All men are rapist, sex is bad in general, it makes you impure and don't even think about enjoying it.

Oh dear.

May well be true, but I seem to remember the bible has many instances of misogyny and rape. It should be categorized as pornography then?

only the insane[or biased]..could deney it

but whats your remedy
your cure?

as i see it..the deliberated perversion began
with airbrushing pubic hair bits so child and mummy looked the same

heck now wee get the brazillion
so groan woman can look like wee little girls

the topic is clearly leading somewhere

we hear as previously said in reply
about the perversions of our most holy men
yet having a child muse to peruse at leisure

heck govt and the party and justice systems couldnt egsist without those so vile they are called pedophile..[meaning funny enough simply lover of children]..a big stick indeed..

think they dont know
what pedophile means...[they say yes we are]
as are all who watch bald beaver porn

and move-on
to their next perversion

we need to know..there are 3 types of porn
porn you like...porn that hates..and porn that perverts

and yes many mens nmagazines make adult woman
look like little girls...

[adult woman dont look girlish]
they spill over..all over the place...
[if the adult woman bits..wernt made to look as if a little girls
maybe then we could LEARN* the difference]

but if all you seen is your kid sister
and mens magazines..of course..your on the way to perversion

cause real woman
dont look like kids!
or sterotyped airbrushed dollies

QUOTE.../Most participants were unable..to distinguish the source of the quotes;""

yes just as they grow up
thinking woman are girls

""the study also revealed..that most male participants identified more strongly..with the language expressed by the convicted rapists.""

so how great...that most
resisted the temptation?

or great how the victim*
gets so persicted..each stage is like another rape?

""Dr Miranda Horvath from Middlesex University said:"We were surprised that participants..identified more with the rapists'""'

yes it would only surpise a lol..pshyko

re rapist quotes,
""and we are concerned
that the legitimisation strategies that rapists deploy..when they talk about women..""

this is a specific point
men use stragedies
that work...""are more familiar
to these young men..than we had anticipated.""'

lol the ignorant judging the blind
but heck these type of 'studies'..allways work

with woman thinking every guy is a rapist
yep that will help

put kids on meds
stop the little vile rapists from reading poor trashy port
in glossy magizenes..or as bait on the web search

subnert the sex reflex
and we get good subverted sex drive kids...doing the things
their masters tell them to do...[partyiarcal overlording...sold to us
delivers into law..by juliar and wrong pennie..peter garrot and the new gg

lol

oh for a return of the 60;s
so creduly ended by injecting homo's with polio vacination giving them their new virsus....aids..[your next lover will kill you]...it sure dried up the free love movement overnight]

helped formalise porn..as the new normal
with or without toys...then the intersting bits got took out

and we got party loyalty
friends...lol...and those 70's shows
to guide us back to boyhood..and we been kids ever since

time to grow up
[grow a pair]

be honest

how do you get a pary loyalist?
get the dirt on em..they do ANYTHING you say!

i have talked with many...abused by the system
deliverd to lawyers judges polies..by govt car

if this corruption of power
is to be stopped..we need to declare barefaced truths

thuing is holy men has little girls
[no woman allowed..but heck men just being men
and only non beings[children]..they arnt woman till menysteration

yes there is perversion
but also possability...the girl does an apprentice ship
shares in his glories..meets the best people etc

is that the same as raping babies
and the other vile stuff we can all imagine

is love making the same as rape?
is it easy to have any reasonable solutions
so the abusers cant corrupt the processes of power

we hear of lord..in the hoyuse
loving their bottoms smakked...[ok not for me]
but heck the pay to smak a groaning man...[who did that hurt]

if my lord wants to demean HIMSELF...hey
do as you like lord..just dont be hurting others
or you go to jail

in short dont just ban
reason this thing out

who got hurt
by who?

who set up the system
so pervertrs..could subvert and pervert it

dont pre judge
but suspended sentance
dont end the pain..if a danger
well thats it...game over...locked away for life[and imprisoned into your mortal flesh for eternity..[just like them egyptian mummies]

the only proven way
to end perversion

killing just enmpowers those driven
to do more vile...often the abuser...has secumbed to takeover by spirits unseen...yet his own basic lusts..allowed the vile spirit in

Big problems with this one. Firstly, the author, who is described as an 'Social Justice Advocate' links not to the original study, but to a magazine called Jezebel. Jezebel is a "Celebrity, Sex, Fashion for Women". His article is therefore based on a piece from a saucy online Womens Mag. I wonder whether he actually read the study at all.

Secondly, we really don't know the criteria for selecting statements. For example, relatively mild statements from rapists may have been used while more offensive and provocative ones from the Mens mag.

His second link is to an article on the Dail Mail online regarding research with SCHOOL CHILDREN. Careful reading shows that while 11% of schoolboys (!) were offended by such pics, ONLY 20 % said that it made them see women as sex objects. So 80% of the schoolboys said that the Mags DID NOT cause them to see women as sex objects.

Some Mens magazines may or may not have a detrimental influence but lets get our facts right first.

any threat to those enslaved by the porn industry gets reactions like those who look like being deprived their drugs. They are unable to face the obvious.

Get rid of so-called "Mens magazines" off the shelves of newsagencies. Who reads them anyway, and mostly they are a waste of trees.

But more importantly, get rid of "Women's magazines", as they have far, far more readership, and represent the greatest amount of polution of women's minds ever developed outside of feminist indoctrination.

A quick glimpse of the Jezebel magazine that the author quotes from has the following articles.

"The Popularity And Perfectionism Behind Butt Sex"

"Guys Aren't Always Thinking With Their Dicks"

"The Real Reason You Shouldn't F..k Your Professor"

http://jezebel.com/

One can only wonder what such crap is doing to the minds of young women.

But then, looking at the divorce rate, and considering how hopeless so many women have become, I think the results of reading such crap can be readily seen.

vanna I'd recommend a read of the last two of those articles you referenced. In particular the one about men and thinking.
An academic who is saying some very positive things about men.

R0bert

Robert,

You actually read that stuff.

The real issue is , "Why do women have to read such magazines"?

Can't they think for themselves for once, or is it a situation that women cannot do anything, or make any type of decision without reading about it in a women's magazine.

Q/ What to do if you can't think?

A/ Read a women's magazine or become a feminist.

However, back to the topic, I don't believe men's magazines have much to do with rape, as the sales are very minimal anyway.

This article establishes only two things:

1) The participants in the study were all idiots. I just took the test and got 14/16 (one rapist mistaken for a magazine; one magazine mistaken for a rapist). It's really not that hard - the fact that so many folk failed with flying colours says a lot more to me about their poor literacy skills and lack of grey matter than it does about anything else.

2) Matthew Holloway doesn't like sex. Or possibly, he just doesn't like sex with (live, human) females. Which is fine - but he'd be a fool to think that his views apply to the majority of people (of either gender). Homosexuals are a small minority; asexuals even smaller. But most men prefer the romantic company of women, and all of those men enjoy the sight of an attractive woman - clothed, naked or somewhere in between.

Matthew seems to labour under the misapprehension that this makes them sexual predators, which is a load of crap. Most men appreciate female beauty; few men are sexual predators.

He also seems lived such a sheltered existence that all those jokes about men buying pornographic magazines because the articles are so good have completely bypassed him. Here's a little secret, from one young man to another: guys don't buy them to read (in my experience, the guys that buy them aren't really the reading types at the best of times). They buy them to look at. Now, what is the difference between men ogling slim, busty, bikini clad women in Zoo magazine and men ogling slim, busty, bikini clad women at the beach (I don't know about the rest of you, but the ogling is my favourite part of going to the beach - much better than the sunbaking or swimming)? The slim, busty women in Zoo magazine get paid to be ogled at. And for the Matthew Holloways of this world, the women in Zoo magazine possess a strange supernatural ability to induce sexual depravity in the minds of men that the beach babes do not.

Hmmm, doesn't sound very likely, does it? What sounds a lot more likely is that Matthew is employing that tired, old argument so beloved of conservatives the world over: that whatever he finds personally distasteful is immoral, dangerous and should be banned post haste. I'm not going to rebut an argument which has been thouroughly rebutted countless times before - instead, I'd suggest that he deal with his personal distaste for Zoo magazine in the way that healthy people do: don't read it. Works for me.

I buy Phantom comics instead, they're cheaper and more entertaining. Matthew might not like them, though - they feature some breast nudity, and some of the classic (old) stories written before feminism was so popular feature attitudes toward women that would make some of those rapists cringe. Oddly enough, despite these obviously corrupting influences, I am not a sexual predator. I wonder how that happened? Maybe it's because I'm not so damn silly as to believe everything I read. Something you might like to try, Matthew.

Matthew seems to need to feel guilty about something and needs to find some other source of impure thoughts to purge. We have it from all sides. Don't show skinny models, or even ones that are too perfect, ban all porn, or anything controversial.

How many women have been raped because of Zoo magazine? Absolutely Zip.

For God's sake grow a spine.

i dont buy mens glossies
but have seen a few..and bought a few when i was young

and it wernt for 'the articles'
that in the main seem to be imaginative boasting

anyhow i read a biit more of the first page
[of the articles/porn that passes as info]

""The report surveyed students and found that 100% of girls found images in men's magazines to be offensive,"""

wow 100%
im a bit suss on that
what with lesian tendancies etc

but heck on second thought
WHY ARE THEY SHOWING PORN TO GIRLS?

was mummy
or daddy...or responsable adult..present..

[as the law would currently require for something that perverse]

""only 11% of males felt the same
and one-fifth admitted"""

oh lordy admitted
did they have legal advisers..that wont let one admit
confess to thinking 'like a rapist'...that it could go on their file[forvever]

admitting..suggests some pervert
said something ..'they admitted to'
not knowing the joinder to that they 'addmitted..to..''that the material encouraged..them to see women as sex objects.""

the material encouraged me
to read the filthy book
se the feelthy picuture

is a picture 'an object'
whats the true objective
certainly not perspective

vanna

If you were slagging off on pathetic celebrity/royalty voyeurism rags posing as women's magazines - like New Idea, Women's Weekly and Woman's Day - I'd be with you 100%. But, from checking out the magazine Jezebel from your link, all I can see is that it's a reasonably good quality publication targeted mainly, but not exclusively, at women. Sex is only one of the many generalist topics covered - from politics to gift wrapping.

