Does that make it ok?

It does not bother me either way.

don’t. That’s wow as in ‘wow that’s bad’ not ‘wow look at that lovely crumpet’

Wow made me believe you were surprised that such things went on. And the use of babes by maxxis was exceptionally bad.

They are their promotional models mole grips the sort 100s of company’s not just the motor sport trade use at events, shows and race days.

The sort I think you have previously claimed to not agreeing with.

And saying these calendars cause such behaviour is a cop out that some feminists might use as an excuse to get there own way.
It’ll make a change from the men always getting their way, hey?

I said feminists, not women. You are sick.

Because I am one and stereotypically are blamed for such behaviour.

You did not mention builders as far as I am aware.
I just see us heading for a nanny state what happened to taking responsibility of your own actions.
Plenty of people indulge in objectification with out it leading to a twisted view of the opposite sex.
And saying these calendars cause such behaviour is a cop out that some feminists might use as an excuse to get there own way.

Cougar do you view porn.
Has it turn you into sex pervert shouting sexual abuse at young ladies.

If the answer is yes then no.
Then that is responsible objectification. I made that up really.
But you get what it means

I have worked in the building trade all my life and never witnessed anyone shout look at the tits on that.
How many times have you witnessed that cougar .

Mole grips you are a fine man, good and decent.
You have managed that despite the corruption of sexy calanders.
What percentage of the population manage to partake in responsible objectification with out resorting to sex crimes or it cultivating a unhealthy attitude to the opposite sex.

Forcing self censorship of all sexual images of people based on it offending feminists or encouraging a hormonal young man to shout oy oy at a passing lady is as I said before like restricting the performance of all cars because some people drive like knobs.

So what if it all went away in the name of feminism. No more ladsmags on sale no more calendars of either sex on show, no more sexiest soap star award. All men and woman featured in music videos will be appropriately covered up.

Will this make me more or less likely to take a second to admire the pretty woman with a large bust walking past me in a low cut top. Will she even be allowed to show ample flesh once sexual attraction becomes a taboo.

will my sole source of titilation be the Internet or will that be campaigned in to self censoring too.

Will I be reduced to buying old copies of baywatch on VHS from a dodgy bloke behind the co op.
Could this whole sorry affair fuel a resurgence in hedge porn until we eventually evolve in to a nation of asexuals.

If the only person you have seen naked in the last twelve months is your wife are you going to be more or less likely to look at the bikini clad ladies on the beach when on your annual two week break in Torremolinos.

Oh the humanity.

Really, not as crap an argument as that just because some one would not call someone a **** it is proof that that person is wrong in believing this calender is not sexist.

Yes, one is racist, and the other objectifies and is pretty much (99% of the time) sexist as well, so semantically they’re different, but is essence you’re still repressing a group because of something they can do nothing about (being South Asian or Female)

It’s not sexist though, that’s the point, the calender is repressing no one.
There is one school of feminist thought that objectification is wrong and another what says it’s not.

And we have a winner! You are agreeing with the author of the article about Maxxis Calenders!!
[/end of thread]

Not so quick Nicky boy,
What percentage of Pakistanis would take offence at being called a **** in any context
How many Indian people would object to being called it as it is often used as a broad term by the type who would use it.
I even know some Indians who are doubly offend by the term because they say the don’t like ****.but thats another story.

I would say the number would be very high because it is a known term of abuse used in such catchy phrases as **** out and **** go home. So the word **** is synonymous with racial hatred.

How many woman would be offended by this calender, how many see this as a woman hating statement of sexism.
this calender is not deliberately trying to be offensive calling brown people **** is.

To be fair poah when I have been groped it did not cause me to be in fear of my own safety nor when I was flashed did I think it could be the prelude to an attempted rape. So I can understand how although similar experiences they can have completely different impacts on a man and a woman.

But still don’t find her linking these things to the calendar fair and don’t agree that because her argument may be, I don’t know a delicate subject for want of a better word I can’t put her argument under question.

