Archive for September, 2007

Aunty accused of promoting prostitution by Beyer

September 30, 2007

What possible reason could the BBC have for “promoting”
prostitution? Oh don’t tell us Beyer and you legions of Daily Mail
readers….pushing the government’s “PC lefty librel agenda” right?

From the Melon Farmers:

Beyer Recommends…

Beyer Recommends:
Fanny Hill

Fanny Hill

From the Telegraph see full article

Written by Andrew Davies, the Bafta-winning dramatist of Bleak House
and Pride and Prejudice, the programme sticks closely to John
Cleland’s 18th-century tale of a country girl who finds sexual
fulfilment through a life of debauchery and promiscuity.

15-year-old Fanny is played by the 22-year-old unknown Rebecca
Night. Fanny is shown naked, losing her virginity and fighting off a
rapist. Fanny and several of the other female characters appear
topless during the drama and scenes of orgies that follow.

John Beyer, the director of Mediawatch-UK accused the BBC of
investing in sleaze so it could raise the profile of BBC4, the
digital channel on which the programme will be screened.

He said: At a time when resources are short I am surprised that the
BBC wants to invest in this kind of sleaze. It is just a promotion
for prostitution.

As usual Beyer sticks to his warped belief that by showing something
on TV broadcasters are “promoting” it.
The BBC is promoting nothing whilst Beyer is coming out with
illformed bollox statements like this to promote himself and
Mediawatch UK.

The Melon Farmers regular features a “Beyer Recomends” section where his outraged musings on various controversial TV programmes are featured.

So if you are struggling to find something to watch on the box Beyer can point you in the right direction. Lol!

China bans “vulgar and corrupting” sexy ads

September 30, 2007

China should next ban sex. Then they should also ban fun.

From the BBC courtesy of the Melon Farmers:

China bans ’sexy’ advertisements

Broadcasters breaking the rules will be punished, the watchdog said
China’s broadcasting watchdog has banned all “sexually suggestive”
advertising on television and radio, state media has reported.
Adverts for products like sex-related health supplements and sex
toys will be prohibited, the State Administration of Radio, Film and
Television said.

“Vulgar” adverts for things like breast enhancements and female
underwear will also be banned, Sarft said.

The watchdog said the move was taken as the adverts were “socially
corrupting”.

‘Morally depraving”

In a circular on Tuesday, Sarft said that adverts featuring
suggestive language or scantily-clad women were “detrimental to
society”, Xinhua news agency reported.

China has introduced controls on popular talent shows

“Sexually suggestive ads and bad ads not only mislead consumers
seriously and harm public health, but are socially corrupting and
morally depraving, and directly discredit the radio and TV
industry,” the circular said.

Broadcasters that do not obey the rules would face severe penalties,
it said.

Sarft has been tightening its grip ahead of the Chinese Communist
Party’s five-yearly congress in October.

Last month, it banned a talent show for being “vulgar” and earlier
this week it ordered strict curbs on Pop Idol-style TV shows.

Observers said that one reason for the crackdown was a view that
participants were negative role models for the young.

“Sexually suggestive ads and bad ads not only mislead consumers
seriously and harm public health, but are socially corrupting and
morally depraving, and directly discredit the radio and TV industry,”

In other words our people can’t think for themselves and need us to
decide what is and is not good for them.

China may have one of the world’s highest poverty rates but it’s
people can sleep soundly in their beds that their government is
protecting them from “vulgar, derpaving and socially corrupting”
adverts!

Home Sec in more TV booze blame bollox

September 28, 2007

That’s right Jacqui, why try to tackle the real causes of binge drinking and alcohol misuse when you can blame convinient scapegoats like TV programmes?  

  

Home Secretary launches battle of the binge, condemning TV shows ‘which glorify drunken behaviour’

Last updated at 08:02am on 28th September 2007Comments Comments (1)

Jacqui SmithJacqui Smith wants an end to binge drinking and its ‘glorification’ on TV

TV shows which glorify binge drinking were condemned by the Home Secretary yesterday.Two years after Labour introduced 24-hour licensing laws, Jacqui Smith pledged “zero tolerance” on alcohol-fuelled antisocial behaviour and shamed programmes which “celebrate” drunkenness, particularly among the young.

