Carey

I wonder if there is any evidence that men’s taste in women has changed at all over recent years? I’ve heard mention that the younger crowd recoil in horror at female pubic hair. Other than this (if true), whatever the effects of these magazines, I find it hard to believe that men have only recently developed an interest in the kind of superficial feminine features displayed on the cover of FHM etc.


Speaking from personal experience, my own 13 year old daughter has never once given Lad’s Mags a second glance…

…she’s still far too interested in the contents of this week’s Doctor Who Adventures to give a toss about FHM.

24. the a&e charge nurse

Good discussion of ‘Media images and self-esteem’ here (p55)

Bottom line?
Self esteem is mostly in the eye of the beholder.

Additionally there is no evidence of causal link because, ‘while it is intuitively attractive to accept that idealised images of female beauty impact on teenagers’ aspirations and expectations about their looks, there has long been evidence that self-esteem and body confidence, as well as the more academically rigorous measures of well-being, are driven by much more deep-rooted factors, and an over-focus on advertising and images used within the beauty and fashion industries can be more of a distraction than a solution’.


Quite – got a recent, and very good, meta analysis by Chris Ferguson of Texas A&M University looking at media/body image studies.

Results – failed to find evidence of any kind of general effect.

Trouble is, when talking about this stuff, people normally ignore facts and go with gut instinct. It’s the classic right-wing moral panic (Dungeons and Dragons is making children into satanists!!!)

27. Derek Hattons Tailor

It is most definitely a class issue. The women who object are generally middle aged, middle class, media connected and with too much time on their hands. Mumsnet types purporting to speak for all women but who are just a noisy minority.


You’ll probably find that decisions to buy a loaf of bread are dependant on all of the things you outline, but that’s the way markets work. As the Co-Op is not in a position to ban lad’s mags from anywhere other than their own outlets, if there is a demand for it, the little newsagents next door will respond to that demand, consumers need not panic.

29. Derek Hattons Tailor

@28 I think you’re missing my point. The co-op don’t know how many of their customers actually object to lads mags on the shelves, they are responding to a moral panic whipped up by a minority whose voices are heard because, and only because, they belong to a certain demographic. This is denying other customers a choice on no logical basis. It has nothing to do with the market, if all supermarkets listened to all pressure groups, they wouldn’t stock anything, and would go out of business. So why are the co-op listening to this particular pressure group ?

It’s interesting that the sites advocating the removal of ‘Lads Mags’ offer no room for debate , it’s their view or no view , that’s not discussion it dictation, they are making a gross generalization that anyone who reads these magazines or dares to look at the female body is misogynistic and potentially a rapist , I don’t buy these magazines but I’ve glanced through one or two , when I’ve finished it doesn’t make me think any less of women,

It is a sad fact that I think the only industry in which women earn more than men is modelling but sad though it is it’s a fact! , many models have enjoyed very good careers out of modelling and gone on to have very successful careers after in other areas, as modelling gave them the money to do that, I don’t advocate brothels or legalisation of prostitutions just trying to get some perspective and there are far worse things in this world than this! Is there any concrete evidence that reading these magazines have ever prompted someone to go out and rape or beat up a woman or is it all supposition and university reports? If you study these kind of reports over the last 10 years there have been some very respected institutions that do reports on everything from the existence of Martians to the probability of Elvis still being alive, they take a very small catchment area and take a % of their views! (I know I have been involved in producing some of these reports)

I do get weary of women complaining about newspaper and magazines such as nuts and zoo exploiting women and objectifying them , if you bring it down to its basest level humans are mammals the same as any mammals on this planet and when you take away all the sophistication and achievements the human race have done a man’s primary purpose is to procreate it’s in his DNA! There gets to a point where feminists are going to have to realise wrong though it maybe is that this is the best it’s going to get and the more they push on every small point the less sympathy men are going to have , men are always going to want to feel that they are superior even though as proven they rarely are but if you take a scenario of a female in a male dominated office parse whether in a superior role or a subordinate you take that group of men and put them in a pub or other social setting without the woman present they will speak about her in a derogative way! Either about her ability or in a sexual way , you will never change that! no matter how much you protest it shouldn’t happen (and it shouldn’t) it always will regardless of whether its poor, working or upper class.

