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.
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Of course campaigns and charities need attention grabbing tactics to promote their efforts, but on a personal level all I read into these calendars and contests and posters is that it's still alright to objectify women in 2008 as long as it's "for a good cause". How about the good cause that was fought so long and hard - to stop the objectification of women?
The main argument of course (in addition to "it's for charity!!!!") is that all the women chose to take part. Well I should hope so! But it doesn't change the fact that they (or at the very least the "mastermind" behind the tactic) is equating women's flesh with promoting good causes. Forget that coast-to-coast cycle, that sponsored silence, the good old baked bean bath... just get your kit off. You never know... you may even feel empowered?
:rolleyes:
Haven't seen any naked men who've had a testical removed running through London's parks and gardens. But it's "empowering" for women who've had a mastectomy. No moreso than climbing Mt. Kilimanjaro, but who am I to comment? It's ingrained, still, that women's nudity is alright... sells magazines/calendars/perfume/charity envelopes.
I believe the money from the Ryanair calendar is going to a children's charity, which makes it even more difficult to swallow. Campaigning should be appropriate to the charity, not desperate, headline-grasping tricks from the powers that be. Whether or not the stewardesses were willing, I'm surprised no one thought twice about how appropriate it is. Should these calendars hang on said-ill-children's walls?
It's not the easiest ground to take, to criticise a charity. We all want to help in whatever way we can. But it is sexist behaviour and attitude that means a raunchy calendar is still the go-to for quick fundraising. Pound of flesh for a pound.
I don't think half naked pictures of girls are are a bad thing but I admit that there is probably too much of it.
Sexual objectification is not sexist. However sexual onbectification of one sex only is sexist.
Sure they agreed to do it - although, frankly some of them look absolutely miserable. But what are the chances of miss 'cockpit' being aware that she is creating herself as a purely aesthetic sexual object for the gratification of men?
When does this happen the otherway round? And if this wasn't exploitation, then where are the opposite sex?
You mean like this
http://www.thisisscunthorpe.co.uk/news/Steelmen-pose-nude-charity-calendar/article-443072-detail/article.html
or this
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/highlands_and_islands/7068818.stm
and this
http://www.berwickshire-news.co.uk/news/Greenlaw-men-grin-and-bare.4617644.jp
and even this
http://www.darlingtonandstocktontimes.co.uk/news/2443638.stars_bare_all_for_dales_charity_calendar/
Getting your kit of for charity has a long and glorious history - with both men and women...
theyre not really the same thing though. Theyre more along the same lines as calender girls (film) not really sexual
Bollocks.
If it were old hanging men then yes I might agree with the comparrison to 'calendar girls' but they not. Those sort of calendars feature all sorts and apear to me more about fun than using sex to sell.
These links to male calendar stories though feature scantilly clad young fit men in poses. How is that any different than the calendar featuring air hostesses?
http://www.firefighterscalendar.com/
Whilst it does nothing for me - I would say that is sexual
You said cunt
Now that's worth falling asleep in bed with a lighted ciggy for.
God, I get so friggin' mad sometimes! :mad: :banghead:
This is the umpteenth time they have superimposed the face of some bloke on a photo of my body. Fuckin' pisser! They just don't wanna pay me any royalities! Grrrrrr!
Or it shows that even when doing their job they can be attractive, have a laugh and raise some cash for charity.
:yes:
It hardly looks like they've a gun held to their head either, does it?
Why would they be laughing? - they're supposed to be looking sultry, not like Bobo the Clown
:yes:
It's a charity calender, I think it's safe to assume that they
1. wern't being paid for it
2. wern't forced into it.
Leaving me to suspect they did it for fun and for charity.
This is not the same as Nuts and Zoo.
Hardly. Nuts and Zoo tend to be WAY more 'sexual'.
Being honest, I don't buy either of them as I can't stand that kind of 'lads' mag. I don't like sports, I don't like the bullshit 'lads' banter in there, and I see plenty of boobs.
Give me GQ, any day.