BN, I agree with where SJF took the discussion; choice is never as clear as it may seem.

Is it really a "choice" for women to be photographed in these magazines; or the socially constucted roles and expectations for women to be seen as attractive, sexy, hot, submissive, porn- star- like, etc.?
I have no doubt that these girls consent to being published and more than likely feel honoured and exclusive at being offered the 'opportunity'. But was it their "choice" to feel that it is some sort of an accomplishment? I don't think so.

"What is Zoo Magazine"? Now there speaks somebody who really has a finger on the pulse of our society.

"I have never...seen it in any newsagency." Ah, that'll be because it is protected by a mandate which only allows it to be sold by women with a black eye and their ilk.

From what I understand is that Greer was very, very sexually active. Now she is writing about desiring young boys/men. So I doubt that she can be held up as a model example.

Male monkeys pay for sex
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23001290-5005961,00.html

HRS/Timkins: "I don’t think Zoo magazine is widely read, but Cleo, Cosmopolitan and Marie Clare certainly are"

Perhaps it's because HRS/Timkins and others of his ilk read so many women's magazines that they are apparently so insecure about their gender identity.

Why would anyone be surprised that "Audrey Apple" is a typical example of the humourless feminist?. Although I have never been a great fan of magazines like "Zoo" I do appreciate that it is in no sense a "serious" magazine it exists purely to entertain and amuse, as it's rather cheeky TV ads suggest.
What both men and women find attractive or even abhorrent about each other has been the wellspring that has fed humour and satire since they were invented and it is only those with significant chips on their shoulders who lack the ability to laugh at them selves or their own political groups who take offence at some good humoured mockery.

Oh, and for the record I personally find that the sexist thing about any woman is the twinkle in their eye rather than the sort of shoes that they wear.
Cheers Comrades

HRS,

Whilst it is perfectly correct to target Cleo, Cosmo and Marie Claire for their attention to trivial matters like handbags, e-male and goodies from Clinique, that does not mean that Audrey's criticisms of Zoo are any the less wrong - it's just the target she appropriately chose in this instance.

Kathryn,

Yes it is a choice. We may not think it's a good one and it's quite probable than many engage in it without sufficient relection. But even a bad choice is better than a lack of choice.

As for Zoo, I'm still glad I had no inkling of it. Trash culture is trash no matter how popular it is.