Promoting heavy drinking was irresponsible and had a direct link with the “real damage” alcohol caused to society, the minister said.

Miss Smith did not single out programmes for criticism. But aides said she has in her sights fly-on-the-wall programmes such as Sky One’s Ibiza Uncovered. The programme shows British holidaymakers drinking heavily before having one-night stands.

Aides denied that she was specifically referring to soap operas. However, charities say there is widespread glorification of heavy drinking on programmes including EastEnders and Holby City on the BBC and Coronation Street on ITV.

Miss Smith said: “Let me be clear. I’ve zero tolerance of anti-social behaviour, and zero tolerance of its causes – causes like alcohol misuse-We should give no time to the idea that just because you’re drunk and incapable that somehow lets you off the hook.

Scroll down for more…

Alcohol featured in 18 per cent of scenes in Channel 4’s Hollyoaks, a survey shows – and the Home Secretary thinks it should stop

“Why celebrate drunken behaviour on our TV screens? Alcohol misuse can cause real damage to real people.”

From Monday, powers for police and councils will mean “dodgy” off-licences and pubs which sell alcohol to children can be shut, she said.

The criticism demonstrates a Government’s crackdown on alcohol – two years after 24-hour drinking began.

It also showed Labour’s continuing incursion into Tory territory with “zero-tolerance” pledges on crime and anti-social behaviour.

Gordon Brown is ready to reverse the controversial 24-hour free-for-all after calling excessive alcohol use as “unacceptable”. The Daily Mail has campaigned to end 24-hour licensing.

Miss Smith is not planning new laws for TV at this stage, but wants to shame programme makers into being more responsible, an aide said.

The charity Alcohol Concern has also warned that soap characters were seen drinking too often. Its research found that scenes in TV pubs in shows such as EastEnders showed alcohol being drunk seven times an hour – almost twice as much as in the 1980s.

Scroll down for more…

TV shows such as East Enders should not glorify drunken behaviour, Jacqui Smith has said

In March, a survey in The Food Magazine showed alcohol featured in 18 per cent of scenes in Channel 4’s Hollyoaks and 16 per cent of scenes EastEnders.

The BBC said its “continuing dramas never seek to glamorise alcohol” but aimed to “reflect society”. “On occasions when EastEnders or Holby City does deal with alcohol within a storyline context we always seek to handle the issue sensitively.”

Miss Smith also promised a £50million fund for crime-fighting technology to allow police to spend more time on patrols than on paperwork.

Motorists could be fingerprinted at the roadside by police using hand-held electronic devices, she said. The cash will also pay for 10,000 handheld computers Gordon Brown has pledged to distribute to police by next year. He also promised to equip officers with hand-held metal detectors in a blitz on gun crime.

The government must be thrilled that their Home Secretary has given them the perfect scapegoat with which to point the fingre of blame should 24 hour drinking go tits up! “It’s not our fault people are getting blind drunk every night, it’s all the fault of those evil irresponsible soap operas!”

Lol!

Her words will be music to the ears of anti-booze nannies like Alcohol Concern who don’t want to see TV shows showing people letting a drop of the “devil’s juice” passing their lips let alone binge drinking!

We don’t no why she’s sighted Eastenders. The characters on there are always bloody miserable when their in the pub! Hardly an advert for binge drinking!

The Daily Mail and TV’s “culture of squalor”

September 27, 2007

Ohhhh get them!

From Mediawatch UK:

Editorial: Culture of squalor
On the day when GMTV is fined a record £2million for fleecing
viewers in the phone-in competitions scandal, ITV2 screens a preview
of its soft-porn series, The Secret Diary of a Call Girl, which
glamorises the squalor of prostitution. Meanwhile a judge condemns
The Jeremy Kyle Show as `bear-baiting’, while the X-Factor continues
to present its modern theatre of cruelty, making fun of the obese
and dysfunctional. No doubt the TV companies will clean up their
phone-in act now that their fraud has been exposed. Far more
worrying is the way they’re allowed to get away with utterly
degrading Britain’s culture.
Daily Mail 27/9/2007

Mediawatch UK have put this comment from the Daily Mail on their
website which is unsprising as it fits in with their views.

