Gringo Posted February 26, 2010 Share Posted February 26, 2010 Back in 2006 there was a debate on here over some legislation that Claire Curtis-Thomas was trying to introduce..... Bid to restrict 'degrading' mags The overwhelming view on VT back then was that this was a bad move by the nanny state; perhaps a reflection of wider public opinion as the legislation never hit the books. Since then the home office have been doing a bit more work Children and young people see increasing amounts of "hyper-sexualised images" in the media, according to a Home Office study. It says they are sold the idea they have to look "sexy" and "hot" and this leads young people to be more likely to have poor self-esteem, depression and eating disorders. It suggests there may be a link between increasing sexualisation and violence. And it calls for tougher regulation of sexual imagery, that lads' magazines be sold only to over-16s and that children learn images are routinely digitally altered. So has the collective VT mind shifted in the past 4 years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted February 26, 2010 VT Supporter Share Posted February 26, 2010 You can't put the genie back in the bottle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_eristic Posted February 26, 2010 Share Posted February 26, 2010 No thoughts on the actual topic at hand, but, yeah, first thing that came to mind when I read the thread title: Why do I still find this movie to be so funny? :cry: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDon Posted February 26, 2010 Share Posted February 26, 2010 I can see their point really. Magazines don't just push pictures of models that are wafer thin and next to perfect, they also airbrush the hell out of them and photoshop them like crazy to push them far beyond the realms of what is achievable. Even if you end up looking like a model you're never going to look like what the model looks like in the magazines. Should they restrict them though? Hell no, just get our schools to do what they're meant to do and educate people. Prohibition is never the answer, the answer is in changing mindsets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted February 26, 2010 Share Posted February 26, 2010 Hell if nuts magazine means that teenage girls see a model and think i want to dress and look like that then i'm all for it .... Haven't read nuts for years but i know i read it on the train once whilst sitting next to some old lady and of course i opened it and there were women popping out off skimpy bikinis .. i felt a bit embarrassed by it at the time .. but lesson learnt next time i will go to the toilets to bash one out ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrissmith921 Posted February 26, 2010 Share Posted February 26, 2010 putting it to a high shelf just makes teenage lads try to get them more. porn mags are restricted to 18+ and i'd guess most blokes on here had hold of them by the time they were 14? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briggaman Posted February 26, 2010 Share Posted February 26, 2010 Just the usual argument to be honest, although it is nice to see that it is saying parents also play a role in this (I read the article on the Sky News app). The problem is far too big to stop now. It's not just the lads magazines that are doing it either, so to put the entire blame on them is pathetic. Lads magazines were around when I was younger and it didn't make me think of thoughts like "oh, I must rape or sexually abuse women in some way". Sure, I can see why there should be an age limit on it though, as children are aging far too quickly these days. On another note, when it comes to protecting girls from growing up too fast and such, there is something else to blame. How about womens magazines like 'Hello' and 'OK'? Plus the other magazines they have. What do they show?! They show women dressed in skimpy clothes that weigh about two stone (ok, perhaps a slight exaggeration). Nobody forces women to dress like slappers at any age. True, they are influenced by outside sources but to pinpoint certain things and forget all the others is just pathetic. Society today is a complete joke when it comes to the children. It's far too late to change it and all we can possibly hope to do is stop it continuing in the future. They have bad attitudes, no respect and the girls dress like little slappers. I have no idea how to stop it though, as there are far too many sources... People will get hold of magazines if they want them badly enough. Plus they can just look things up on the internet. How can these things actually be stopped? It would take a lot of effort and a lot of time, meaning I very much doubt it will ever happen. Although if they do decide to move lads magazines like Nuts and Loaded to the top shelf, then perhaps they should move womens magazines up there too..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjw63 Posted February 26, 2010 Share Posted February 26, 2010 porn mags are restricted to 18+ and i'd guess most blokes on here had hold of them by the time they were 14? More like 10 ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briggaman Posted February 26, 2010 Share Posted February 26, 2010 porn mags are restricted to 18+ and i'd guess most blokes on here had hold of them by the time they were 14? More like 10 ;-) Months knowing you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Posted February 26, 2010 Share Posted February 26, 2010 Can a kid buy nuts or zoo anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshVilla Posted February 26, 2010 Share Posted February 26, 2010 isnt gordon brown shooting himself in the foot with this idea how's he going to reach the top shelf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted February 26, 2010 Moderator Share Posted February 26, 2010 More nanny state bollocks, when will this government realise that its got more to do with the way kids are brought up that the availability of pictures of scantily clad women Pandering to religion, pandering to the blue rinse brigade and failing to see where the problems lie but will give a little gesture policy that limits peoples freedoms just a tiny little bit once more. Bloody Stalinist Arsewipes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted February 26, 2010 Share Posted February 26, 2010 edit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Posted February 26, 2010 Share Posted February 26, 2010 I remember discovering page 3 of the sun whilst doing a paper mache project at school in year 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted February 26, 2010 Share Posted February 26, 2010 Nuts et al = Soft Porn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted February 26, 2010 Share Posted February 26, 2010 I remember discovering page 3 of the sun whilst doing a paper mache project at school in year 4 call me a traditionalist but i used to adopt the flour and water approach when making my paste Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted February 26, 2010 Share Posted February 26, 2010 I thought this was going to be a thread about the USA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted February 26, 2010 Moderator Share Posted February 26, 2010 Oh and if this goes through, I'll wager that the Sun, The Daily Star et al, which actually feature naked women won't end up on the top shelf will they? Why's that then? Ah right, its because this is just another example of government hypocrisy, they need the red tops so they won't do to them as they do to others in the name of "protecting the innocent". Like I said its just another "gesture policy". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts