[Closed] That Maxxis "babes calendar" article...

Whereas everyone knows that glamour models doing photoshoots like this don't come from there. They come from grim council estates in some god-forsaken hole like Doncaster.

Wow!

Say what you like about binners contributions to this thread, at least he's been honest enough to give us an insight into his thinking.

Having read this whole thread with the interest, I think these latest comments by binners have been massively condescending, and have not helped the against arguments at all.

Don't worry, he'll be along again any second to claim the Edinburgh Defence.

tbh if you cannot see the humour [ I am applying your rule to your posts] then i am not sure how he can make it more obvious tbh...yours is far mire subtle #davidtaylforth

I read that post again and I still can't believe he wrote that.

That is straight from the pages of the Daily Mail.

If you really don't like a company's marketing ethos that much...simple, don't buy or associate your self with that brand. In the meantime, there is no need to preach your views.

This has been a nasty and dim-bulb thread for most of the 17 pages, but this stands out as intriguingly wrong.

The young lady likes Maxxis tyres, she doesn't like their marketing. She's told them, and they appear to have modified it. One can speculate, but it seems reasonably likely that they'd prefer more money from women, and are happy to be told when they're not helping themselves on that front.

Calendars containing naked ladies will continue to be available in the wider economy, and I very much doubt anyone who proudly displays one in their garage will shift their business to Schwalbe in protest at the change of tack.

All this sort of incident is, is (some) women providing fairly vocal feedback that a brand's marketing is alienating them unnecessarily. I find it difficult to understand how we can honestly say that a customer expressing an opinion rather than simply changing the brand they buy has someone got out of line or done something wrong.

there is no need to preach your views

This sounds a tiny bit "Women, know your place". I'm not 100% sure whether it was meant in precisely that way.

🙂

Junkyard, I'm as honest as I can be, I'll put up my hands when I've done something wrong and often do. That comment honestly wasn't intended as a dig by the way, nor a backhanded compliment.

And I'd like to play the game if someone else will play with me rather than just attacking the rest of the players.

I'm not sure what the heck your second paragraph is supposed to mean, it looks broken.

Binners, that's not even a leap as opposed to the sort of heavy lift launching any advanced space-faring nation would be proud of. To be honest it says a lot about your own mentality that you think that's what Dan is even remotely implying.

tbh if you cannot see the humour

in a nation built on social mobility, meritocracy, and most importantly: gender equality, plentiful opportunity for all classes and sexes, they just chose to get their norks out instead.

Slight humour there.

I suppose its easy money, when you've left school with no GCSE's as you were probably bunking off, smoking weed, taking legal highs, and shoplifting. Its a good living for the inherently ****less. And who knows where it could lead? A saucy schoolgirl photoshoot in Razzle? A regular slot at a lap dancing club. One of those inexplicable underwear-clad Dear Diedre photo problem pages in the Sun, or if they work on their regional accents, and learn which cutlery to use, some work as an escort in City Centre Hotels, servicing businessmen

This is humourless.

I'm not sure what the heck your second paragraph is supposed to mean, it looks broken.

He never makes any sense to me. I think if he used a comma now and then it may make more sense.

When you point this out to him he just calls you stupid and a troll.

tbh if you cannot see the humour [ I am applying your rule to your posts] then i am not sure how he can make it more obvious tbh...yours is far mire subtle #davidtaylforth

Sorry Junkyard, did you just compare Al Murray with Jim Davidson?

Ah so glamour models are poorly educated chavs, brilliant not offensive at all, not sure you are serious in that statement.
Glamour models have gone on to be TVs presenters. Actors tv and film Successful business people. Did not one even marry a former pms son.nand I am hazarding a guess many have a great education unless you can prove me wrong.
Not to mention many sports stars, actors, musicians and cebrities in general don't mind baring their flesh in magazines and calendars.
Many young woman do promotional modelling to pay there way though uni.

No I meant exactly what I said based on what you said.

Previously she'd said she wanted to be a marine biologist. Silly girl. I've told her to get those fluffy ideas out of her pretty little head
So any one who believes modelling fashion or glamour is a legitimate career for a female (or male) would not equally agree that marine biology was also a great career for a female (or male)

Quick heads up, Miss World 2015 finals now on London Live.