As for the issue of objectifying women , yes there is a lot of nudity in magazines and newspapers but sadly that’s because there is a demand for it , men have an overwhelming urge to see the female form naked which I think comes down to my point above , I would have no issue with female magazines or newspapers showing the equivalent amount of naked men but they don’t because women are not as crass as men , however I do find women’s magazines worse than men’s circling cellulite , insulting what someone’s wearing etc. men’s magazine complement how good someone looks (albeit without a top on). My daughter (who’s 12) has a topless picture of Liam from one direction on her wall but as soon as my son (who’s 16) wanted to put a picture of Lucy Pinder (a glamour model) up we said no for fear of offending any guests we had , what’s the difference , the difference is girls mature boys don’t.

Have you ever visited or seen sites such as ‘Lads bible’ or ‘Rack of the day’ on Facebook? Ever read the comments people leave regarding the posts? These views aren’t systemic of lads magazines, the readership of these magazines has dropped to a negligible level as men of a certain age have found other outlets to demean women and objectify them on social media , if you somehow stop that they will find another way. It will be a never-ending battle and I fear the more you push the more resentment men will feel and I worry that what your trying to prevent will become more prevalent

I’m sure I will get a flurry of responses abhorred about my comments but I’m just writing from an honest male who agrees there are many inadequacies in the current world and whilst many of them should be addressed there are many that should be just accepted rightly or wrongly

What irks more than anything are programmes aimed at women i.e. loose women for example which is as far as I’ve seen just an excuse to slag off men , if there was a programme called loose men it would cause outrage amongst feminists ! it’s got to the stage now where women feel as though due to the weight of history that they are still treated as the inferior sex when they are not , yes history has not been kind to women and in the past they have been unjustly treated , you only have to go back 40 years and see some old advertising to see what a sexist world we used to live in ,but it’s not like that now , there are so many sex discrimination laws no one can afford to be openly sexist anymore and that’s part of the problem , many people resent this whole culture of not having free speech for fear of offending someone and it drives the problem underground , the sexism unfortunately will always be there and by feminists bleating on about every issue starts to grate , men are full of testosterone and its inbred that they are here to protect the female of the species in the same way as any other creature on this planet and the constant demining of men however subtle in humorous TV ads or comedy shows dilutes that basic instinct and an interesting fact I read the other day is in the last 5 years more and more men are watching or looking at online pornography and this report surmised that it’s the only time a male can feel liberated and not ashamed to be looking or commenting on the female body. So I think the more feminist push for equal rights on everything more men (in general) are going to look at images that women find are exploitive or objectifying I really do not think we will ever get to a point that the feminists want I.e. equal rights on everything and a ban on pornography.

Please read these comments as an honest opinion on society and not just my views , I’m not sexist I’m in a relationship where we share the household duties & raising the kids 50/50 , we both work , I do the majority of the ironing and tidying she does the majority of the cooking (but only because she’s better than I am) we have 2 sons who we raise to respect girls and not objectify them ,we also have an 12yr girl who is very conscious of her weight so I do understand the trials and tribulations of the opposite sex! I really do think the more its talked about and highlighted the worse it’s going to get.

If this gets discussed in Parliament (which is obviously what you want) you know that no one would dare go against the ban for fear of offending the feminists! But if you do get them banned you won’t find men marching to demand them back they will just find another way to look at naked women, you would win a very small battle in an unwinnable war

In summing up and before you think I’m some misogynistic lunatic all the above paragraphs are from different blogs, websites , letters etc., and until you start accepting there can be other viewpoints and are prepared to discuss constructively without taking the moral high ground you will find very little sympathy I feel from the vast majority of people (certainly men)


Is there any evidence that the Co-Op are responding to a particular pressure group? And even if they were, they are free to do so. I remember when certain shops and supermarkets would not purchase goods from South Africa due to apartheid, others did not ban the goods. This appealed to supporters of the anti-apartheid movement, who chose to shop in outlets which upheld the ban, whereas those who did not care, were able to purchase those goods from other outlets.

