What Makes Girls Go “Nuts”?

2007_09_15_ladmags2b.jpgThe lad mag industry—a business that we’re somewhat familiar with—gets a dressing down in the UK Daily Mail by a former Esquire editor named Rosie Boycott. (With a name like that, is it any surprise that she’s pissed off about something?) The general thesis is that Nuts, Zoo Weekly, Maxim, Loaded, FHM, etc. are nothing but exploitative trash that marginalizes women and perpetuates negative attitudes toward them in young men … but that maybe the women who willingly drop their bikinis to get a spot in the glossy pages are at least partly responsible.

We don’t want to rehash the whole “stupid sluts/empowered women” debate here—you can read it yourself and make up your own mind, but we do take issue with one particular comment. She writes:

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

Really? No one? Because from where we sit there’s pretty much an entire industry devoted to doing just that. Hardly a day goes by that we don’t stumble across someone who is wringing their hands over what MySpace, Girls Gone Wild, and beer commercials are doing to our youth. They may or may not have point, but if you can’t hear them making it then you clearly aren’t listening.

· “Women blame lads’ mags for sexual exploitation – yet are they are just as guilty?” (dailymail.co.uk)
· Related: “Feeling Sexually-Objectified? It Could Be Your Own Damn Fault” (Jezebel)

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

  • Come a little Miroslav Klose You’re My Kind of Man

    I would like to point Ms Boycott to a li’l ditty called “Volvo Driving Soccer Mom”. Sure, it is hackneyed, & got everclear’s alexakis a strong rebuke in the ONION‘s a/v club (!), but the premise is no less a reality. The redtube video uploading, serial fellating, hypersexed [insert archetype name] (could be punker, raver, wannabe, cheerleader, jock, goody-two-shoes, etc.) is destined, by age thirty-five to have more than settled down. Each will be married &/or in a committed, (largely) monogamous relationship, with kid(s), steady employment (or spouse’s employment… don’t say that some women, & now, men, don’t still marry well so they can keep house, or if they have enough money, make sure the cleaning-lady isn’t stealing jewelry), & nary an acknowledgement of their sexually catholic (in the non-religious sense) past. But we already knew that, huh?