@squirell

That comment honestly wasn't intended as a dig by the way

Of course you dont know what it means I was calling you a hypocrite as you keep doing what you say not to - ie dont play the man then you play the man. Not complicated, not even close.

You've got to admire the mental fortitude of some of the people on this forum, holding their ground for 18 pages of argument (and still counting)

There's already been some controversy around the competition; there isn't going to be a bikini round 🙁 and Miss England said she would be happy to don one if asked 🙂

Its that kind of can do attitude that made this country great!

Gaaaawd bless her!

Of course you dont know what it means I was calling you a hypocrite as you keep doing what you say not to - ie dont play the man then you play the man. Not complicated, not even close.

Oh, is that what you were saying?

My mistake it was not an accident it was a deliberate polemic masquerading as an appeal for balance You have done what you are asking us not to do each post face palm pic here.

Because I honestly couldn't figure out what you were trying to say. If you're going to use clever words I don't know could you at least set them out in legible sentences that don't look as if a massive chunk has gone missing somewhere in the middle? Some punctuation and sentence structuring would be a good start.

How exactly was I playing the man other than pointing out that it's exactly that thats been going on for the last umpteen pages rather than anymeaningful debate from numerous posters? I'm happy to debate the topic, it's you who seems insistent on constantly bringing it back to me.

This is evidently going nowhere, argue amongst yourselves, as you were...

You've got to admire the mental fortitude of some of the people on this forum, holding their ground for 18 pages of argument

Hehehe.. you're fairly new here.. this is nothing!

Can someone lend binners a shovel, I think he needs a hole digging a bit deeper

IF you say which if the word confused you I will be happy to clarify and i have already quoted you playing the man whilst telling us all not to.

Perhaps your own words confuse you as well?

I don't have a problem with topless calendars or Miss World competitions. But I do have a problem with women being used in marketing in this way.
The most stupid comment in this entire thread was

most women don't buy tyres of any kind, so a babes calendar for blokes is bang on target audience

IF you say which if the word confused you ...

Start here!

There is definitely a big problem with comprehension of the English language in places here, not to mention a huge amount of presumptions based on what amounts to prejudice.

It would be quite fun for a proper psychologist to look at this thread, I'm willing to admit the report could be pretty uncomfortable reading - for quite a few people 😆

It seems there's two camps really:
the high and mighty few who would ban the calendar (i'm not explaining the non-literal use of the word ban again)
the tolerant ones who don't see a major problem with the occasional smutty image

I'm guessing it comes down to world view really and whether or not you believe your own way is always best or if you are more open to alternative ways of thinking.

I am also willing to bet that many the first camp think they are really in the second camp. There will also be some who [i]appear[/i] to be in one camp on reading this but are really in the other!

Like I say, its the internets innit.

I do just need to paraphrase binners last effort though - i think it comes down to "WONT SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHLIDREN?"

Meh.

you're going to use clever words I don't know could you at least set them out in legible sentences that don't look as if a massive chunk has gone missing somewhere in the middle? Some punctuation and sentence structuring would be a good start.

That's dyslexia for you I'm afraid.

the high and mighty few who would ban the calendar (i'm not explaining the non-literal use of the word ban again)

Perhaps you could use a less melodramatic word then? Only, the definition of the word "ban" is pretty clearly defined and absolutely no-one on this thread has suggested banning anything.

I do just need to paraphrase binners last effort though

I find absolutely staggering the number of people who actually think he's being serious.

the high and mighty few who would ban the calendar (i'm not explaining the non-literal use of the word ban again)

It's not 'non-literal' it's just wrong/made-up.

I guess you're not going to bother explaining why you pretended you didn't mention anything about bullying when you definitely did either. These are just minor details obviously. 🙄

the tolerant ones who don't see a major problem with the occasional smutty image
I'm guessing it comes down to world view really and whether or not you believe your own way is always best or if you are more open to alternative ways of thinking

😆

Yeah, because you're really tolerant of the views of people who don't like the calendar aren't you.

I find absolutely staggering the number of people who actually think he's being serious.