If it's the racy articles that turn you off, for goodness sake. Aren't women allowed to imbibe some erotica from the public culture too?

vanna "You actually read that stuff."

I did yesterday. Like Atman I was suspicious of the study and the fact that the link was to a woman's mag rather than the research.

I do think that for some people a regular diet of unrealistic fantasy can cause harm to themselves and those around them, it does not seem that most women are all that keen to bring a female friend home for a threesome with their partner and most families don't have the budget to keep up with the images portrayed in womens magazines.

That does not necessarily lead to sexual assault or stealing from the family budget but there is some truth to the old adage about what we fill our minds with.

I don't always get it right but I do try and check what's being said rather than prejudging based on initial impressions. In the case of Jezebel it wasn't a solid diet of trashing men or treating them as a means to an end.

Two of the articles you mentioned were ones I read yesterday and both were fairly positive about men and boy's. Not the sort of magazine that has much appeal to me but then the men's mags targetted in this article don't have much appeal either, I'm more interested in special interest mags (hobby related).

R0bert

I wonder if they could replicate the studies with modern day language comparative quotes from the bible instead of "mens magazines" ?

eg

"If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT"

or

"When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again Exodus: 21"

or

"Now kill all the boys and all the women who have slept with a man. Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves. Numbers: 31"

See if they're also a hit with the lads ? Maybe we will then need to rethink the bible ?

Kilarney,

No I am not "slagging off on pathetic celebrity/royalty voyeurism rags posing as women's magazines"

I'm serious.

If anyone gets into the habit of reading that crap, they would probably end up in the mental ward, or drive someone else into the mental ward.

The rather hopeless, disillusioned, disorientated, non-satisfiable excuses for women that now inhabit so much of our society, could well be the result of reading so much of that crap.

This is just the usual anti male stuff we have come to expect from second rate academics.

It would be nice to read about the impact of love stories and romances have on young woman and how they affect women's expectations in relationships. A good title for a study might be: "Do Women's magazines and the popular media lead women to believe that they are princesses" or "Can women ever be pleased?"

Another title for a study mighy be: "Attracting lots of male attention by wearing sexual clothing: why women do it?"

Of course, I won't hold my breath for 'studies' on women, just more agitating to further criminalise/pathologise male behavour. It's really just about power - power and control over men.

Answering Michael Holloway’s pertinent question, yes, we are doing young males a great disservice by allowing ANY form of media to portray females in terms which a convicted rapist would approve.

Young men really like looking at pictures of naked, or near naked, young females, and nobody is ever going to stop that. The problem is, that the way that these images are presented can have a deep psychological impact on the values and attitudes of the viewer, if they are presented in such a way that they normalize rape, sexual assault, bondage, and other forms of sex which most people would find objectionable.

This was discovered in the early sixties when “men’s magazines” as we know them today either did not exist, or were illegal. Since images of female nudity were at that time proscribed by law, “men’s magazines” of the period consisted of “detective magazines”. The front covers of these magazines usually depicted females in bondage situations, cringingand horror struck, from the actions of a menacing male. Moral campaigners of the time considered such images to be puerile but harmless.

They weren’t.

Police forensic psychologists became interested in these bondage normalizing magazines when they realized that they were always among the possessions of the worst kinds of serial sex offenders. Interviews conducted with these men convinced the psychologists that these types of pornography was extremely important to them. Worse, the police psychologists were able to provide many links between the often bizarre bondage stories in these magazines, and of actual acts committed upon abducted females by these sex offenders.

With the legalization of pornography in the late sixties, most of the pornographic publishers showed admiral social responsibility by never again displaying females in bondage situations, or linking violence with erotic images, because the industry accepted that it was just too dangerous. Sexual images in these magazines was always depicted as consensual and fun. Responding to complaints by women’s groups, the leading publishers also removed any material (including cartoons) which suggested that young children were interested in sex.

But today, both print and electronic media are openly flouting this responsibility in the search for more profits. Movies produced by Miramax, Tristar, Columbia, Fox, and MGM are now producing movies which are far more explicit, violent and realistic than anything which the old “detective magazines” ever dreamed up. ‘Action” movies (read “violent movies”) suggest to their primarily young male audiences that violence, sadism, drug abuse, and perverted sexual behaviour is fun.

The pop music industry is leading the race to the bottom with “artists” now producing “songs” extolling the virtues of violence towards women, with Michael Mathers relesing a song recounting the pleasures of raping his mother. Not only does today’s pop music feature music with explicit sexual content which is freely available to every child with a radio, these songs sport titles such as “Smack My Bitch Up” and “Rape Me.” Not surprisingly, it is the singers and writers of such songs who seem to get all of the laurels at the major pop industry awards.
That the print media has reverted to depicting women in ways that a convicted rapist would approve, is not surprising, given the promotion of anti social behaviour now being normalized by our media. And anyone who thinks that the images presented by the media have no link to behaviours and attitudes of people in real life, should stop and listen very hard. You will hear the advertising executives of Saatchi & Saatchi and Mojo, laughing their heads off.

There is an element of young people who have been conditioned to believe that any form of censorship is old fashioned, and the ideal of conservative, unintelligent, religious and stupid people. They have also ben conditioned to think that opposing censorship is the ideal of creative, intelligent, social progressives, like themselves. They have accepted that a media which advocates drug abuse, violence, the denigration of women, and suicide is completely harmless.

It just goes to show that the media savvy sevants of Mammon are a lot smarter than the educated, “progressive” disciples of socialist Idealism.

Lego,
Of course “men’s magazines” should be banned. Then we should all be reading women’s magazines.

We can read articles such as the following: -

"Jennifer Aniston Advised To Make Mad Dash For Brad Pitt’s Sperm

Brave ‘Hebephile’ Stands Up For Right To F..k Teen Girls

Don’t Use Elaborate Wrapping On A Sh..ty Gift, You Guys

The Story Of My Man-Boobs

Demi Lovato Rips Disney Channel A New A..hole For Making Jokes About Eating Disorders

Our Favorite Mortician Takes Us On A Hollywood Death Tour"

http://jezebel.com/

And all this in a magazine the author refers to, and that magazine seems to be targeted at educated young women, or women attending universities.

It is contemporary media, but unfortunately totally inane, and often profane, and contains nothing of any real usefulness or meaning.

One could worry about the writers of such media, but most importantly, one should worry about the women readers, and whether they become inane, profane, useless and meaningless, or already are.

I guess men will have to be given the blame for that as well.

Hi Vanna, my favourite was from Cleo entitled "How to Beat Your Husband."

You must have read my article in haste, I did not advocate the banning of men's magazines, I simply stated that the presentation of the images is critical to understanding the psychological impact which the images will have. Yesterday's porn industry understood that, and never mixed erotic images with violent ones, especially those normalising bondage, rape, sadism, bestiality, or the idea that children like sex.

But today's media does not conforms to these standards, and we as a society are reaping the wind with rising rates of adolescent and teenage pregnancy, as well as rising rates of drug abuse and violence, especially against women.

People are not born with moral values. Pro social values are inculcated into them by their peers, their parents, teachers, religious leaders, community leaders, and the role models provided by society. Increasingly, what constitutes accepytable behaviour is not coming from parents or the community. It is the media which is the primary creator and transmitter of popular culture today.

And the role models provided industries such as the pop music industry and the visual media, is that you men are violent men, who should look up to gangsters, and who should call women "hoes" and "bitches."

Female role models are usually depicted wearing as little as possible, or even naked with their legs so wide apart that you can see their tonsils. Have a look at what the little girls are wearing today. I agree with President Bush's wife who was once quated as saying that the best thing her husband administration could do was "shoot Britney Spears."

Lego,

I agree.

Ban pornography.

And ban women’s media as well, before too many women actually become what they read.

Such as articles : “Sofia Vergara pretends to be her son's sister”

Work that out.

Or perhaps “Angelina Jolie weighs the same as a seven-year-old'

Women are becoming addicted to this inane and brainless stuff, and the more addicted they become, the more useless they become to anyone.

Lego,

Each time I turned on the TV, read a magazine, or see a billboard I see extremely sexual images of females. It was women's desire to 'express their sexuality' that has led to the saturation of sexual images in our culture. If men try to say that something is indecent they are accussed of 'oppressing women'. We now live in a feminised society. It is women who decide what they wear. They do it for themselves not for men.

Yet you only talk about further restricting men's behaviour? Our society is jusy completely incapable of asking women to take any sort of responsibility for their actions.

The research is completly rubbish. It doesn't try to uncover a truth; it tries to provide evidence to push an ideological agenda. You are an advocate quoting from other advocates in Universities. Pointless.

Hi Dane.

I did not advocate banning men’s magazines, and I repeated that point in my second post.

I would disagree with your assertion that the sexualized advertising that you see every day is the fault of women, most advertising executives are men. Women’s groups have constantly complained of the sexualized images being depicted. Here in Sydney, a furore erupted over one billboard, witch displayed a scantily dressed famous young model with a cockatoo on her shoulder, above the blazing banner headline “She Loves a Cockatoo!”

Women’s groups have also complained about the Hollywood inspired ideal of the perfect female figure (size 6) which some young girls literally starve themselves to attain.

What constitutes correct values, attitudes and behaviours is no longer being created by the community, it is being created by manufacturers and their advertising men. Not surprisingly, the values that they are imparting into our children’s minds is entirely to their own benefit.

The pop music industry is a glaring example of that. Do you think that kids should take drugs? Use weapons to solve personnel problems? Tell young girls it is cool to dress in a sexually provocative way and act the whore? Tell young boys that girls are just “hoes and bitches” who swoon over the attentions of a violent man? Do you think young boys should be told how great it is to rape their mother’s? If you don’t, why do you tolerate an industry which constantly repeats these messages to adolescents, who are at their most rebellious and vulnerable stage in life?

