Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

'Win a boob job' advert is rapped

245

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Anyway, to attempt to explain why it's on topic to make this link.

    The objectification of women dehumanises them.
    The objectification of sex dehumanises sex.
    Whereas sex itself used to be taboo, and therefore "kinky", now this is not the case. The idea of "kinky" has moved further to the extreme, such as sado-masochism and coerced/forced sex.
    Taboo is seen as glamourous in many cases, especially among the young.

    Where you have a society that sees women and sex as objects for their gratification, and you have a society that glamourises forced sex, then you have problems.

    It's exactly the same with youth. When you have a society that objectifies youth, you can't be surprised when you have a nation full of people obsessed by youth- e.g. paedophilia.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I see nothing wrong with this.

    a) It's harmless fun
    b) All women I know could do with a boob job
    c) Nanny state
    a) How can you say this is not harmless? I'd be crushed if my partner turned around and said he'd won be a boob job. Women should be celebrated for being beautiful whatever shape they are, the same with celebrating men.

    b) I'm sure most of your friends would think you need an attitude adjustment if you said that to them.

    c) No it isn't. It's re-inforcing people's insecurites and making them less like adults and more needy as people.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote:
    Whereas sex itself used to be taboo, and therefore "kinky", now this is not the case. The idea of "kinky" has moved further to the extreme, such as sado-masochism and coerced/forced sex.
    Taboo is seen as glamourous in many cases, especially among the young.

    So we were better off when sex was totally taboo?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I think you missed the point. IMO its about the commodification of human beings and sex. We did a thread on this not long ago iirc.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Blagsta wrote:
    I think you missed the point. IMO its about the commodification of human beings and sex. We did a thread on this not long ago iirc.

    His comment just sounds like things were better when sex was taboo, it is not that we are more open about sex that is the problem, it is the way sex is used in marketing etc.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It shouldn't have sounded like that.

    Being open about sex isn't really what I was getting at.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Most mags aimed at a gender could be seen as a way of being offensive to the opposite gender.

    I seem to remember a womens mag with "Teach your man how to beat the bunny" which went on to explain how to turn your bloke into someone who was better in bed than using a vibrator.

    I've seen many articles on how to change your boyfriend into a different type of person and fix his faults and what not.

    I'm sure the winner won't be held down and forced to have her tits changed.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So objectification of human beings is the problem, no?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Blagsta wrote:
    No, you wouldn't would you.


    there is a difference between objectification of people and extreme sex though

    i know plenty of shallow people who like to just 'fuck a bird' then not see them again, whilst i know people in long term fulfilling relationships who love their partners who love super dirty sex

    don't confuse the 2
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Most mags aimed at a gender could be seen as a way of being offensive to the opposite gender.

    I seem to remember a womens mag with "Teach your man how to beat the bunny" which went on to explain how to turn your bloke into someone who was better in bed than using a vibrator.

    I've seen many articles on how to change your boyfriend into a different type of person and fix his faults and what not.

    I'm sure the winner won't be held down and forced to have her tits changed.

    exactly, and women's magazine have a go at womens' bodys more than mens magazines, men like women almost no matter what....

    and i'm sure some of you ould think it's fine about the indepndants article the other day on why 'men are crap' - as if id listen to rebecca 'celebrity whore'
    loos :rolleyes:

    the double standards are a fucking disgrace to be honest!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    there is a difference between objectification of people and extreme sex though

    Yes.
    i know plenty of shallow people who like to just 'fuck a bird' then not see them again, whilst i know people in long term fulfilling relationships who love their partners who love super dirty sex

    don't confuse the 2

    I haven't confused the two, I can't see that anyone else has either.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Blagsta wrote:
    I haven't confused the two, I can't see that anyone else has either.

    from kermit
    Maybe you'd like to consider objectification along with the removal of sexual taboo. "Vanilla" sex is now seen as so normal that the taboo has had to become more extreme.

    Extreme sex and the objectification of women don't go too well together, unless you like your women beaten and raped.

    when the only people who do things because they're taboo are idiots

    then toagberg said
    Well I don't really see where extreme sex comes into it

    then you said
    No, you wouldn't would you.

    and so i said "there is a difference between the 2 and a very big one at that"

    objectification of sex has nothing to do with extreme sex.


    and is this(bad joke by a crap magazine) advert less bad than magazines telling women what their man should be like :s i dont think so
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Read the rest of the thread.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Blagsta wrote:
    Read the rest of the thread.

    :lol:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    What? Kermit qualified his comments, I expanded on what I meant. Everyone's happy, no?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    exactly, and women's magazine have a go at womens' bodys more than mens magazines, men like women almost no matter what....

    and i'm sure some of you ould think it's fine about the indepndants article the other day on why 'men are crap' - as if id listen to rebecca 'celebrity whore'
    loos :rolleyes:

    the double standards are a fucking disgrace to be honest!

    It is always going to be double standards. I don't see what the fuss is about to be honest. It was a light hearted competition. Of course if men started posting things about every time they see stuff that is sexist against them then we would just be "petty" and have no sense of humour.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The point is though, is that it isn't "light-hearted", anymore than an article about penis size would be.

    Also, your point completely ignores the whole social dynamics of the relationship between the genders. Women have traditionally been the subservient pretty ornaments, which makes denigrating comments toward women much more serious, and much more important.

    I don't think people from the dominant social group can quite appreciate that, tbh. If a girl has her arse felt then that is a threatening situation, because of the connotations; if a bloke has his arse felt up then it doesn't have those connotations. The same example can be transferred to discussions about many other "jokes" and "light-hearted" behaviour.

    I also feel the attack on women's magazines isn't really completely relevant. The point being made is not that the women will feel inferior for having small boobs- although that is a significant factor- the point is the objectification of women. Women's magazines have many faults, but one thing they do not do is objectify women.

    The lad's mags do objectify women. The lad's mags separate a woman basically down to her tits and arse, and that is what this competition does. It is not about making your girlfriend happier or more beautiful in any meanigful sense, a boob job is treated in the same vein as putting a spolier and blue lights on your Saxo.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    if a bloke has a gf he loves, surely he wouldn't want to change a thing about her?
    same to womens mags, i hate seeing aticles like ''make your man better in bed'' and stuff
    bollocks tbh
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I see what your saying Kermit but I would say that both Lads magazines and Girls magazines objectify the opposite gender. Also regardless of traditional views on dominance between genders it is shifting the other way now. Have you seen the statistics on the amount of men that do not feel they know their role in life etc?

    I'm not saying its not offensive just that it isn't surprising and I am not sure it is any more or less offensive than anything they usually have in their mags.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I would say that both Lads magazines and Girls magazines objectify the opposite gender.

    Why would you say that?

    I don't think it is the case that women's magazines lower men to their abs and arse.

    I don't think women's magazines are healthy, and I think they make everyone feel inferior by having such unrealistic ideals of beauty, but I don't think they objectify. Or not in the way that is relevant in this case.

    Lads mags define a woman by her tits and arse. That is a fact. Women's mags tend to state that she is an inferior person if she doesn't have the perfect tits and arse, but they don't define a person solely by their secondary sexual characteristics.

    It can appear to be a fine line, and I suspect I'm not making myself clear.
    Also regardless of traditional views on dominance between genders it is shifting the other way now. Have you seen the statistics on the amount of men that do not feel they know their role in life etc?

    The second sentence is an irrelevance.

    Why do you say that the imbalance is shifting the other way? Given that women are still earning 1/3 less than men, and are almost certain never to get the top job in a company, how do you justify your argument that equality has "swung the other way"? How do you justify that women are more dominant than men, or even as dominant?
    I'm not saying its not offensive just that it isn't surprising and I am not sure it is any more or less offensive than anything they usually have in their mags.

    No, but that is the point.

    It's not an argument about one stupid competition about a boob job, it is an argument about what that stupid competition represents. And it represents everything that the lads mags are about- dehumanising women into their respective body parts.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    im so glad to see a man who stands up so well for women :)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    J wrote:
    Having small boobs and the truth could coerce woman into having a boob job.
    what truth? are you saying all women with small boobs should get a boob job?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Ballerina wrote:
    what truth? are you saying all women with small boobs should get a boob job?


    no that they have small boobs


    since when is big boobs the only thing?


    some men like smaller perter breasts

    big breasts are a bonus personally, but any woman who uses my opinion to justify plastic surgery needs help
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Well I make no bones about the fact that my "type" is for small boobs, but I've married a girl who isn't small.

    People will always have preferences. That isn't the point either.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Also regardless of traditional views on dominance between genders it is shifting the other way now. Have you seen the statistics on the amount of men that do not feel they know their role in life etc?
    You think?

    The problem is that a lot of "male" jobs have been replaced by technolgy, by machines and so on. I haven't seen the statistics, they'd be interesting to read....

    Gender roles are still very set, it's visible through out the UK... Less so economically and socially than fifty years ago, but women still earn a third less than men, we are still subject to sexual harassment (which is seen as funny by a lot of men in my experience), we are still discriminated against in some jobs because we are stereotyped as the type who are going to leave and have a baby and cost the company money in maternity pay.

    A man can dress effeminate, groom himself ad still be a man.... If a woman "lets herself go" she's automatically seen as a 'dog' or a 'dyke'.

    At the end of the day it seems Ok to objectify breasts (traditionally sustainers of life), but not a man's penis.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    but women still earn a third less than men,

    There are several reasons for this, not just sexism
    we are still discriminated against in some jobs because we are stereotyped as the type who are going to leave and have a baby and cost the company money in maternity pay.

    Yes, but also some industries are quickly becoming women only, marketing for example
    A man can dress effeminate, groom himself ad still be a man.... If a woman "lets herself go" she's automatically seen as a 'dog' or a 'dyke'.

    And thats just rubbish, if either sex dont live up to the 'perfect' standard they are looked down on.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bongbudda wrote:
    There are several reasons for this, not just sexism
    Such as?


    Yes, but also some industries are quickly becoming women only, marketing for example
    A 'women only' marketing company? A lot of building sites are men only'... Women are getting a lot more jobs in areas like marketing, secretarial work but the majority of the time their bosses are male.

    I heard on the radio that 'thinner' women tend to be more employable according to survey results (if anybody knows the whereabouts of this survey, I'd love to see it)... Still objectified then? Perhaps 'thinner' men are more employable too?

    I see your point though.

    And thats just rubbish, if either sex dont live up to the 'perfect' standard they are looked down on.
    I meant more on the level of gender roles. Men are slowly starting to adopt 'female' traits in the way they look... Yet it seems that on the level of gender stereotypes if a woman still wants to look attractive, she has to stay in her mould.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Such as?

    Yes, of course there is sexism, but there is also the factor of children, more women look after kids and therefore have time out from their job. More men are driven for success (for social or biological reasons) and enter fields where salary is the main focus. Some women enter the caring professions, teaching etc. which pay crap..... there are lots of reasons, I dont think you will ever get equal pay, equal opportunity yes, but not equal pay.


    A 'women only' marketing company? A lot of building sites are 'men only'... Women are getting a lot more jobs in areas like marketing, secretarial work but the majority of the time their bosses are male.

    I heard on the radio that 'thinner' women tend to be more employable according to survey results (if anybody knows the whereabouts of this survey, I'd love to see it)... Still objectified then? Perhaps 'thinner' men are more employable too?

    Maybe not thin men, but tall men and attractive ones definately. And I'd rather work in marketing than building, but thats a side issue.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote:
    Well I make no bones about the fact that my "type" is for small boobs, but I've married a girl who isn't small.

    People will always have preferences. That isn't the point either.
    we like what we like generally but theres still exceptions :thumb:


    and moonrat, dont you think having equal length paternity leave to maternity leave would be a good thing in the sexual equality movement?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I don't see the big deal. Many people get put through for makeovers. Even extreme makeovers which do already involve plastic surgery. As someone said before to some women this idea may appeal to them. Its not as if they are being forced to accept the prize. Personally, I'd dump my boyfriend if he did this to me but each to their own I guess.
Sign In or Register to comment.