She opened with all the times she had sufferered from sexual abuse (for which there is no excuse) then said that she did not blame the calender for what had happened to her but said it supported a society that thinks it’s ok to treat woman like that.

Well I don’t think we do live in a society that thinks it’s ok to treat woman like that.
And used her experience which I believe are unrelated to this calender to add weight to her opinion that these babe calendars are wrong.

No could mean I haven’t stopped because I never started.

No.

My question was not loaded. It was straightforward asking if she linked this calender to groping and flashing which she did unfairly in my opinion.
She basically tried to justify one reason why this calender was wrong was because she had been groped and flashed playing the victim card so she must be right.

That logical fallacy link says it infers guilt and can’t be answered without appearing guilty.

But it wasn’t. She did link it.
And do you beat your wife is a yes or no question in my book.

it was a loaded question

So he did neither this,

A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent’s argument, while actually refuting an argument which was not advanced by that opponent.[

Or attack me.

What did he wish to achieve by asking such a question if it was not just a roundabout way of calling me a wife beater.

You can’t say playing the person as the arguement ultimately started as what people thought of her writing this article as well as the subject itself being her view it was sexist and made her stupid.

So people have every right to consider her history and what they may perceive her motives behind writing it. And their view of what they feel to be her clear hypocrisy of not calling out wonderful people who stripped to sell lads mags but did this calender.

So when drj had no relevant response to my arguement so then chose as a response to infer I was a wife beater.

Was that a strawman, an ad hom or neither.

I think it would sell.

We’ve hit new levels of simple(ton) on this thread Fiona.

Again more insults.

I try not to resort to name calling. And it really bothers me not when people call me names. after all it’s just the Internet, I can’t help it if people find my views offensive, but I never deliberately try to cause offence for causing offenses sake.
I couple of times I thought I may have been short with mole grips but is unintentional as I do tend to be a bit of a blunt instrument.

But the fact the name calling seems to be coming from the very people who claimed to have evolved and to occupy a higher moral ground I find very amusing.

y DrJ about the Scandinavian countries. Perhaps it shows that as equality increases here, we’ll be able to grow up a bit about sexuality and nudity

Is that when he said the men liked looking at naked ladies and the women thought they were just being silly boys.

But that is what I think about it,

It’s you who says looking at women is demeaning and supports sexism.

Have you stopped beating your wife?

Now I Am not an intelectual Titan but I believe that statement is a straw man.

Did she link this calender to people flashing and groping? Yes or no.

And maaxis did donate there own money, they matched calendar sales pound for pound.

She said, this calender supported a society that says it’s ok to treat women (grope and flash) like that? Absolutely.

And saying that they aren’t doing it out of the goodness of their hearts is also pretty cynical.

Whena company does a massive PUBLIC charity events publicised on their own website /social media/general then they are clearly doing it for reasons other than pure altruism. They can do this in secret if they do not wish the company to gain by being associated with the charity and with raising money. Hell they could even donate some of their profit in secret to a charity. yt they chose the public way of raising money that costs them NOTHING beyond time.
WHether it is a good thing or a bad thing is different from debating their motives. which is clearly a win for them and the charity at the lowest cost for them [ this may not be a major factor it might just be a lucky coincidence].To argue otherwise is incredibly naive..

Is that what STW did, raise money in secret.
Should I be cynical about there motives.

I really would not have bought this up but cougar felt he had too.

Mole grips I said linked old bean.

Do I see the calender as both SYMPTOMATIC AND SUPPORTIVE of a society that says it’s ok to treat women like that? Absolutely.

You probably need to re-read what she wrote.

Maybe you do.