Mixing erotic images with statements suggesting that women are all sluts who deserve to be raped is a very dangerous thing to do. Most young men who are well socialized can laugh at these statements and understand that they are simply outrageous statements meant to entertain. But some young men are not real bright and are poorly socialized, and they may consider such statements confirm their fantasy that women who act or dress in certain ways want to be raped, and the community thinks that they deserve it if they are raped

When GoMags come with Nag-around-Sound and Smell-o-Vision they will be far more interesting and far less likely to create evil demons in the minds of men.

Women actually believe they are about to RULE planet Earth as they are gaining EQUAL RIGHTS and gaining the "free-drinks" double-chick-dip and getting the "enough-kids-that-I-own-YOUR-house" judgement.

In reality Women have just been rebranded & repackaged by the stock market GURUS (comprising women and men entrepreneurs) as a conduit to impoverish the POOR and make the RICH richer. From birth to divorce women spend more money on non-essential goods. NOW and on the way, women entangle and force (by deception) young men to do the same thing. After the divorce, Governments and Lawyers take at least 1/3 of the combined marriage wealth and that figure is set to RISE as the stock market falters in traditional areas such as mining.

An important part of keeping this "Rich V Poor" insanity running is deception about what women really are and what they really want -POWER!

To that end GoMags are the ultimate deception. The current boardroom and stock market sentiment is that "the less young men know about women, the better economies will boom and the more stable "rich-friendly" world governments will become"

Personally I detest LIES, DECEPTION AND RICH people who LACK MERIT.

Bring on GoMags with Nag-around-Sound and Smell-o-Vision!

Lego,
If someone wants to see consumerism and commercialisation, look no further than a woman's magazine.

Nothing of any reliability or educational value will be contained within, and the inane articles and gossip that appeal so much to the modern woman, are simply fill between the advertisements.

The vast majority of the editors and writters at such magazines are female.

However, your logic that media for men should be the only media that should change, highlights feminist bigotry, narrow-mindedness and gender prejudice.

I tend to think that few feminists have objected to the consumerism and commercialisation contained in women's media, because most of the money women spend has been money earnt by someone else, mainly males.

Or it is money grabbed from the taxpayers, who are mainly males anyway.

Lego,

Your comment that most advertising executives are male is just trite. We have a female PM and G-G by extention should we just blame them for everything?

You comments about feminists groups are true. How do you reconcile the views of feminist groups with the evidence we see every day on the street? Be careful - we wouldn't want you draw any obvious conclusions like feminists are just out of touch with mainstream women. The fact is that for women sex is power. They like it and want it. They have all of it.

Do you think women should take any responsibility or are they just helpless victims?

Re-assessing men's magazines?

A storm in a teacup. There are various forms of
communication that can reach a large audience
without any personal contact between the senders and
the receivers of the messages. Newspapers, books,
television, radio, movies, DVDs, CDS, magazines.
So much diversity. We take this barrage so much for
granted. An individual may be influenced by many
other agents of socialization - religious groups,
family, schools, universities, peer groups, they all
affect people to a certain extent. There's also
agents such as corporations, other employers and
voluntary associations like clubs, political movements
and even retirement homes as people get older.

Personality and behaviour are never entirely stable, they
change under the influence of all these socialisation experiences
throughout one's life course. Men's magazines may serve
a certain limited purpose during a certain period of time
in someone's life - but other things come into play in time.
Few people take them seriously for long.

Interestingly, the most popular article in the latest edition of The Women's Weekly" was "Deborah Hutton: Why I posed naked at 50"

http://aww.ninemsn.com.au/news/inthemag/8392133/deborah-hutton-why-i-posed-naked-at-50

Another reason to shut down women's magazines.

Apart from containing the largest amount of inane, puerile, misleading, mindless, irrelevant, unreliable, gossipy and often feminist junk ever written in human history, women’s magazines also have nudity and treat women as sex objects.

Dear vanna,

How Odd that you're seeing sex in the Deborah Hutton
article. I see a woman celebrating the beauty of her
own body, comfortable with who she is (finally), having
won the battle of cancer - and simply celebrating the joy
of being alive. Hutton may have found fame with her
beauty, (she was a model) but as the article states,
"young Deborah Hutton was as insecure as any other girl.
And as she turns 50, she tells us how she finally learned
to love her body and why she agreed to pose naked for
The Weekly."

She tells us, " The reason I agreed to pose nude for The
Weekly is to celebrate that I'm 50 ... I didn't take
the challenge lightly. I really had to think through why
I would want to expose myself in such a public way. For me
it's much more than just being naked on a cover. I fear
there is too much emphasis on how thin women ought to be
and not enough on health and the acceptance of who we are,
with all our imperfections. So I sat here baring it all for
public comment. Some will be offended and I say to those
who criticise my actions. Why? Why does this make you feel
uncomfortable. It's a tasteful photograph, of someone who
is comfortable in her skin. It's a celeb ration for me of not
shying away from the fact that I'm 50, a time most women fear,
as society dictates the best years are behind them."

"So on behalf of those leaving their 40s, I say embrace a
positive future, celebrate the fact that we're still here,
that our bodies are healthy and still working, and make the
most of every precious moment."

"And if I still haven't won you over, then you've quite
possibly lost all sense of humour and, believe me, as you
get older, you'll need that more and more!

Lexi
Who is Deborah Hutton, and what has she ever done?

I don't recall a Deborah Hutton ever doing anything of any great relevance or importance, unless someone thinks posing naked in a women's magazine is relevant or important.

The modern women might think she is relevant, but then so many modern women read women's magazine, and their minds now show it.

Those participating in this discussion are to be congratulated on their civility. So often these sorts of things get heated and tend to be a breeding ground for aggression and consequently, the very sort of gendered violence they're pretending to be concerned about. Sometimes I think academics intentionally do these studies for just that purpose - to bring about social discord and to add fuel to the fire of the now nearly defunct (thank goodness) "gender war".

On an historical note, however, LEGO doesn't seem to have a good grasp on the history of smut. Back before the 60s, there were men's adventure mags that featured scantily clad females in vulnerable poses and circumstances, and they weren't illegal. Pin-up girls were all over the place, on calendars, on mechanic's walls, engineering shops and before that, lewd female pulchritude adorned the weapons of war in the form of aircraft nose art. And even before that, there were "artistic" photographs and smutty jokes available on souvenir postcards at all sorts of holiday kiosks.

Porn goes back long before that too. Hindu temples are full of it. The Romans had a strong penchant for it, in bath houses and bedrooms. Even primitive Aboriginal and Melanesian artefacts feature strong sexual representation and icons. Porn and smut are not products of the post sixties political liberalisation. Nor is sexual violence. It is incorrect to blame modern men's media for something that's as old as recorded history.

I think Vanna has the most enlightened view of the current situation regarding gutter and slush media and in particular, women's mags, books and pop-music culture. Young women in Australia definitely appear to like playing the tart, the tramp and the whore. I travel a bit and get to see it. Unfortunately, many women are very good at it.

The article, like the study, is nothing more than antagonistic gender war propaganda. It's good to see that in this forum it isn't working.

Dear vanna,

Perhaps you should have actually read the issue of
The Weekly that you referred to in your earlier post.
It was an issue dedicated to the past.

December is a good time
to reflect on the past before we ring in the New Year.

Anyway, for your information, Deborah Hutton was
lucky enough to start out in Australia in our modelling
industry, she later joined Eileen Ford's agency in New
York and her face became famous gracing many magazines,
from Cosmopolitan,and The Weekly, to name just a view.
She modelled her way across many catwalks - and ended her
modelling career when her battle
with cancer began. She was always a positive role-model for
so many people - because of the way she dealt with whatever
life threw at her.

You claim that women's minds are affected by what they read.
Or words to that effect. Well the same can apply to either
gender - or any individual. However, you should of course be
aware - that people do read other things apart from magazines
(male or female mags) and their edication and influences are
derived from many sources - as I pointed out in my earlier
post on this thread.

People tend to see the world from a viewpoint of subjectivity.
And interpret things based on personal values and
experiences. As your looking at the pictures of Deborah
Hutton naked, and seeing sex, illustrates. That's possibly how
a fundamentalist preacher would tend to view any naked
body, (in terms of pornography). Both of you are inclined
to perceive facts selectively and to interpret them
accordingly.

Of course if the world consisted simply of some self-evident
reality that everyone perceived in exactly the same way,
there might be no disagreement among observers. But the
truth of the matter is that what we see in the world is not
determined by what exists "out there." It is shaped by
what our past experience has prepared us to see and by what
we consciously or unconsciously want to see.

Lexi,
Men developed writing, and then they developed paper, and then they developed the printing press, and then they developed magazines.

And then women got hold of it, and they developed the greatest amount of brain-dead drivel ever accumulated, which are women’s magazines. Complete with articles such as “Top 10 Kate Middleton fashion moments” and “Suri Cruise Has Meltdown and Make Up Dinner”

Now, such magazines are ever present in most houses wherever a woman is present, and they have become the only reading material available in doctor’s and dentist’s waiting rooms.

Ban porno magazines. Who cares, as very few men buy them anyway.

But for the sake of humanity and any form of intelligence, women’s magazines MUST be banned.

oh dear banning womans magazines
how extremist

see where these silly topics lead
lets have a book burning

beginning with the con-stitution
then the law books..and lawyers

put our leaders on the pire
why not the rich exploiters too
and heck the useless eaters..and perverts too

heck we are doing great
lets kill anyone who has killed..or commited crimes

oh how can we finnish with a bang
lets ban nukes...and cluster bombs

but ban books
you sook..

pick onto.. the real problems
get a life...try reading the words..

not just look at the pictures

we all got life via a carnal act
born out of the muck if you will

killing reading matter
wont kill the mind..that framed the concept
nor the heart that serves..the need

this is the dtrug war thingy
the anti smoker thingy all over again

where does the insanity stop
you cant stop what you hate
so get over it..[get your own life]...

im using mine
how i want
not as you let me

Under One God,

Well, if women’s magazines cannot be banned, then perhaps they should carry some type of warning label.