Mediasnoops thinks Jeremy Kyle is the biggest load of crap on TV and
the idiots who appear on his show are the kind of people we would
cross the road to avoid!
But it’s hardly causing the breakdown of our society!

No justifcation for having porn say Mediawatch UK

September 27, 2007
So lock up those who have it!ACTION ON PORNOGRAPHY!
ImageOn Monday 8 October 2007 the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill is to have its Second Reading in the House of Commons. This Bill includes provisions to make the possession of certain categories of extreme pornography illegal. 
This is good, however mediawatch-uk (and many others!) believe the list of pornographic material listed in the consultation is too limited and should be extended to include ‘R18′ films. It should also be extended to include images of any sexual activity with animals.We do not believe there is justification for anyone to be in possession of pornographic imagery. There is plenty of evidence of the negative effects associated with pornography. Research concludes that pornography contributes to the incidence of marital breakdown, the growth of sexually transmitted infections and the annual increase in sexual offences.

ImagePLEASE EMAIL YOUR MP TO MAKE YOUR VIEW KNOWN. IT IS VITAL THAT WE LET MP’S KNOW HOW IMPORTANT THIS ISSUE IS. Click here to email your MP

Read our response, Towards a Decent Society, to the Home Office Consultation on this important issue – there’s lots of information to help support this argument.

Action porn! Action to get the government to punish people for looking at things we don’t like! 

Evidence of marital breakdown, sexual diseases and sexual offences? Mediawatch UK can cut the concern for people’s welfare their campaign is about trying to stop people looking at things they dissaprove of.

How do we stop marital breakdown, sexual diseases and sexual offences? By locking people up for looking at sex? Oh riggggggggggght!

The government need to decide whether laws should be made to protect people from harm or to impose the will of pressure groups like Mediawatch UK onto society! 

Boycot ponts off part II…to help the Daily Mail cause a stink over Diary Of A Call Girl

September 26, 2007

Why do so many modern women think being a sex object is cool?

by ROSIE BOYCOTT – More by this author » Last updated at 21:33pm on 25th September 2007Comments Comments (4)

My street in West London used to be run-down, in an area which would definitely have once been described as dodgy.The boom of recent years has seen my street move up the property ladder, the rough pub on the corner has been replaced by a faintly fashionable restaurant and the corner shop is now a distinctly upmarket pet emporium, selling dog collars which cost around £100.

But one thing hasn’t changed: at the end of the street, any hour of the day or night, there’s generally a hooker or two, plying their dangerous trade on the corner, waiting for men to pull up in their expensive cars, in need of ‘relief’ in the form of quick, casual sex.

Scroll down for more…

Billie PiperBillie Piper in The Secret Diary Of A Call Girl

Even if the women are still young, their faces are lined, their complexions pasty through too many cigarettes and – I’m sure – through heavy drug use. They all, without exception, look sad and defeated by life.

Just the other day, I was standing in the kitchen with my 24-year-old daughter, when she suddenly pointed across the street at a house, which is being refurbished and thus covered in scaffolding.

One of the street prostitutes had just walked through the rusty gate and descended the steps into the small basement yard, followed by a young man. Ten minutes or so elapsed and they re-appeared. He went one way, she walked off back to her position on the corner of the big road. Business had swiftly been concluded. It makes me shudder to think of it.

It is impossible to imagine that any one of these women entered ‘the game’ out of free choice. Yet according to Belle, the heroine of the new eight-part ITV series, The Secret Diary Of A Call Girl, which starts on Thursday, she loves sex and money and so prostitution was a natural career choice.

The series is based on the life of ‘Belle de Jour’ – the pseudonym of a high-class prostitute – who launched an internet blog in 2003, detailing her daily adventures with men who paid her for sex.

So successful was the blog that two books were subsequently published, both best-sellers.

Controversy always followed Belle: was this in fact total fantasy (possibly even written by a man) or was this the real thing? Belle claimed to be a young woman in her early twenties, a university graduate who had failed to find a job which satisfied her need for entertainment and sufficient funds to meet her love of clothes, jewels, smart apartments and bling.

The series opens with Belle – played by Billie Piper, who to me looks young enough to still be going to school – explaining some of the tricks of her trade. “Why do I do it? I love sex and money. I enjoy the sex. I’m lazy. I’m my own boss. I love the anonymity. I’m the expensively dressed woman you see gliding across the hotel lobby – fabulous but forgettable.”