One final attempt to explain why I’m

not comfortable with the calender (if anyone in this thread remembers what the debate was originally about)…
I’ve been groped on the tube. I’ve been flashed at on the train. I’ve been leered at on the bus. I’ve been harassed walking down the street. I’ve had men in cars shout things at me as they drive past. I’ve had comments when I’m on my bike. None of these experiences are unique – all of my female friends have similar tales.
Do I blame the calender for those experiences? Of course not.
But…
Do I see the calender as both SYMPTOMATIC AND SUPPORTIVE of a society that says it’s ok to treat women like that? Absolutely.
Do I want the calender banned? No.
Do I hope that type of marketing finally dies out as support for it dies? Yes.
If anybody is still struggling to understand the above I honestly don’t know what to suggest.

I can recognise a concept and still disagree with it.

– that’s really not the point at all.

Fiona clearly stated it is though and linked this calender to her being groped and flashed at.

do you really need “context” explained to you?

No obviously not.

here is just one of many although I am sure some of the antis will disagree with this aswell but some may think this is ok as its not advertising tyres.

I already said some people would be in the above camp, and that would be you.

But equally I am sure some people would still be opposed. As once all the tyre calender have been self censored the flasher will be left no choice but to snap up all the calendars that don’t Obvs.

Looks like McMillan make a lot of money from a spot of objectification.
here is just one of many although I am sure some of the antis will disagree with this aswell but some may think this is ok as its not advertising tyres.

There are literally hundreds of these calendars modelled by male and female, lots of beautiful university people to hunky firemen to middle age people who are well, not as toned as there younger counter parts. Reason being for what ever reason nudity must clearly sell. But maybe these calendars could be classed as art by some, so again to some rendering them acceptable.

Apparently Ryan air did a bikini babe calender from 2008 to 2014 using there cabin staff as models (whos idea it was in the first place) but stopped due to a campaign claiming it demeaning and sexist, there last calender alone raised £78,000 for a children’s cancer charity.

I am with Dan and don’t think these calendars cause or compound sexist views and a great many people can own and view them without reverting to flashing on the underground or treating woman like second class citizens.
And campaigning against them because some undesirable people may buy them is like campaigning to have all cars limited to 70 because some people drive like knobs.
If all such calendars did disappear chairities would loose millions.

This ones for binners,t his is a show I did like in the 70s although this collection of clips is from 1980.
Please take with a pinch of salt and there are some sexist (maybe) images of woman.

Completely unrelated but I think it demonstrates the difference in the sexes. That dating program with Paddy McGuinness where the panel with twenty or so young women are vying for a single man, you know no lighty no likely.
He was asked why they never flipped it the other way around.

He said they tried it once. He said well the women would be very fussy, a woman might turn her light out after the short VT of the man at home and then when asked why she turned off her light would say she didnt like his wallpaper.

Where as when they had a panel of young men faced with a beautiful young woman, she could come on and say she was a facist dictator who regularly committed genocide on her own people And the men would be like,I don’t care if she is a mass murderer, she’s fit,I’m in.

He said the game went on for an eternity as no one would turn off their lights, so they never tried it again.

I don’t want to censor Adele, I just disagree with her or believe her.
She worked in an industry for years that exploited young woman, telling would be fashion models if they had more meat than a butchers pencil they were no good. Parties where the newest young models would be introduced to rich preditary older men. An industry that promoted and enforced the body image that you had to be stick thin,leading to probably thousand of young woman developing eating disorders.
I believe the industry she worked in to be more damaging than any calender.

I don’t believe her bike tyres make her feel stupid, make her stupid.
I think she should do a regular column called “things that make me stupid” it could run and run.

What about cheerleaders, acceptable or not,

David……….. Eyes up David………david…………..DAVID!

David’s clearly not evolved.

Apparently Madonna and Beyoncé are in the top 25 feminists according to Harper’s bazaar. Now Beyoncé dares to bare while walking round in big knickers and modonna did a coffee table book Called sex of her in the noddy.

So to be a feminist you have to believe in equality but objectification appears to be optional.

http://www.swide.com/celebrities/this-is-why-madonna-is-one-of-the-greatest-feminist-ever/2015/03/08