Such as: -

“Warning! Reading this material is likely to make you into a brain-dead, consumerist zombie, with possible feminist tendencies, and you could become completely non-satisfiable, and inflict much pain and grief on anyone who has to live with you.”

im fine with the mess-age vanna
but we should put them words over all media

broadcast it
during the commerce-ial breaks

begin every conversation and end each
with the same form of words

heck just a pretty person
wearing a message on their t shirt

anything but book burning/banning/

sticks and stones
arn't photo's..nor words
if words hurt...the word..isnt the problem

but the meaning
credit blame or shame..we give them..offends
let those offended walk away....

[as further offence
..isnt going to fix nuthin]

i dont drink booze
so resist the urge to stop others from doing it

just because 99%..say they do it...
might not mean..the other 1%...dont
but if they never tried it

their opinion is just bias/words

or maybe they got caught 'at it'
a few words..more or less

fine add-in..the words
we all know whats behind them..intent to control others

OUG,

"im fine with the mess-age vanna
but we should put them words all over the media"

Precisely.

vanna continues the line that societies ills "all" emanate from "one" gender.

It's our capitalist-consumer culture that has delivered us the brain-wasting mags and all the rest of the modern paradigm.

Poirot,

No, I don't think that "societies ills "all" emanate from "one" gender"

But when the situation is analysed, the pinnacle of it all, is for one gender to be so often reading articles such as "Robert Pattinson doesn't actually smell like butts", or "Celebrity Apprentice reveals who is nice – and who is nasty"

And they read such articles in vast quantities.

Brain-dead with minimal ability to think for themselves, and there is the question of what to do with them.

I think the question of what to do with women has been around for centuries.

vanna,

When the situation is analysed" it's apparent that the human penchant for gossip and gain is the driving force behind the consumer juggernaut.

Do you imagine that all those marketing and advertising corporations are solely staffed by women? Women and children are huge markets because women have always been the "gatherers" in human society - and children are targeted as an adjunct market in a world where "stuff" is made to be consumed to satisfy a manufactured desire. In fact, I've seen car ads during children's programming, and my son was quick to tell me that I should be using some "oxy-action" washing powder because he saw it advertised during children's programming - and that's separate from all the products designed especially for children. We've constructed an overarching consumerist paradigm where we're drenched by waste, excess and advertising...but it's a human predicament, not just a female predicament.

"What to do with women", eh...can't help but feel a little sorry for you. Maybe you can find an island where there's no women and consequently no angst. Good luck!

Poirot,
More often than not, “glossy” type advertising that concentrates on “image” is targeted at people who are easily lead.

The more the modern woman reads her “glossy” type magazines that concentrate on “image”, the more brain-dead and easily lead the modern woman becomes.

I also don’t think all modern women buy the magazines for the advertisements, as some like to read the articles, such as “Lose weight fast with these healthy recipes”, which appear side by side with articles such as “Decadent chocolate treats”.

Women’s magazines cater for all modern women with no ability at critical thought, and so, such magazines should carry a Warning label.

As for porno magazines, I think they are already are restricted, and already have some type of Warning label.

vanna,

Since when does modern life encourage critical thought?

The whole system is set up to dissuade people from such wanton ideas. It starts at school, where children are poured full of information and discouraged from self-directed inquiry.

If you wish to include warnings on vacuous media outlets - you should include all commercial TV and radio outlets as well.

AND dont forget on soap's
and neighbours..and days and ellen degenerate
or the late night show..or yes minestrer

certainly before the king or pope speaks
and juliar too of course,,[and tony and bob]
heck any suit..or pr/spokes [person]..crisuss manager]
gossip colomist..or party spiel...or avertisment..or leaflet dropped into the letter box

hey
lets just take it as read
put graphic pictures of thingd 'dropping off'
and a blind guy...on tv..saying dont,..![see what happend to me]
you will go blind[too]..

unle$$ you pay u$
money...ahhhh money..now there is a thing that leaves me cold

but what cant it buy?

its about money
make this porn..*free
criminals love the income
[perverts pervert it to suit their perversion
or suck such perverts dry..[price to the market]
freemarket forces..crass commercialism..perversion..

but in a womans rag..nope
not bying into it..washing my hands off the whole topic

set my people free
we just weant to love
why cause us further pain

Poirot,
Well I have heard that porn can be addictive, and of course women’s media can be addictive. I do think women’s media is entering more and more into mainstream media, with a subsequent decline in the quality of mainstream media.

I stopped buying newspapers sometime ago, because they are filling up with articles such as “How stars celebrate Christmas”, next to articles such as “Andrew and Noa split up”.

Because of the internet, many newspapers and magazines are finding it difficult to survive, and it is possible that they are attempting a last ditch effort at staying in publication, by now catering to the modern woman. They are no longer interested in maintaining ethics and high standards of journalism, but just want to stay alive and stay in publication.

So now they cater to the modern woman.

And they are are prepared to publish so much inane, unreliable, useless and gossipy drivel, that the mind of the modern woman finds totally interesting and absorbing, and can’t get enough of.

Dear vanna,

Oh dear. We've been over this ground so many times
in the past - you can't tar everyone with the same brush
as you are prone to do. Do allow for individual differences
in people - male or female. Sound reasoning will conquer
unreasonable sweeping generalisations every time.

The women I know,
are avid readers - and their tastes in reading material
are wide and varied as I assume are yours and those of
your male friends. If you want to focus entirely on
the commercial magazine market - that's up to you - but
don't single out just one particular focus. This article
is supposed
to be an assessment of men's magazines. Stereotyping
only leads to the questionable practice of counter-stereotyping
and a total break-down in communication. No one likes
or supports an illogical, weak debater with an obvious axe
to grind.

Some of the posts is in this forum appear to originate from people whose thinking aparatus is stored in their little toe. The article did not say that all men were rapists or that a mutually-agreed pleasurable relationship was unacceptable. It said that a focus group, comprised of young men, was unable to distinguish whether descriptive phrases were those which routinely appeared in nominated "men's" magazines or were those routinely used by convicted sex offenders.
Amongst other things, it also made comment about the de-humanising of women and the objectification of women as sex objects.
In my opinion, some of the comments appearing in this forum support this concept which is a sad indictment on those who have made them. It is an unfortunate fact, backed up by a number of scientific studies, that pornography is just as addictive as narcotics and it has been proven without a doubt that the more you get, the more hard-core porn you seek.
It has also been proven in scientific studies that men's addiction to pornography, whether so-called "soft porn" as per these magazines or hard-core, directly contributes to the breakdown of real relationships.

Kalam A Tee,

"It is an unfortunate fact, backed up by a number of scientific studies, that pornography is just as addictive as narcotics"

No it isn't. Show me one peer-reviewed scientific study which shows that pornography is just as addictive as opioid drugs. I bet you can't.

All google has provided for me is a lot of references to a supposed study by one Richard Drake of Brigham Young University. But lo and behold, the actual study is nowhere to be found. The claim that porn is as addictive as narcotics is such an impressive and dramatic one that I suspect a lot of folk have simply pushed the 'I Believe' button and quoted it without first attempting to establish its veracity (exactly like you've just done). And thus a myth is born.

But I'll be willing to believe that you're not just telling big fat pork pies if you can show me some evidence to the contrary.

Lexi,
To put the matter into perspective. So-called “men’s magazines” hardly sell any copies. Even Playboy magazine was on the brink of closing a few years ago, and had to sell real estate to survive.

Overall, the concept that men’s magazines create rape is just another feminist type fear mongering campaign, but a far greater problem is the brain-dead, consumerist, and manipulative content of women’s magazines, which sell more copies than every other type of magazine combined.

So yes, women’s magazines should be re-assessed to see whether they should be banned, or should have some type of warning label attached.

BTW. I personally don’t think too many modern women are all that clued up about much at all, and eventually men will have to sort out their problems for them.

Kalam A Tee,
The trendy thing is to find fault with men, but I think the concept that men’s magazines are ruining relationships is a very long bow to draw, particularly when the sales of men’s magazines are so minimal.

However, I don’t think a relationship would go very well, if the woman has her nose forever stuck in a magazine with articles such as: -

“Mel Gibson pays out £271m to ex-wife Robyn”

or “27 Gorgeous Bags and Jewels”

or “Sinead O'Connor ends fourth marriage after just 16 days”

or “8 Items To Add Sparkle to Your Outfit”

or “Should He Love Me More Than I Love Him?”

or “32 New Hair Ideas for 2012”

or “Why Women Are Leaving Men for Other Women “

or “8 Products to Help You Shine This Holiday Season”

Walk into any house with a woman in it, and the magazine rack will probably be filled with magazines containing such articles, and I believe such magazines are creating far more relationship problems than they ever solve.

Women remain their own worst enemy.

It is not men.

Dear vanna,

I feel that you're simply stirring to
get a reaction. Either that or you
have a greater pre-occupation with
"women's magazines"
and take them more seriously than any
woman I know.

Perhaps in that case you should be a
little more particular of the company you
keep and your choice of reading matter.
It does definitely appear to be affecting your mind.

I'd have to agree, Lexi.

vanna's attitude to women's magazines is reminiscent of the priest's attitude to "Chocolate" in the film/book of the same name.
He decried the advent of a chocolate shop in his village and held it up as a temptation into moral decay and lack of control, warning his parishioners to beware of it and its proprietor.

At the end of the film he was found in a stupor in the front window display of the shop, having gorged himself into oblivion on the very chocolatey loveliness that he so despised.

Watch it, vanna - it's a slippery slope : )

Lexi and Poirot,
Did you know, the highest selling men’s magazines in most countries, are actually health magazines.

Oh, lets ban them, before men rape woman.

Did you also realise, that most of the titles to the articles I mentioned in my previous post, actually came from Oprah’s magazine.