As Belle explains at greater length in her book, “granted I’m meant to f*** them regardless of whether they’re covered in hairy moles or have a grand total of three teeth … but it’s better than watching the clock until the next scheduled tea break in a dismal staff room.”

And as the series goes on, the truth of Belle’s words is seemingly borne out. She spends her life visiting men in flash hotels or entertaining them on her opulent bed, strewn with silks and satins.

The men she meets aren’t even that hairy (some are extremely good looking, in fact the type any girl would be happy to date). They are all pleasant to Belle.

The first one, a farmer, wants her to talk dirty about horses and stables while they have sex, the second wants oral sex, the third – a Russian billionaire – wants to take her to a kinky party where she’ll be fancied by other men because it turns him on to be in possession of a coveted woman.

It’s all clothes, easy sex, sexy underwear and lots of shots of Billie Piper getting dressed and undressed, lying on her bed and looking out of the window clad only in her lacy knickers. At the end of each day, she has a pleasing stash of bank notes to pay into her account. So, a carefree life. Heavens – if I didn’t know better I might find myself suggesting to my own (newly graduated and still unemployed) daughter that she gives up the tiring and painful process of sending out her CV to prospective employers and goes on the game.

If you were to believe the world of Belle, it’s one of the best career moves for a young girl with her heart set on making money in an easy way. There’s just one problem with all this: it’s nonsense – insidiously dangerous nonsense that should shame the TV makers and publishers behind the Belle phenomenon.

Billie PiperOn set: Billie in costume as a prostitute

Just last year, the country was rocked by the murders of five prostitutes in Ipswich. They were all young – about Belle’s age – and the grim picture that emerged then of life on the street is, in reality, a lot closer to what prostitution means.

There are an estimated 80,000 people involved in selling themselves through prostitution in the UK. Five thousand of them, at any one time, are children. Three out of four are women.

Some 75 per cent of the women started selling themselves for sex when they were under 18 and most of the teenage prostitutes work on the streets – on their own, without any protection – and their lives are said to be ten times more dangerous than girls who work from houses and flats.

Many of these young girls have run away from home, found themselves on the streets and turned to selling themselves as the only way to earn a few quid and, in many cases, to support drug habits.

In a survey entitled Uncovering Women’s Inequality In The UK, issued earlier this year from the Women’s Resource Centre, 74 pc of the women cited poverty, the need to pay household expenses and support children as the main reason they became sex workers.

A career choice? A pleasant way to make a living? Hardly. Of all the women, 95 per cent have drug or alcohol problems. Of 100 women who were arrested in London’s King’s Cross in 2001 – a notorious red light district – 53 used heroin and 73 used crack cocaine. Almost half of these women were either homeless or living in temporary accommodation.

Of 115 prostitutes questioned in one study, 81 per cent had experienced some sort of violence, half had been slapped, punched or kicked, 37 per cent had been robbed, 28 per cent had suffered attempted rape and 22 per cent had actually been raped. In London, prostitutes are 12 times more likely to be killed than ordinary women.

That is the reality of this unhappy business in modern Britain, but you won’t find it in the world of Belle de Jour. Three minutes into the new series, the camera pans across what, to me, is a very familiar landscape.

It turns out that, by coincidence, the TV Belle lives right round the corner from where my daughter and I watched that sad prostitute, so desperate to earn her living that she had to clamber down broken steps into a rubble-filled basement to cater to the sexual urges of a stranger in return for a handful of notes.

But in Belle’s world, all is beautiful, the men wouldn’t lay a finger on her and it’s champagne, fast cars and flash restaurants all the way.

Extraordinarily, the series has been written and produced by a team of women. Producer Chrissy Skinns says that it is important that “the writers of the show are all women, talking about prostitution from the female point of view.

“This goes some way in challenging any accusation that it could be titillating. We want people to see Belle in a true, honest light without being apologetic for her. This is a view of womanhood without objectifying it or, on the other hand, being adulatory.”