Markets allow for all participants to choose, that’s why it’s normally referred to as ‘free’. And as consumers of lad’s mag are able to purchase those mags elsewhere, including the internet or postal subscriptions, why is it such a big deal that the Co-Op wanted to cover-up the magazines, note they have not banned them.

My daughter (who’s 12) has a topless picture of Liam from one direction on her wall but as soon as my son (who’s 16) wanted to put a picture of Lucy Pinder (a glamour model) up we said no for fear of offending any guests we had , what’s the difference , the difference is girls mature boys don’t.

Eh? Sounds more the case that girls are given the room to mature whilst the same behaviors and intentions from boys are seen as offensive and are blocked. Whoever the author is they may want to think about that.

I think a massive part of the issue with those who do want them banned, which explains the reason they have no issue with women’s magazines that are filled with anorexic women and toxic filth about being thin, which are cruel to females who do not display the very narrow qualities they have deemed as being the definition of beauty, is that men are not looking at women’s magazines in a sexual manner, but they are looking at the pictures in mens magazines that way, and even though its a passing glance, they them selves feel extremely uncomfortable about their own sexuality and lack confidence to an extreme point, if a man is looking at them or a picture in a magazine its enough to set them off.

“why is it such a big deal that the Co-Op wanted to cover-up the magazines,”

Why is it such a big deal that the Saudi government want to cover up all women?

I don’t see the difference. Conservatism and fear of sexuality are the same wherever they are.

34. Derek Hattons Tailor

@ 31 If it’s not a bid deal then why bother with the restrictions ? Pressure groups are making it a big deal. I am a member and regular customer of the co-op. It is my nearest supermarket. If they are responding to a demand from customers/members then where has that demand been expressed ? No one has mentioned any customer surveys, I have seen no protests, I have not responded to any questionnaires on the subject. Are you suggesting it is a coincidence that they have just restricted the sale of lads mags at the same times as mumsnet and other busy body groups have been publicly pushing for a ban ?
As it happens I do have a choice of supermarkets (only because I have a car and live in a relatively affluent area) but what if I didn’t ? As in most supposedly “free” markets, there are multiple constraints.
Why don’t the hordes of people who allegedly object go and do their shopping somewhere else/online if they find the sight of these magazines (which have been on sale for decades without an apparent issue) so offensive ?

I’d be interested to know how many women really do feel strongly on this point , I’m friends with a lot of women and when I ask them although they would never read them they are not bothered about them either , it seems to be a hard core group of extreme feminists! if you look at their website I noticed they’ve got 9000 facebook followers , the meerkat from the compare the market ads has over 700,000 , so whilst they are entilted to an opinion should we really be allowing this group to influence policy? , if they some how put these magazines out of buisness they jepodise a huge amount of peoples jobs who work for these magazines in a country already struggling for employment over an issue that the vast majority of females really could’nt care less about!


‘If it’s not a big deal then why bother with the restrictions?’ Equally we could argue that as it’s no big deal why stock the lad’s mags. In fact my local Co-Op doesn’t stock the magazines that I like to buy, perhaps by not stocking lad’s mags there would be room to stock those (btw this is meant as irony).

The fact is, Jodie Marsh will not lose work and consumers of lad’s mags will not be restricted, even in rural areas, postal subscription is the answer. And I really do doubt if you have information about the level of demand for said mags.

But I suspect that this isn’t really your concern, it appears that you want to impose your own views on what the Co-Op should stock, which is equally as illiberal as you are suggesting femenists and Mumsnet users are.

In other words, the odious Miss Marsh believes that the Co-op is obliged to help her make money from posing topless, and, in doing so, they, and she, are furthering “feminism”.

38. Rob the cripple

Poor thing has spent a lot of money making her assets stand out and now she wants to make that money back.

39. Self Righteous tw@

So presumably they will also be banning the sale of tobacco. To my knowledge no one has ever died from knocking one out to some pictures of a spotty chav who’s been touched up beyond all recognition.

On another note I wish Jodie Marsh would stick to going to the gym 5 hours a day and bathing in ronseal – her voice behind this carries no weight at all… Muppet!


Both cigarettes and lad’s mags are legally available, the Co-Op can choose what it wishes to sell or not sell.