Oprah was the $2.5 billionaire our illustrious and feminist Prime Minister fawned over earlier this year, and wanted to be on her show.
And that billionaire saleswoman, like to sell women products such as Givenchy Le Prisme Mono Eyeshadow in Or Céleste

“We like the matte shade on our brow bone, the shimmer on our lids, and just a touch of the sparkle in our inner corners”

http://www.oprah.com/style/Gold-Makeup-Ideas--Gold-Beauty-Products_4

No wonder our illustrious and feminist Prime Minister is such a fan.

That is the extent, that the brain-dead drivel of women's media has on the female population.

So what do feminists want to do? Ban men’s magazines of course.

I have never known a feminist to get anything right.

Dear vanna,

I'm happy for you that you enjoy reading Oprah's
magazine. However my taste in American mags
differs greatly from yours. I've never read
Oprah's magazine. My taste used to lean more towards
magazines like -

Vanity Fair
Time
Economist
National Geographic
The New Yorker
Rolling Stone
National Lampoon
Harper's Bazaar
Esquire

Just to name a few.

But hey - to each his/her own.
Whatever floats your boat.

Lexi
I don't bother at all with magazines.

They are a waste of trees, and many have so much women's media now in them, I consider them a highly unreliable source of information.

Our (illustrious?) Prime Minister was of course enthralled by the (not so poor) Oprah coming to Australia, whose recent visit to our shores reportedly cost the Australian taxpayer $3 million.

But hey, Oprah might have sold something to Australian women while she was here, (lucky things), or maybe she taught them some of her womanly wisdom.

Such as:-

"80 Inspirational Ways To Get Your Glow On"

or "Melt Fat With A Laser",

or "Don't Change Your Body, Change Your Jeans"

or "You Can Transform Your Whole Life In 60 Days"

or "Meditate and Lose Weight"

or "Want A swimsuit That Takes Off 10 lbs"

It is amazing what a woman's magazine can do to the mind of the modern women.

slippery slope, vanna...slippery slope.
(give 'em up now, mate, while you still have the strength to do so)

"I don't bother at all with magazines."

For a man who doesn't bother at all with magazines, you sure can name a hell of a lot of magazine articles - I'd be hard-pressed to remember any of the titles from articles in the New Scientist magazine I was perusing yesterday. I find it astonishing that you can remember so many titles from magazines you've not even read. Now there's a feat a memory that gives those pi-memorising savants a run for the money. You should get in contact with Ripley's Believe It or Not*.

*Personally, I fall into the Not camp. It just isn't plausible that you could remember all those articles without having bothered at all with magazines. The only logical conclusion is the one drawn by Poirot: that you are an avid reader of trashy gossip mags. Hey, it could be worse. You could be a Twi-hard.

Sheesh, how would Vanna cope without all those womens magazines?
He'd be bored!

I just looked up “women’s magazines” on the internet, and then went to some of their sites.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_women's_magazines

I wouldn’t lower my standards enough to actually buy the brain-dead drivel.

But I did notice they mostly operate in the same way.

Have an article that makes the woman feel oppressed or depressed in some way, and then offer her some type of product to help lift her out of her newly imagined oppression and depression.

EG

“Got The Christmass Holiday Blues”, then why not buy “8 New Accessories To Brighten Up Your New Hair Style”

Its a very old marketing technique that the modern woman falls for every time.

I will stick to my BBC podcasts, or perhaps I can’t in the future, as they might be considered too manly, with not enough women’s media being incorporated.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts

see that the sad thing is
everyone is right...in picking whats right 'for you'

its much the same...with..us all
no doudt in time we will have the anti magazine mag
as well as the anti party party..

[thing is if someones paying you
or entertaining you..or amusing you...
or flattering or trying to help you...then that mag is ok]

but all them others...[well they leave me too informed too depressed..to true to life..or too much in fantasia]

i find the more specialiased a mag is..the better i like it
if it completly covers the topic...revealing its done the re-search,..nanmed names..[laid the topic open]...

clearly..revealing the good
the bad and the ugly...[just the facts maam]
well they are ok...but as for the rest i dont read...well give me a free sample..[i will get back to you]...[if its any good..i will keep out the good...but the bulk of it i know...wont be]

thats how it was for me
[and stop talking about chocolate
i came accross some choci[or was it choka]..porn yesterday
it was discuss-sting...

it was like listening to elton john
singing 'brown dirt cow boy'...discussting
wether rapt-ed..in frilly lace or just sealed in plastic

but heck
its just a class-*sic
ed-u-kate-i-onal..dont you know

Yoo hoo, Kalam a Tee, you have to understnd the psychology of your opponents to understand their point of view.

Some people have a compulsive need to think that they are better than everybody else and they will always look for ways to display to the world that they are God's gift to the human race.

This makes them easy targets for those people who know how to exploit them. Vested intersts in the print and visual media spread the message that anyone who supports any form of censorship is a religious fanatic, a crank, a puritan, an idiot, or (shock, horror) a conservative, while anyone who advocates total freedom of expression is an enlightened, intelligent, social progressive.

That is why they gulp down the message that all censorship is stupid, hook, line, and sinker. That is also why so many of our opponents are hardly bothering to even read our posts and understand our points of view, before launching attacks upon what we have said that completely ignore the points we have submitted. They have already prejudged us as cretins, so they don't really care what we write. All they have to do is respond with sneery one liners, insults, and sarcasm based upon total exagerations of what we have written. It is far easier than having to respond with objective reasoning and informed argument.

Better for them to keep massaging their vanity than to concentrate on what the author of this article actually wrote, or what others have responded with, than to let a little objectivity percolate through their impermeable craniums.

well said leggo
but be carefull mate
i got banned from so many forums
saying just that sort of thought

[those who claim to not read
do read...]...or rather scan...looking for a key word

so i went to your id
looking for key words
noted you didnt post for months
why was that?

personally i thought it was just responding
to a higher call..[mossad]...but your last post..forces me to rethink

oh well lets just agree to disagree
and go with what we agree on

[my mind will still allways be filtering
but hey so too with you..so its all good...neither of us has any real power....beyond the ability to read...and reply..to defend or offend as our set mindfs have conditioned us to be]

as for me..all i got is that i know
i never been overly loved..so dont have many fetishes
every place i post..i hope i find love..or leave love./..but words dont mean nuthing compared to works

still i find agreement with your words
but find words cant say everything

only one true good[god]
all the rest are just paths to good

find our way..
by choicing the better path..of the menche'
not the clay man...wearing sins skins of war and hate

peace not pieces

peace begins
where all things begin

in the heart
forming then fermenting the imagry in our mind
control the imagry..control the mind

set our minds free
our bodies follow

yes porn can be tittleating
but there are higher and lower steps
but each is only a step...[too much of anything..takes the excitement out of its doing]..thats why hell works..by giving us too much..

so much
we arnt thirsty anymore
mags are like a cross between comfort eating potato chips
and carbonate coke..to flush away the taste

anyhow just chewing my gum's
using my finger...type..into word

Ad hominem attacks in place of arguments? Bless me, what do they teach them at these schools?

It's not big and it's not clever, LEGO. And it certainly won't win you any debates. It's difficult to score points when you're playing the man and not the ball. I suggest you try to concentrate on the issues at hand, rather than throwing a tantrum and insulting anybody with the temerity to question your infallible wisdom.

OUG,
Why not try “Bust” magazine.

It is “Smart, Sexy and Dedicated to Your Pleasure” with articles such as:

“The Muppets star Miss Piggy weighs in on life as the world’s most glamorous puppet.”

“Our editors tracked down the season’s best budget-friendly buys so you don’t have to!”

“Daringly dark fashions modeled by the incomparable Dum Dum Girls”

http://www.bust.com/

But not for men unfortunately.

Any reading material they read has to be censored, to ensure it won’t affect their brains.

"OUG
Why not try "Bust" magazine."

vanna,

Why not try Dickens or Hugo - or even Proust.

We're all here to support you, you know.

Dear vanna,

I would also recommend the following book to you:

"A Nation In The Making: Australia at The Dawn
of The MOdern Era," by Alasdair McGregor,
Australian Geographic, $59.95.

"It's a collection of 205 photographs showcasing
urban and rural life during the years leading up
to Federation in 1901. It's not just a compelling
social history, it's a rare chance to see on the
most significant photographic collections of
early Australia. The Tyrrell collection, assembled
by Sydney bookseller James R. Tyrrell, was sold to
Australian Consolidated Press, then under Kerry
Packer's ownership, who transferred the images to
negative form, then donated almost 8000 plates to
Sydney's Powerhouse Museum.

This anthology reveals the best of that collection, including
some telling images of women and children, which show how
far we have come."
(Taken from - "The Australian Women's Weekly," January 2012
issue). ;-)

i searched for 'bust'

http://au.images.search.yahoo.com/search/images;_ylt=A0S0uD0DFv1OmhgAQIEN5gt.?p=bust&fr=&ei=utf-8&n=30&x=wrt&y=Search

but busty
got better search results

http://au.images.search.yahoo.com/search/images;_ylt=A0S0uPETFv1O6HoArlQN5gt.?p=busty&fr=&ei=utf-8&n=30&x=wrt&y=Search

anyhow seen one bust
seen them all

did you mean to reply 'burst'[bust]perhaps?
or perhaps bustardization ..[tonue in cheek][busted]

sorry your search suggestion
well it is destracting

breathtaking
re-freshing
energising

but no

nope...

words fail me
thanks for the tip

the music
that sooths..the save-aged..inner beast

be thankfull..for what is a given

right?

..[more than a handfull]
be they..small mercies or big busts
or just words...wrote in a book..

we wont know
till we take a good look
[mosus never looked...so got it right..and wrong]

had he looked
he would have known better
god is just made us..to love...not hate

i love what we do [for each other]
anyhow im done...

[where is my lighter]
i need a smoke

wow
a new year's wish..will be a given
[more of the same...is a given]..

[watch the ravens
leave the tower...soonish]

You're absolutely right, vanna. We should have a big bonfire for all the vapid, vacuous women's magazines and stick to publications with sensible articles like:

"5 Health Benefits of Masturbation"

"Is Wine Really Healthier Than Beer?"

"Could a 2-Day Diet Work for You?"