Their research, she assures us, was extensive: “Yann, the director, and Greg, the designer, visited a fetish festival looking for interesting props. When we came to shoot an episode about S&M, a dominatrix came on set and explained the safety elements, where not to hit a client and how to walk on a man wearing stilettos.” How reassuring to know.

Skinns concludes that The Secret Diary Of A Call Girl reveals a fascinating world which you never see on TV in quite this way – “it’s a long way from murdered hookers in detective shows”.

At least that part of her feeble justification rings true: the reality of prostitution is a million miles from the soft-porn world of Billie Piper, who presents us with precisely the view of prostitution that men have always wanted to believe: that the women enjoy it and are there for their pleasure.

In commercial sex, successful prostitutes must not only perform whatever their clients wish, they’re also there to bolster egos and reassure men about their performance.

Recent research by the London Metropolitan University into the abuse of women found that while men who pay for sex understand that it is just an illusion, the act also shores up their masculinity. Even if women do get rich out of prostitution, it can never represent any form of sexual equality.

Yet, the makers of The Secret Diary Of A Call Girl, and the women who run soft porn mags, or who go pole dancing, all seem to believe that their full-on engagement with raunchy sex is both empowering and in some way liberating. I would beg to differ.

A series like this turns women into sex objects: regardless of whether it is written by women or by men, it perpetuates the myth that women’s prime reason for living is to service the wishes and desires of men.

This isn’t liberation, it’s a new form of enslavement, born, I believe, out of the desire to look trendy in our modern world.

How can anyone believe that imitating a stripper (or a hooker), a woman whose job is to initiate arousal in men, is going to make us either more liberated or more equal? Women today can do everything-a man can do: run for President, serve in the Army, play football at an international level (the fact that we can also be mothers is the greatest added bonus). So why does this new generation seem so enthusiastic about stripping off for the delectation of men?

Because, in the weird world of the battle of the sexes, being raunchy has become the new chic, a way of throwing off the remaining blue-stocking elements that stick to feminism, as though these make a young woman out of touch and old-fashioned.

That’s why we’ve come to this pass with the slick new production of Belle de Jour – in the 21st century it’s cool to be a prostitute.

Forget the amorality, the sad, soulless sexual congress. She makes money and goes to nice bars – and in this day and age that makes her an object of envy.

But the fact is that women doing this to themselves is no sort of triumph. It’s sad, degrading and downright depressing.

But what it made me think was this: when I was 19, I got my first job on an underground newspaper called Frendz.

It was the end of the swinging Sixties and everyone was – literally – having a ball.

People had sex with people they’d just met, often with people they barely knew the name of: to refuse marked you out as stuffy and old fashioned, still a part of the older generation who were not “tuning in and dropping out”.

We went along with it for a while, outwardly pretending that having lots of sex made us trendy and cool, but inwardly nursing our worries: what did sex without love really mean, wasn’t this all just a little sad and lonely?

Then one day, a group of us got together and said: “Enough’s enough. Liberation is only working for the blokes – and we’re just the patsies.”

We started meeting regularly and decided to start a magazine, which reflected all these concerns. We called it Spare Rib. I suspect that history may soon repeat itself.

Sexuality is a wonderful thing, part of being human and in touch, but it is complex and shouldn’t be treated lightly. Women have always deserved better than to be treated as objects of men’s fantasy – today just as much as then.

It’s obvious the Mail has wheeled out Boycot yet again in order to generate a fuss over Diary Of A Call Girl and to whip up outrage from their middle England readers.

Looking at the comments below her article from Mail readers it’s clear they’ve already done that. Here’s one well informed example….

Finally someone has spoken out about the reality! I am shocked to see that programs like this are even allowed on TV! The glorification of the demeaning of women to the point of being objects. Sadly, so many people will only see the fast cars and the money and the ‘gentle’men.

Notice the faking of concern for women’s rights. More like just being pissed off that “this sort of filth” is allowed on TV.

Excactly the kind of reaction the Mail want to provoke from their readers.

Spoken about the reality? Oh so TV only shows prostitution as good and safe does it?

And we don’t reckon this guy’s seen the programme! Just believe what you read in the Daily Mail, that’s right!

As for Boycot we wonder if she’s become the Mail’s official spokesperson on women’s rights.

She’s all for women’s rights and freedom…but not for them to do things she doesn’t approve of. Ie: anything to do with sex.