You've got to admire the mental fortitude of some of the people on this forum, holding their ground for 18 pages of argument (and still counting)

Their not arguing, they're just taking turns to shout at the internet.

grum - seriously now. I really don't care what you think. And by that I mean it doesn't bother me one way or another. I'm not suggesting you stop talking or posting your opinion.

The proposition from the other side is that somebody should stop doing something legal, quite common and in general fairly uncontroversial (making charity calendars in this instance) because somebody got a tiny bit upset that the calendar in some bizarre way made them look and feel a bit bad. That is the definition of intolerance.

Enough of that one. If you don't get it yet I doubt you ever will.

As for the bullying thing, someone else suggested it, I pointed out one person to whom he might be referring, that is all. I'm really not crying into my keyboard because I think i've been bullied. Some other people do seem to have taken offence very easily though, and I can only hope it is either for dramatic effect or because they are simply trolling.

Cougar - do you take everything you read absolutely literally? I explained my use of the word ban earlier on and it really isn't a difficult concept to understand. Presumably you missed that post. One of the many 'joys' of an internet message board is the way you can go back to the things written previously. I suggest you do that.

I'm starting to think your right piemonster.

*or maybe you're. Bollocks.

Cougar - do you take everything you read absolutely literally? I explained my use of the word ban earlier on and it really isn't a difficult concept to understand. Presumably you missed that post. One of the many 'joys' of an internet message board is the way you can go back to the things written previously. I suggest you do that.

Don't be so condescending. You're really suggesting that readers wade back through an 18 page discussion to unearth your alternative definition of a word, a definition which is entirely different to what it actually means, in order to interpret what you're getting at? Come on. There's only one reason to continue to pap on about "banning" when nothing of the sort has been proposed and that's to wildly exaggerate your point in order to build a straw man.

Do you actually mean "ban"? Yes? Then you're wrong, sorry. No? Then say what you actually mean rather than hyperbolising for dramatic effect. It's quite simple really. (Ooh, now you've got me at it.)

You still haven't explained why you claimed binners posts were bullying then claimed you hadn't mentioned anything about bullying. It's there for everyone to see.

You 'explained' your use of the word ban and I explained why it was bollocks. It's a classic straw man logical fallacy. Absolutely textbook. Really don't know why you're persisting with it.

And can you also explain why the 'intolerance' you claim is inherent in the article is somehow worse than your intolerance of the article's argument? Go on, I'm all ears.

You really need to have a good read of this.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com

Your bingo card is filling up pretty quickly. But if you don't get it yet I doubt you ever will.

Edit: Cougar +1

loddrik - Member

It's the same mentality that has podium girls at the stage end of bike races, pretty girls draped over cars at motorshows and attractive women holding umbrellas over drivers in pit lanes of motor races. Utterly vile practices, nauseating in their outdatedness. Who is responsible for perpetuating these archaic displays of sexism when they should have died long ago..?

loddrik - Member

"Again, we're not (all) stupid enough to let a naked picture affect how we treat or see women in the real world."

Even more reason for it not to exist then.

Loddrik doesn't want it to exist and states as much in three strongly worded posts on page three. That's something of the sort and as near as calling for a ban as you'll get without using the word ban.

Perhaps he'd like to clarify whether or not that's what he meant?

If you're right, then I stand corrected. From an 18-page thread with 118 different posters, one person wants it banned.

Cougar - I'd have hoped you'd have read the thread before you commented on it. You've been posting long enough. OR do you just pop up every now and then to pick a fight with someone rather than engage? Bit pointless.

Grum - It is there for everyone to see yes. Unfortunately for you anyone who bothers to check will see that you are wrong. Lucky for you cougar exists so it really doesnt seem to matter so long as (s)he (cant remember, doesn;t matter) agrees with you.
On your other 'point', posting yourlogicalfallacy links dont actually make you clever or mean that you understand what you've linked to. A rose by any other name would smell as sweet. Think that was one of popeye's quotes.

Are we still on topic? We seemed to be a bit sidetracked from the Maxxis babes calendar.