"The Sex Toy that Cures Erectile Dysfunction"

"Four New Shoes You’ll Need This Season"

and my personal favourite,
"The Best Plate Color for Your Diet"

All of which come 'Men's Health' magazine. We'd better start censoring men's magazines right away. They are prepared to publish so much inane, unreliable, useless and gossipy drivel, that the mind of the modern man finds totally interesting and absorbing, and can’t get enough of.

When the situation is analysed, the pinnacle of it all, is for one gender to be so often reading articles such as "The Most Obnoxious Thing You Do at the Gym", or "Hair Loss is Your Decision".

And they read such articles in vast quantities.

Brain-dead with minimal ability to think for themselves, and there is the question of what to do with them.

I think the question of what to do with men has been around for centuries.

The more the modern man reads his “glossy” type magazines that concentrate on “image”, the more brain-dead and easily lead the modern man becomes.

Walk into any house with a man in it, and the magazine rack will probably be filled with magazines containing such articles, and I believe such magazines are creating far more relationship problems than they ever solve.

Men remain their own worst enemy.

It is not women.

Poirot,
What is it with your veiled threats and nasty comments towards me? Are you some type of feminist heavy?

Lighten up. Maybe you could give yourself a special treat these holidays, and try Oprah’s much recommended “Vanilla Pudding Cinnamon Rolls with Cream Cheese Frosting”.

Or maybe try her “Gooey Cinnamon Sticky Buns” and “Strawberry Whoopie Pies”.

http://www.oprah.com/food/Vanilla-Pudding-Cinnamon-Rolls-Recipe-How-to-Make-Cinnamon-Rolls

Yummy, and no wonder our Prime Minister wanted to be on Oprah’s show. She doesn’t seem to want to walk down the aisle though.

Did you catch her feminist Christmas message to the Australian people. I didn’t, and I don’t think anyone did.

Lexi
Unfortunately I can’t read your recommended book at present, as I have become rather caught up reading articles from “Allure” magazine. It’s all about the modern woman, and its totally riveting stuff.

For example:-

“10 Hairstyles That Make You Look 10 Years Younger”
“10 Beauty Mistakes That Add 10 Years”
“The Sexiest 5-Minute Makeup Looks”
“9 Easy Ways to Sex Up Your Makeup Routine for 2012”
“9 Ways to Look Sexy—Instantly”

And for the slightly challenged modern woman, ”How to Make a New Year's Resolution”

http://www.allure.com/

UOG,

Wash out your eyes immediately you filthy male beast. Obviously Bust magazine is not going to be a suitable magazine for you.

Try this one.

http://myfirstforwomen.com/

Humphrey B. Flaubert
You can do away with men’s magazines. Hardly anyone reads them anyway.

But I would recommend this magazine for you: -

“The Queen of Burlesque On the Art Of Dressing Up”
“See behind the scenes of the covershoot with the pregnant supermodel”
“Get Kate Moss’s Wedding Hair”
“2012 horoscope with Jessica Adams”
http://www.vogue.com.au/

A magazine totally suitable for the mind of the modern woman, or anyone who thinks she is great (and by that I don’t mean she is normally big or heavy or fat type of thing, but great......Although the modern woman is normally big, heavy and fat, but no one is allowed to say that ).

Dear vanna,

You don't have time to look at a book that shows
how far women and children have come in this country
but you do have time to browse through magazines
whose subject matter you claim to be unworthy of serious
consideration.

As Poirot pointed out - slippery-slope indeed.
Oops.

vanna, time to admit defeat. Your generalisations don't cover everyone and the same sort of generalisations could apply equally to men and sports and fishing magazines (or watching Top Gear).

I pointed out early on that a couple of the articles who's titles you'd mentioned from Jezebel were actually positive about men. Have you had the decency to go back and have a read of what you'd apparently condemned without checking or is it all about point scoring?

I detest it when men are judged on mass based on feminist interpretations, I can't see how it's any better when you judge women in a similar way.

R0bert

Dear RObert,

Thank You - your comments are much appreciated
Bravo.

Robert and Lexi,
You may be interested in the top 25 magazines sold in Australia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_magazines_by_circulation#Australia

Only one men’s magazine makes the top 25 (at 20). Few men buy men’s magazines, and less and less are now buying newspapers.

Unfortunately, there are quite a few women’s magazines on the list. Rarely are the articles in these magazines based on any science or proper research, but are simply made up by the author to satisfy the reader’s desire for gossip.

Such articles fill women’s media, and that media is growing, and now extending into mainstream media.

Perhaps that is why so many men don’t bother with mainstream media any more.

It now has minimal reliability.

Dear vanna,

There's no accounting for taste is there. To each his/her own.
And that's the point that we're trying to make to you.
People (male or female) have a choice in these matters
and what they chose to read (or not) is entirely up to
them. However, you seem to infer that women do this or
women do that - and as RObert tried to point out - you
don't allow for individual differences. Not all women
do what you claim they do - and you should at least
acknowledge that - the same as not all men do what they
are accused of doing. Sweeping generalisations can't
be taken seriously. Anyway, I suspect that we're wasting
our time in any further discussions with you. You seem
hellbent to portray all women in a negative light for
reasons only you know why.

Vanna, did you actually look at circulation figures in that list, or just where the magazines were ranked?

The most popular magazine is the Australian's Women's Weekly, with a circulation of 502,441. The population of Australia is approx. 22,000,000. Assuming that half the population are male, that leaves us with 11,000,000 females. Some elementary artithmetic will show that this means that, at most, approx. 4.5% of women read Women's Weekly. In other words, fewer than 1 in 20 women read the most popular woman's magazine in Australia. What are you getting so worked up about?

And why does your misogyny extend to the very large majority of women who don't read that tripe?

Vanna's point is well made and clearly puts the ridiculous claims of the article in perspective. Interestingly, the phenomenon seems to be largely an Australian one, based on the figures for other countries taken from the wikipedia entry. In most oother countries the popular magazines are ones relating to specific interests or industries.

Women's magazines have been encouraging anti-male attitudes and vacuousness for years, whether poirot and lexi are prepared to admit to reading them or not. Those attitudes have become pervasive to the point that such people simply don't even notice the fact that they possess them.

Some intellectual honesty wouldn't go astray.

W

anti/quote...""Some intellectual honesty wouldn't go astray.""

with pictures?

its funny how vidio games
and commics..havnt rated a men-tion..

vanna them search terms were pure gold
[i ended up with naked lust]..that evolved from the alure

but my first...seems to have done major injury
to my fist..oh the sheer frust-ration..of it all
just the simple things...like assess-ing..the fem-in-ine of the big @

words are too slippery a slope
give me pictures...who read the art-icles

Robert, Lexi,
What more proof do you want. Men’s magazine sell very few copies in this country.

Minimal research has actually been undertaken into men in this country.

This article for example, is based on research in another country, and is not based on men in this country. I also cannot find the actual research paper to see if the sampling would be representative of the men in that country. The university itself doesn’t even link to the actual paper, or the link is hidden away somewhere, so the whole thing is now highly suspect.

As for women’s media, it is probably the most manipulative and most consumerist media there is. It is also becoming more pervasive, and entering more and more into mainstream media. As well as predominating in the magazine market, it is gradually filling the TV channels and newspapers, but it is media based on gossip and psychological manipulation of women to get them to buy the products being advertised. Oprah is an example.

There has been the most minimal attempts made by women themselves to clean up women’s media, which basically means, they are fully accepting of it.

Humphrey B. Flaubert
Within the top 25, there are Woman’s Day, Better Homes And Gardens, New Idea, That’s Life!, Cosmopolitan, Dolly, Who, Cleo, NW, Marie Claire, OK!, Australian House and Garden, Girlfriend, Women's Health &, Donna Hay.

How could you overlook so many and not see them. Are you a feminist?

All targeted at the “female demographic”, which basically means they are filled with gossip, advertising, and articles of no reliability. They are also becoming normal media.

Alright vanna, assuming that no woman reads more than one magazine (an unlikely assumption, but it simplifies the maths), the calculation based on the total circulation for all the magazines you listed shows that 'women's' magazines are read by 28% of women. At most - the real figure is probably somewhat lower, because of my dubious assumption that any given woman will only read one of the magazines in that list.

Got that? There are over twice as many women who don't read any of these magazines you so despise than there are that do.

So again, I will ask you: what are you getting so worked up about?

And why does your misogyny extend to the large majority of women who don't read that tripe?

Humphrey B. Flaubert,

“Celebrity red carpet watch”

“Russell Brand, Katy Perry file for divorce.”

“Victoria's Secret model pregnant”

“The Michelle Bridges diet”

“Thirty simple steps to happiness”

“Bullock's baby trumped Oscar win”

“Most influential celeb kids”

“Get lashed”

Where did all the above dead-brain, gossipy drivel come from. It came from one of Australia’s main newspapers.

http://www.smh.com.au/

Women’s media is now beginning to fill mainstream media.

One of the main reasons why I don’t bother with mainstream media anymore.

PS. Don’t bother trying to label me with the word “misogynist”. It is a word feminists say when they can’t think of something to say.

Perhaps its slightly better than saying "duh", but not much.

[Deleted for abuse.]

"Ad hominem attacks in place of arguments? Bless me, what do they teach them at these schools?

It's not big and it's not clever, LEGO. And it certainly won't win you any debates. It's difficult to score points when you're playing the man and not the ball. I suggest you try to concentrate on the issues at hand, rather than throwing a tantrum and insulting anybody with the temerity to question your infallible wisdom."

Posted by Humphrey B. Flaubert, Friday, 30 December 2011 8:28:37 AM

One day later

"You look like a misogynist and quack like a misogynist. Do you really expect me to believe that you're not a misogynist?"

Posted by Humphrey B. Flaubert, Saturday, 31 December 2011 12:50:38 PM

Humphrey B. Flaubert

Going back to your much earlier comment, I (a female) also did the test from the Jezebel article and got full marks - although the one about the woman standing in the dock really had me scratching my head for a while.