Lol!
 

Thompson’s a bloody public nuisance!!!

September 24, 2007

The crackpot US lawyer really has a habit of getting up people’s
noses! He’s clearly honking onto the publicity surrounding this much
eagerly awaited game’s release for his own sorry sad ends.

From Game Politics courtesy of Melon Farmers:

Jack Thompson Seeks to Have Halo 3 Declared a Public Nuisance in
Florida

With the video game event of the year – the Halo 3 launch – just
days away, game-hatin’ attorney Jack Thompson is apparently seeking
to re-create one of his greatest non-triumphs.

Although he failed miserably with a similar bid against Rockstar’s
Bully in 2006, Thompson hopes to have a Florida court declare Halo 3
a public nuisance. He promised as much late last year (see: Jack
Thompson Vows More Public Nuisance Suits Against Games in 2007).

No surprise, really, that Halo 3 is in the media-hungry attorney’s
crosshairs. Thompson seems to prefer rattling his saber when high-
profile game releases are involved. In his latest attention grab
Thompson has released the text of what appears to be a court filing
in the 11th Circuit, the same jurisdiction in which he failed
embarrassingly during last year’s Bully case.

Once again, Thompson is basing his claim on a Florida statute which
defines public nuisances as that which:

…tend[s] to annoy the community, injure the health of the citizens
in general, or corrupt the public morals

To get an idea of what the public nuisance law was really designed
for, the types of places named in the statute include:

…any house or place of prostitution, assignation, lewdness or place
or building where games of chance [i.e., gambling] are engaged in
violation of law or any place where any law of the state is
violated, shall be deemed guilty of maintaining a nuisance…

GP: Not a video game retailer in the bunch.

As with Bully, Thompson clearly hopes the court will grant him a
hearing. Although after last year’s well-publicized Bully
performance, which earned Thompson a Bar complaint from presiding
Judge Ronald Friedman, that seems unlikely.

More troubling by far are the long term implications of this action.
Thompson apparently feels emboldened to invoke Florida’s public
nuisance law against any video game he desires to target. That is
the essence of censorship and the video game industry cannot allow
it to continue on any number of grounds – legal, moral or creative.

It seems Thompson’s beef is with retailers selling the game to
minors. Well there are already laws in the States which stop them
doing that.
Chances are he’s pushing for a “public nuisance” order to stop
retailers selling it altogether to anyone!
Either that or just to get the game banned, at least in Florida!
Hope US game fans give old Jack hell!!!

Feminist Boycot ponts about lads mags…in the Daily Mail

September 14, 2007

Feminist Rosie Boycot voicies her concern over the “exploitation” of women in lads mags in the ultra right-wing anti-feminist Daily Mail. Lol!

From the Daily Mail:

Women blame lads’ mags for sexual exploitation – yet are they are just as guilty?

by ROSIE BOYCOTT – More by this author » Last updated at 09:48am on 14th September 2007Comments Comments (8)

When I became the editor of Esquire magazine in the 1990s, I found the question of how to celebrate women’s sexuality in a non-sexist way tricky.Could you print photos of women showing their breasts or their bottoms in ways that were not sexist, exploitative and demeaning to women?

For a time, I think we succeeded.

For one thing, the magazine always featured women in many others ways – as writers, interview subjects, as people to take seriously.

Scroll down for more…

lads magazinesEvery month, magazines such as FHM, and now Zoo and Nuts, serve up page after page of breasts, bottoms and sexual titillation, says Rosie Boycott

Enlarge the image

I never published a photograph that I thought made the woman look subjugated: they always looked as though they were having as much fun as anyone and they were always wearing bikinis.

But as the years went by and the pressure to push up circulation figures increased as other magazines entered the market, so, too, did the pressure to show much more naked flesh of such girls.

The “girly” photographs changed; from women who seemed to say “I’m your equal and I’m beautiful” to something much more sinister.

The models were younger, more vulnerable; and while Esquire never, I believe, stooped towards any form of exploitation, the same could not be said for the rest of the lads’ magazine stable.

Every month, magazines such as FHM, and now Zoo and Nuts, serve up page after page of breasts, bottoms and sexual titillation.