I cant find it on their website any more. I suppose its sold out.

http://www.maxxis.co.uk/calendars

is that the best you can come up with? 😆

If I say I strongly dislike the Daily Mail and think the world would be a better place if it didn't exist, is that me calling for it to be banned? Is it bollocks.

Grum - It is there for everyone to see yes. Unfortunately for you anyone who bothers to check will see that you are wrong.

You're really making yourself look quite silly now, but keep going if you want. :shrug:

But here you go, [i]again[/i], just to be clear.

Perhaps you'd like to explain how binners later contributions were remotely constructive and not some vain, pathetic and bullying attempt at shutting down the debate.

I said nothing about bullying, misrepresentation number 1

I'm not trying to make myself look clever - I'm asking you to apply some logic and critical thinking to your own arguments. But I'm fighting a losing battle on that front clearly.

Accusations of 'shutting down the debate' are a familiar cry when people can't manage to actually make a coherent argument. No-one's told you you can't say this stuff - they've just pointed out the numerous gaping holes in your logic.

😀 To be fair I too felt like some were implying to ban this type of thing hence my heart felt plea to handle these complex matters with delicate hands.

I also think some forum members pop up on a thread just to antagonise with silly pictures, pedantic points and name calling. It was what Binners was doing earlier and in my view it's a type of forum bullying by a regular and isn't really in keeping with the rules of the forum.

Bullying:-use superior strength or influence to intimidate (someone), typically to force them to do something.

I don't take these things too seriously but I knew you would be very interested in my point of view. As you were.

Cougar - I'd have hoped you'd have read the thread before you commented on it. You've been posting long enough. OR do you just pop up every now and then to pick a fight with someone rather than engage? Bit pointless.

Of course I've read the thread, I just wasn't taking notes on people redefining the English language because I didn't realise there'd be a test.

Pick a fight? [i]Seriously?[/i] Deary me no, that's hilarious.

I'm not trying to make myself look clever - I'm asking you to apply some logic and critical thinking to your own arguments.

Theres your problem right there. Critical thinking? Getting back on topic - heres the level we're dealing with here...

[img] [/img]

Welcome back to the 1970's. Its spirit is alive and well in all its sexist, misogynistic glory, no matter what load of old crap it uses as a justification

Apparently you're a bully if you point it out?

Its actually just really really tragic. Truly tragic.

That self-awareness thing I was on about a few pages back. Can't see it happening any time soon....

Can you?

Cheekymonkey that is there standard calendar I saw presviously. The one pulled is the one where all proceeds went to cancer, something it seems they have been doing for a while.
[url= http://www.maxxis.co.uk/news/corporate/maxxis-babes-boost-for-macmillan-cancer-support ]http://www.maxxis.co.uk/news/corporate/maxxis-babes-boost-for-macmillan-cancer-support[/url]

I think we're all aware of the limits of our power in the democratic process. In real life I sometimes make tongue-in-cheek comments that start "when I'm dictator...". I don't call for the Daily Mail to be banned and find the direct link ban on this forum informative but when I'm dictator delivering the DM to my parents home will carry a fixed penalty fine.

I doubt many people would publicly state they want a ban as it demonstrates a lack of tolerance, or they are closet fans. Either way I think the level of support for [url= https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/69505 ]this petition [/url] is indicative of how many people really oppose erotic art. That compares with 16 000 signatures on a petition against Tumblr's crackdown on adult content.

Edit: Miss France on TF1 at the moment. Jean-Pierre Foucault's false tan, false smile and painfully stilted presentation is irritating me far more than anything the Misses are saying or wearing.

It was what Binners was doing earlier and in my view it's a type of forum bullying

It was what Binners was doing earlier and it was bloody hysterical. He's consistently been ridiculing the entire discussion. Mock The Week would be proud.

Bullying:-use superior strength or influence to intimidate (someone), typically to force them to do something.

I'm at a loss as to how Binners has "superior strength" unless you're setting up a pie-eating competition.

Hang on a minute. I've just realised that its saturday night, I'm drinking wine, listening to Taylor Swift, and drawing pictures of flowers*

The life of a bully isn't what its cracked up to be! Where's your dinner money you ****s?!

[img] [/img]

* this is all true!