The mindset that sets the rapist apart from the lad mag is that the rapist refuses to take any responsibility for his actions or fantasies. He views the woman's behaviour as being to blame for making him do bad things to her. This absolution from responsibility is typical of criminal behaviour in general.

On the other hand, the lad mag quotes do a lot of erotic projecting onto women, but the man clearly takes responsibility for his actions and also acknowledges that the woman has choices. His attitude to women may be reprehensible but it's not criminal.

Humphrey I liked your post above...lol :)
If ever there was a misogynist on these threads, Vanna is definitely well up there as a suspect!

Vanna, for one professing to not read mainstream media, you certainly have noted the latest headlines above.

Personally, I don't know many women, professional or otherwise, who don't occasionally flick through a woman's magazine.
I like the recipe magazines, and rarely read any other, but that is my only vice :)

Many women (like men) have to read serious, often boring reading material at work all day, and thus having a mindless rag of a magazine to flick through and check out the rubbish stories, the fashion and the recipes is a welcome respite from mundane everyday duties.

What real harm can any of them cause?.

Men like to flick through men's magazines for the rubbish stories and the half-naked or fully naked women's pictures.
There's nothing wrong with that either, as long as there is no violent porn etc.

Killarney,
Within google, Jezebel magazine is described as “gossip, culture, fashion, and sex for the contemporary woman.”

At least Jezebel magazine is quite blatant about it, but if the word “gossip” is stated, then how much reliability can be placed on anything else in the magazine.

And it is not just magazines. I have seen quite a few articles by university academics in recent times, that make a series of statements without any reference to any research or any type of study.

What is fact (and believable), and what is fiction is now becoming very difficult to determine.

And I would place women’s media as being a primary agent in this gradual merging of fact and fiction, or indeed, of replacing fact with fiction.

Suzanonline,
Someone else who can’t think of a word, so they say the word “misogynist” instead.

Did a feminist teach you to do that?

Next you will be saying, “abuse, abuse, abuse” like any well trained feminist.

“Men like to flick through men's magazines for the rubbish stories and the half-naked or fully naked women's pictures.”

Do they really?

I would like to see the statistics regards it.

Or are you simply giving some “womanly wisdom”, that you learnt from a feminist or a woman’s magazine.

Dear vanna,

Sexist put-downs tend to trip off your tongue
at the slightest provocation. I'm beginning to
get the impression that you really have an
unhealthy obsession with women's magazines, and
male bonding. Are you overweight?

Lexi the lion,
More nastiness. Is that the extent of your wisdom?

You could answer this question, and display your wisdom.

Give a short list of properly run social science studies that have been undertaken into men in this country.

You won’t get much help answering that question from a women’s magazine. They normally have a lot to say about men, but are usually categorised as being “gossip” magazines.

PS. Not studies that have been undertaken in another country, and then the results extrapolated onto the men in this country. And not studies where the men weren't actually included in the study. And not studies involving a few male university graduates, and then the researcher tries to say that they are representative of all men in the country.

[Deleted for abuse.]

[Deleted for abuse.]

we are feeling beings...emoting our inner being outwardly
and body language..dont often get recorded..into word

with words we cant see the wink
and have great difficulty with ambasidorial nudges
[so forgive me for saying things...only cause the feel good;..or felt good at the time][or rather hurt..to even think]

lexie i love you
but vanna is right
but...its buyer beware

we are supposed to be free..to read/see/hear anything...
others let us...its unfair to accuse vanna of obsessing with womans articles

[clearly vanna,..has searched for the article titles[shopped]
to make her point[and i cant say i dissagree..

but what can be said for womans mags...
can equally apply to mens mags..general media..even the groups we join

its rife in movies..and music..poisend the well for many
there is no safe dosage..[every word twists our perception]
every image creates our mental map

its difficult..to recognise
what a car looked like..before the car crash
just as its difficult...to see the child..with-in..us all

there are many comfortable in their skin
and a 50 year old functioning woman...[who might take off her clothing]..well thats better done earlier..than later..[a rule that applies to men too]

if vanna hadnt raised the awareness
of how low the bar has been reset
we would still be being/doing
things called..likely

Mr'sogenist-ing
personally im over blokes...alltogether
i can well see their silence...is much like destracted...by watching a cat fight...[i will be reviled for saying that]...

but im saddend...that were picking on one..
trying simply..to reveal the truth
with anything..its buyer beware

if it dont broarden the mind
it narrows it

Humphrey I'm not confident that circulation equates to readership in the way you've suggested.

From the Sports Illustrated Wikipedia page "Sports Illustrated is an American sports media company owned by media conglomerate Time Warner. Its self titled magazine has over 3.5 million subscribers and is read by 23 million adults each week, including over 18 million men."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_Illustrated , this appears to be sourced (in part) from
http://abcas3.accessabc.com/ecirc/magtitlesearch.asp where the numbers are given in terms of total paid and verified circulation (not just subscribers).

SPORTS ILLUSTRATED 3,207,861 3,207,861

A paper I've only skimmed at http://www.mediabiznet.com.au/pdfs/auditreport.pdf seems to give a lot of details on the sales aspects of Australian magazines.

Antiseptic, perhaps you'd have a look at a couple of the titles that vanna used to criticise Jezebel early on but doesn't appear to have t had the decency to read. As usual any good points he may make are lost under the flood of generalisations and a lack of balance.

My views on the topic so far
- the author (and those who did the original study) are stretching things too far and the core of the article isn't valid
- anybody taking the contents of trash magazines too seriously is not likely to benefit from it
- most adults don't take it all that seriously, good for a giggle ( just look at the pictures, don't read the articles)
- trashing either gender based on stuff like this requires the ability to ignore a whole bunch of stuff pointed at the other gender.

R0bert

Humphrey B. Flaubert
Still flicking are you? Perhaps you would like this website.

http://www.paperdollheaven.com/en/

One under God,
But don’t you understand. Women’s magazines are an essential item. Without a woman’s magazine, the modern woman mightn’t know how to look.

Study this website carefully to understand what I mean.

http://www.look.co.uk/

Suzanonline and Lexi,
Hi there inspirational feminists.

Still waiting on an answer regards previous social science questions and men.

Feminist seem to know a lot about society, although feminists generally don't like to answer too many questions.

Too above it all.

Robert,
I read the Jezebel articles, and note that Jezebel magazine is defined in Google as being “gossip, culture, fashion, and sex for the contemporary woman”.

The first word is “gossip”.

There are 100’s of social science studies undertaken each year, mainly of small groups of university graduates in the US. It has become an industry that feeds women’s media.

EG “New research shows blah, blah, blah. “

Then next week, a so-called social science researcher at another university releases another study that shows the opposite.

Eg “New Research shows opposite to what was previously thought blah blah blah.”

That is social science.

It is as false as Oprah.

Dear vanna,

Sorry - I can't take you seriously.
Labelling people and stirring only
works for a limited period of time.
I'll leave you to your antiquated tactics.
Enjoy your gruntlement.

[Deleted for abuse.]

Lexi,
I’m very upset, but I thought you wouldn’t be able to answer a question.

Maybe someone else can answer a question.

Is there any difference between women’s magazines, feminism and gossip?

Humphrey B. Flaubert,
I thought you were a flicker.

Is there any difference between women’s magazines and porn?

[Deleted for abuse.]

Humphrey B. Flaubert,

Judging by your posts, you must look at women’s magazines and porn.

You must be one sick feminist.

Dispensing with porn slightly, are there any others willing to answer the question: - Are there any real differences between women’s media, feminism and gossip?

Or is it all the same?

Lol Humphrey and Lexi for taking Vanka on!
I wasn't going to waste my time, but you two have renewed my vigor!

Vanna, "Is there any difference between women’s magazines and porn?"

Have you looked at the content of both sorts of magazines yourself at all Vanna? Take a look yourself and get back to us.

Why are you so uptight about Women's magazines?
They really don't rate highly on anyone else's agenda, even feminists.

Am I a feminist?
Hmmm...

Wikipedia explains feminism quite well:
"Feminism is a collection of movements aimed at defining, establishing, and defending equal political, economic, and social rights and equal opportunities for women.
Its concepts overlap with those of women's rights.
Feminism is mainly focused on women's issues, but because feminism seeks gender equality, some feminists argue that men's liberation is a necessary part of feminism, and that men are also harmed by sexism and gender roles.
Feminists are "person[s] whose beliefs and behavior[s] are based on feminism.""
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism

So yes Vanna, I guess I could be a feminist.

One thing is for sure, I prefer this label to that of being called a misogynist...

At last! Some type of breakthrough (phew).

It been established, that the gossip industry is mostly dominated by women. True.

It has also been established, that very little research has been undertaken into men. True.

Now, according to Suzanonline, feminist are not gossips?

But when feminists talk about men, where do feminists get their information about men, when very little research has been undertaken into men?

They don’t get their information from anywhere, they just make it up like a woman’s magazine.

So my theory at present, is that feminism is also a part of the gossip industry, and fulfils a desire many people have, to gossip and make up stories about men.

And this article is another one of those stories made up about men.

Suseonline, the antonym of "feminist" is not "misogynist", although it must be said that "feminist" is very often synonymous with "misandrist".

You must have picked that piece of misinformation up somewhere disreputable. Perhaps a women's magazine of some kind, or perhaps it's just that you hang out with too many divorced women with an axe to grind...

it occurs to me that the few studies...[of men]
will yet outweight..that of studies re woman

further that such studies..reflect
the equalities..aimed for by feminists

of course man/woeman..
is just too general a title..[titular heading]
without other qualificatory limitaions

ps lexi loved ya new word
i was so proud...[dont know why]
must be the season im presuming..[or lack of a personal life]

anyhow as a generalitie...i only search for porn..to chew up my download limits..that are going to expire after 30 days..plus an occasional youtube clip

of course the adult version of youtube...is much as vanna has exposed the mag media generally...as much as i exposed it particularilly..but heck im think im a feminist[allways been a lesb ian]

i note that all general lables of hum[man]..being..like pea-pole
wo[man]...and heaps of others are male specific..[inclusives..[so we feme's...[fe's..need rethink the words we use]..or we just perfect [refine]..the generic namecalling based on gender...

so whats some lad-ies
feemale..wurds

and here was i thinking in pictures
poor hurumpfree..[but his link didnt have nuthin;..anyhow

still its moderate
so im not mentioning it any further

do not respond to the troll's..[ending this opinionated comment]

What an absolutely pitiful discussion thread!