No women write for these magazines, unless you count the strange agony aunts who answer readers’ sexual queries.

These tend to be stern-looking women with horn-rimmed glasses and a lot of cleavage, and they dispense their smutty advice in a clinically pornographic tone.

Leafing through one recently, the only ‘real’ woman I found was the recordbreaking yachtswoman Dame Ellen MacArthur, who was dragged through the mud and described in highly offensive terms (which I don’t want to repeat here).

The other women on their pages are known only by their first names and they are always quoted as being “hot and ready”.

The message these mags transmit is clear: women are there to be used sexually for men’s pleasure and all women – secretly or not – are longing for rough sex and plenty of it.

Scroll down for more…

Lads magazines

Lesbianism is frequently featured, served up for the delectation of the readers.

There are horrible jokes about “poo”, as well as women posing on all fours, bottoms towards the camera, women wearing handcuffs and dog collars, wielding whips and chains.

Here, the sex is ice-cold, passionless and cruel: it depicts a world where relationships in any meaningful sense don’t exist, their place taken by bondage, exploitation and a certain cruelty. But now this already grim content has plumbed new depths.

I’m pleased that Loaded, which once sold half a million copies a week has recorded a 35 per cent drop in circulation and that FHM fell 16 per cent in the same period, but with the loss of sales has come even more demeaning editorial.

This week, I, along with every other woman I know, was shocked to hear that FHM had published a photograph of a topless 14-year-old girl without her consent. The photo had been sent in by her boyfriend.

But what does this say about their relationship? Clearly, unless he was planning to dump her, he thought his actions would meet her approval and that she would be happy to have her body exposed for hordes of randy teenage boys to salivate over.

Equally clearly, his action tells us that he regards sending a snap of his semi-naked girlfriend to a magazine where her body will be ogled by a group of strangers as an entirely acceptable and – no doubt – cool act, one that his peer group will applaud.

That’s bad enough, but what was truly shocking was to learn that FHM receives more than 1,000 topless submissions from women every week (and many of them are probably from underage girls).

Scroll down for more…

The Nuts website has a page called Assess My Breasts, in which readers are invited to rate the breasts and bottoms on display.

Nuts shows pictures of readers’ girlfriends – not the whole girl, just the breasts with the heads cut off. Every one of these has been sent in by a young woman.

And this forces us to ask the truly difficult question: just how much are women themselves complicit in this exploitative and degrading business?

Many of the magazines have female publishers, one of whom appeared on the Today programme this week with feminist Natasha Walter to discuss the launch of Nuts’ new cable TV channel.

The Nuts’ executive argued that the women who appeared on the channel (and, by extension, in the magazine) “celebrated” and “respected” women.

Sadly, this woman cannot be described as either young or innocent and this collusion and complicity in the newstyle exploitation of women is both sad and, to me, scary.

Thirty-five years ago this summer, when I co-founded Spare Rib magazine, our goals were so different. We wanted to empower women to become the equal of men in the workplace, the home and the bedroom.

Equal meant just that: a world where neither gender exploited the other. But in order to be taken seriously by men, women needed first to learn to take themselves seriously.

And to a large extent, we did, forging ahead in our careers, excelling in the classroom and carving out our place in the professions. We tried to be the best mums and workers we could be. We tried, above all, to be decent women who respected ourselves.

Yet, over the years, several things have happened that worry me. One is our increasing fixation on looks and our apparent belief that what we look like determines who we are.

The influence of programmes such as Sex And The City seem to have spread the idea that promiscuous sex is a cool and cultish goal for young women to pursue.

Maybe it was only to be expected that there would be small backlash against some of the more blue-stocking aspects of the women’s movement, but the new vogue to re-embrace ‘girliness’ seems to me to have happened at the expense of equality and credibility.

On social networking websites such as Facebook, teenage girls post pictures of themselves showing their breasts.

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to work out what every young man looking will think: she’s available for sex and she wants it. How can that be combined with an attitude of respect and equality?

We’ve moved so far from the straitlaced days of my youth to today’s culture where, sexually, apparently anything goes.

No one – at the risk of looking oldfashioned and stuffy – is willing to stand up and question current behaviour.

I went through a wildly promiscuous phase in my youth – and it left me with nothing but sadness and a sense of waste.