Incidently, LC can also choose which subject to debate or not.

Jodie doesn’t mention she is in a rare and privileged position of power as one of the few glamour models in the country who can get away with just doing topless shoots – not one of the many now doing hardcore. Are these woman simply choosing to “celebrate” their bodies in a different way to Jodie? Or have they been forced to go deeper into an exploitative industry because they have not been as fortunate as her?

“Or have they been forced to go deeper into an exploitative industry because they have not been as fortunate as her?”

No. It’s no more exploitative than the industries the rest of us work in.

You are PC.


Well, I don’t end my working day with a face covered in semen. But maybe it’s different where you work.


There are far worse things. Semen washes off easily, the work is indoors and you get paid.

Your statements are evidence of an ultra-conservative attitude that regards sex as fundamentally evil.


First I’m PC, then I’m ultra-conservative?

Look, the point is that hundreds of girls come to London every year dreaming of a career like Jodie Marsh’s and end up in prostitution and/or pornography. I think they’re being exploited and if that makes me PC, ultra-conservative, wishy-washy liberal or any other epithet, so be it.

And I’ll take your word for it about the semen.

Political correctness IS ultra-conservative. PC liberals pretend to be on the left, but they’re reactionaries at heart. The fact that you think sex work is any more exploitative than any other industry is based on nothing more than inherited Christian antipathy to sex. You get out into the real working world and I’ll show you exploitation.

Mate. There’s a documentary about a London brothel, Channel 4, in 7 minutes. Sorry for the short notice. Watch it, then tell me sex work is just another job.

I would like to join Sarah Cope in thanking the Co-op for this change. I look forward to signing a letter with others in my local party, to deliver to my local Co-op “food” supermarket.
I agree with Jodie that true equality should mean equal rules on topless men as well.

What planet does Jodie marsh come from, its thanks to views such as hers that women are used and abused on a regular basis for sex not love! Empty meaningless sex, maybe the market that buy these mags need counselling for relationship issues, and from a mother’s point of view, your a disgrace! Your daughter needs to know she’s loved for who she is not what she can give! lost for words! get a proper job!!

Dawn , Whilst I read your rant with intreast its a completly Biased view , you seem to have jumped on the bandwagon of moral indignity without any real insight of the issue in the same way that the Americans introduced Prohibition as they thought liquor was the cause of all the crime or the censors of the 1940’s and 1950’s films where anything even remotily saucy or offensive was not allowed , this did’nt cure the problem it just pushed it underground! women as you put it have been used and abused for centuries for meaningless sex , it has not been caused by these publicatations nor compounded by it either! I think the treatment of women in this industry is apalling , I think brothels should be legal so that women who want to work in this industry can do it with a modicombe of saftey.

Men in general are always going to think about sex , its their basic instinct to procreate and if unable to do that will happily look at erotic images or porn to releve that urge , So Dawn you need to jump of your soapbox and face the reality thats its a sex driven world we live in and for every little step you might take forward you have to belive the porn industry are strides ahead!

that women are used and abused on a regular basis for sex not love! Empty meaningless sex

Heh, replace the word women with men, and you’ve pretty much summed the main use of Grindr up in a nutshell.

It is interesting to see the same puritanical alarm that once blighted the lives of gay men is now being focused upon straight men. Even Joan Smith found herself moved yesterday to claim “The Porn industry targets men and increasingly boys, telling them that anal sex and blowjobs are a right”, focusing on the two sexual acts that are classed as sodomy. Might we see the return of anti-sodomy laws to these fair isles, though this time aimed at protecting women’s bottoms rather than men’s?

“Might we see the return of anti-sodomy laws to these fair isles, though this time aimed at protecting women’s bottoms rather than men’s?”

I hardly think that’s likely, even if it was possible to enforce such laws.
However, there’s nothing wrong with trying to make people aware of sexual dangers such as STD’s. This is particularly well understood by gay males, and for obvious reasons.

Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. Liberal Conspiracy: Model Jodie Marsh attacks coop ban on Lads Mags | moonblogsfromsyb

    […] via Newswire Liberal Conspiracy […]

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.