101 posts so far, of which about 7 and a half have said anything worth reading, and of those maybe half again have actually addressed the article.

At least one in every 3 posts are by vanna, and all of them are designed with one purpose - i.e. to suffocate any chance of an actual discussion of men's magazines by repeating irrelevant rants about women's magazines. Much of the rest appear to be the usual feminism haters, sexual libertarians and anti-intellectuals, all of whom naturally assume all research is poppycock unless it's something they agree with.

Dear Killarney,

The following link may be of interest:

http://www.theory.org.uk/mensmags.htm

[Deleted for abuse.]

This article on OLO is based on so-called research conducted in the UK, but the actual research paper cannot be found, it is not known if the sampling was representative of men in the UK, and then the author of this article tries to infer it is representative of men in Australia.

As feminism, it is typical.

A desire to gossip and make up stories about men, and it should probably should go into Jezebel or some other type of woman's magazine, under the category of unreliable, non-scientific “gossip”.

Abuse and a citation of an undergrad essay. Good to see you're keeping up to your own standards, Lexi.

"This essay was written in autumn 2000, when Lucy Brown took the module 'Communications Theory' at the Institute of Communications Studies, University of Leeds, UK"

Just following the high bar that you've set
old chap. Afterall I don't have your knowledge
of expertise in this field.

Dear vanna,

Here's a link that may give you another perspective
on the subject:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/12/13/no-men-s-magazines-aren-t-written-by-rapists.html

I think Vanna's point is made, sour grapes notwithstanding.

Lexi,
If you want social science studies on gender, then try this.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/news/mind_brain/gender_difference/

It has everything, from

“Men More Likely to Stick With Girlfriends Who Sleep With Other Women Than Other Men”

to “Study Debunks Stereotype That Men Think About Sex All Day Long”

to “Gender Bias of Prospective Parents Revealed”

You can find anything you want in there, and just the type of material as feedstock for the multibillion dollar women’s gossip industry.

Unfortunately, nearly all the so-called studies are carried out on small groups of students in US colleges, and then the researcher tries to say it is representative of every man and woman in the world.

I wonder why feminists don’t complain about this.

So often, feminists use exactly the same research methods themselves.

Antiseptic, what a joy to see you back in action on this forum.
I thought you had a dummy spit and gave it all up some time ago?

As to your' comment on my comment above, I didn't suggest a feminist was an antonym to misogynist at all.
I just suggested I would rather be called a feminist than a misogynist. Read it again and see this is true.

Lexi, you have fought a valiant fight against an impossible subject :)
See you on another thread...

Suxanonline had to say the word misogynist, not once, but twice.

Could earn extra points for that.

The whole world is so overwhelming and misogynist.

I think I’ll have to take some medication and lie down with Jezebel magazine, and read articles such as “Fashion Industry Salivates Over Creepy Photos Of 10-Year-Old French Girl”

or “Kids Receiving Intentionally Crappy Christmas Presents Is The Funniest Thing You'll See Today

or “Ryan Gosling Spends New Year's Eve With Eva Mendes, Ruins Our Hopes Of Marrying Him In 2012”

It’s all true and so comforting.

Actually Suseie, I said there was nobody here worth talking to. Hearing the crows chorus cackling empty triumph while pecking at Vanna, I decided to make an exception.

And the crows are all flying away in a flap.

See you on another thread...

Dear vanna,

My apologies for not responding to you earlier
but I had used up all my post limit and had to wait.
Glad to see that you do find some comfort in
women's magazines after all. As the link I provided
earlier indicated - women do work for men's magazines
as do men for women's magazines so discussions about
men's and women's magazines should not be an
indictment on either men or women.

The link I cited pointed out that
conversations about men's magazines (including
pornography) and women's magazines should be
conversations about media - not an indictment on
men or women. Whether the media contributes to
rape (or gossip et cetera) is a conversation worth having.
Yet assumptions about who's to blame, finger-pointing,
and gender indicments, stop such conversations in
their tracks.

The point being made should be that yes the media does
shape people's view on gender, sex, and other issues - but
it's people, men and women who create the media. Focusing
on only one group does not present the full picture.

Of course you are entitled to your opinion.
As am I, to point out the flaws in your reasoning.

Dear Antiseptic,

Suse is right in pointing out the fact that you did more
than leave because you found no one to talk to. You made
it quite clear that you were going to ask Graham to remove
you from the forum. That was a reaction that concerned
my and Pelican, and others. We tried to persuade you to
re-consider. Although possibly you did not read the rest
of that particular thread.

As for your analogy of "crows," that would indicate a case
of - to quote your own words - "sour grapes."
You must try to resist the compulsion to resort to these
tactics. Perhaps the reason you can't find anyone to talk
to is because you have to learn to listen to more than
just the sound of your own voice.

Lexi,
I think the situation is being made more complicated by a number of factors.

1. Traditional media such as newspapers and magazines are declining, with less people reading them.
2. Certain areas of research have minimal ethics or scientific method involved, and the results of such research often feed into gossip media.
3. Women seem to like gossip more than men.
4. Feminists are mostly male-bashers.

The concept that men’s magazines lead to rape is a very abstract concept, and is most likely the result of poor quality research, women’s gossip, and feminist male-bashing.

Dear vanna,

Thanks for a very robust discussion.
I feel that I've said practically all I can.
You're right, the issue is not a simple one -
and of course whatever sells seems to matter.
You certainly have given me a great deal to think about
so Thanks for that. I look forward to our next discussion.

Lexi,
Yes, well stick with this research about life in Australia.

http://www.livinginaustralia.org/default.html

It is semi-reliable social science research being carried out on 10,000's of people in Australia.

Although I have noticed feminists are now entering into it, and giving a biased, bigoted and corrupted spin on the data coming out.

this is an egsample of how these select sources
can have real affect

note the 'authority'..quoted

Thank you for your recent question to iheard.
'' Wood smoke and diesel micro particulates
are the two highest causes of lung cancer.''

...and asked:

''Is this correct?
Is smoking the third? How dangerous are these pollutants?''

anyhow the link gives 'the replie'

Please find a link to our answer: http://iheard.com.au/question/woodsmoke-diesel-lungcancer/

;...""..a study in the Lancet,
a top medical journal,..estimated..."""

lol
so dont underestimate the fruits of 'the source""

a study..by a mag

i guess i could find out who runs the adgenda
via their propaganda mag

but heck
were all over it

but see where the trail leads
biased science...but thats the science standard
that and accountants /lawyers...and do gooder's..with hates fears bias [adgendas]

who next?
info or porn
no not even...via womans mags



""Kind Regards, the iheard team""

were only saving you from yourself

[plus were paid good regular govt funding..
to hate smokers..lol from smokers taxes]

even if you vote..your not a grownup..
[we're the nanny..you the child]

now pay up

pleae note no further comment can be made nor enterd into
those facts are the facts[and you cant rebut them...at the topic[source]

One under God.
There is a little discussed aspect of air pollution that could be cleaned up relatively easily, and would save the lives of millions of people each year, and may considerably reduce global warming.

http://www.c2es.org/global-warming-basics/blackcarbon-factsheet

But I don’t think there is much money to be made in reducing it, so its not mentioned that often.

I have another theory regards information.

Some people have found that they can make more money by selling misinformation than making known the facts.

Women’s gossip magazines and feminists are an example.

Thanks, Lexi, for that link, which I've bookmarked.

vanna: 'The concept that men’s magazines lead to rape is a very abstract concept, and is most likely the result of poor quality research, women’s gossip, and feminist male-bashing.'

You keep on saying ad infinitum that this particular research is poor quality but you give no indication in any of your posts that you have even read it. You keep claiming that it's coming from a combination of women's magazine gossip and man-hating feminism. Yet, it's clearly stated if you bothered to follow the links that the research was conducted by a co-ed team at the University of Surrey. It's been published by the British Journal of Psychology, Wiley online and Psychology Today. An extensive press release appears at the University of Surrey's website and the study has been reported on by mainstream media outlets.

It's no surprise that the one publishing area in which this kind of academic research never, ever gets addressed is men's magazine publishing. The reason that they won't touch it under any circumstances must be bleeding obvious, even to you.

It's also no surprise that this kind of research is important to women's magazines and feminist websites, for the simple reason that women are by far the major targets of both sexual objectification and rape. Men cannot possibly relate to this sad fact of life, because they do not have to live with the cultural and psychological fallout all their lives. If for no other reason, it would be a big help if men like you were to stop whingeing about being victims when you clearly are not.

Kilarney,
Being published in those journals means very little, because it is a hypothesis only, and not fact. There are hundreds of hypotheses published in those journals, but few hypotheses ever make it to verifiable fact or a scientific law.

But I can't find the actual research paper, only references to it.

So it can't be determined whether or not the sampling was representative or subjectively undertaken, were the questions loaded questions, were the conclusions objective or subjectively made, was the study repeated by other researchers to verify the results, or the numerous other ways feminists use to rig a research study.

As pointed out earlier, it took place in the UK, but in Australia men's magazines sell few copies anyway.

So the hypothesis is bunk on an international basis.

The whole thing definitely has the smell of feminism about it.

anyhow i call the topic resolved

hip hip...lip lip
ho ho ho

anyhow..what is the basic cause
the need..we all have for the most absurd things

be they brazilian's...or vanillaliain delectables
why do we read the nonsense we do[ok why do i write it]

its a need...we want to know truths
or validate lies..so they seem true

them girls looking out of the pages..so seductivly
well who knows their real life pains?

and them dopey articles...its all nonsence
so what do they give us..that the financial pages dont

the same as sport
being in the in crowd
without actually ever really getting in

yep
its the vibe of it

yep
its the vibe
now where are them batteries