I did it because I thought it made me look cool (and, in truth, I always hoped it might lead to something special). But that sort of sex is merely debasing and dehumanising.

It never leads to anything meaningful.

This current generation of young women who believe they will find any sort of satisfaction, emotional or sexual, through allowing themselves to become the sex objects of young men’s fantasies are fueling a sorry state of affairs.

They want to be taken seriously, but, by behaving like this, no one can blame the young men who treat them like sex objects and little else.

The Daily Mail have not printed Boycot’s views out of concern over the exploitation of women or out of concen for women’s rights but to push their own agenda that anything with a whiff of sex in it is disgusting and immoral.

Notice how they divulge in detail all the most salacious (and apparently “exploitative, sex and demeaning”) aspects of lads mags. So much for their apparent concern for women’s rights eh?

But they do this just to whip up outrage amongst their middle England readers about “disgusting filthy pornography”.

As for Boycot she clearly has a dislike for women models who do anything which could be remotly sexually graitifying to men.

We wonder if charlie_grrl has seen this. It seems the Daily Mail would be right on her wavelength. Hey it may be overtly anti abortion and mostly anti women’s rights but at least it doesn’t like lads mags eh!

Beyer’s cunting angry about Billie Piper saying cunt

September 13, 2007

The Mirror is trying to stir up outrage to create a bigger story
than this is and Beyer as usual has been suckered into jumping on
the bandwagon.

From The Mirror:

Billie’s C-word storm

By Mark Jefferies 12/09/2007

Billie Piper is set to prove she’s a big girl now by using the C-
word on TV.

The 24-year-old, who first found fame as a popstar aged 15, is set
to shock with her saucy antics in a role as a high-class hooker -
and her foul mouth.

Billie, who made her name as an actress in Doctor Who, is about to
star in ITV2’s Secret Diary of a Call Girl based on the bestselling
book.

In the first episode on September 27, Billie’s character Belle
utters the rude word as a prank goes wrong.

John Beyer, director of Media watch was outraged. He said: “This is
likely to cause considerable offence.

“Itv and Billie Piper have displayed poor judgement.”

Itv said it was acceptable as the show will be screened late.

It may offend some people but as it’s been given publicity
by the press those who would be offended will know to stear clear.

Beyer obviously isn’t aware the programme will be shown on ITV2 and
therefore it won’t cause as much “consierable offence” as he
suggests.
But as always he never lets the facts get in the way of having his
two pence worth!

As per ususal the tabloid press continue to wheel out Beyer as a
rent-a-quote everytime something slightly controversial pops up on
TV in order to create a fuss.

Beyer chips in as Sir Trev cleared of racism

September 11, 2007

We thought race wasen’t an issue Mediawatch UK were bothered about. Oh it seems it is when only white people are concerned.

From Mediawatch UK:

Sir Trevor is allowed to brand Manning a fat white b*****d!

Sir Trevor McDonald has escaped accusations of racism, despite
calling the late comedian Bernard manning a `fat, white b****d. Sir
Trevor made the comment on his satirical ITV1 show, News Knight, one
week after the death of the stand-up comic.

A total of 112 viewers complained to media regulator, Ofcom, citing
the broadcasters’ `inappropriate and/or racist’ comments. Following
an investigation Ofcom claimed that Sir Trevor’s comments were
justified … The comments were clearly intended to parody Manning’s
own comedy, where he claimed he was not himself a racist but simply
made “jokes” based on racial stereotypes …

Last night TV pressure groups described Ofcom’s ruling as
extraordinary and said that Sir Trevor’s comments had been glossed
over. John Beyer, director of mediawatch-uk said: `While Sir Trevor
McDonald’s comments were untypical, I still think Ofcom should have
reached a different outcome. If the comment had been made in
reverse (a white man calling someone a `fat black b****d’) there
would have been utter outrage, and rightly so.’

Daily Mail 11/9/2007

Given the fact that Mediawatch UK and Big Brother neglected to get
involved in the Big Brother racism row it’s questionable whether
they would have felt the need to comment on a white TV personality
being cleared of racism for racially insulting a black TV
personality.
Mediasnoops suspects this is all part of the middle England paranoia
over political correctness “taking over” Brtiain.