Apparently there problem was only with the sun.
no mote page 3

So it was more no more page 3 in the sun, than actual no more page 3

So stop the page 3 campaign successfully made the sun see the error of their ways.
After which did they just pack and go home.
As apparently the daily star still features topless models on page 3.
So why not then switch there campaign to this similar red top? Or was there problem only with the sun.

Does the sun still run page 3 or not, I thought they started again.

Easy: Chip 2016 Calendar

I have let myself go a bit lately, give me six months and I’m in, and we will shoot the 2017.

Binners is even posting pictures of child abusers now.
Yay, go binners.

I have been groped by women , had woman flash their boobies and lift their skirts. I have had a man just walk over and sit on my lap and tell me he wanted to take me home and **** me on two separate occassions. I have been beeped at. Had women hold two fingers to their mouth and wiggle there tongue through it.
I even had a woman crash her car as she was to busy watching me walk down the street with my top off.
And had several dogs hump my leg.

I don’t know what conclusion to come to with regard to calendars based on the above information.

Binners sorry but I am but a poorly educated chav.
But atleast I am trying to understand using what I believe valid points and not just being condescending by posting Sid the sexist.

Because if the men were not as muscular and (strong) they would not sell as many because since Michael Angeles David this is masculine beauty.

So if the woman were muscular and the men weedy would that be ok.

So the reason one of these images is sexist objectification and one isn’t is because we do not live in an equal society.
So when there is no longer a pay gap will The bottom image be acceptable in a modern society aswell as the top or will the top become as unacceptable as the bottom.

Is a winner emerging yet?

No winners here, I am signed off sick at the moment so have to much time on my hands.
And arguing the toss on the internet is vaguely entertaining. keeps me away from porn at least.

No bike tyres were harmed in the making of the calendar.
I t was women in short skirts and tight trousers possibly in evocative poses we will never know.
How is that,
prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex.

The fact there was no men on it could mean it was discriminating against them maybe.

In a separate discussion maybe. The last time I looked at porn, which was many years ago, it wasn’t trying to sell anything. Is there product placement these days or something?

Yes, in a way,it often gets linked to Internet gambling sites plus online, well not quite dating. So I have heard. 😀

And where people realise that models pouting at the camera have absolutely nothing to do with tyres.

Does it have to. There many such calenders. Hollyoaks I think do a babes and hunks calender, what does it have to do with tv soap opera.
It’s a slightly sexual calender that just happens to be put togeather by a tyre company.

I haven’t a clue to be honest. If I had a quick link to one of aracer’s straw man pictures, I’d post one though.

no straw man required it was a genuine question.

Or will It be our guilty secret. our attitude towards women has changed. Although still furiously fap away but feel really guilty about it.

r feminism is not telling other women what they can and can’t do, but a society where “babes” calendars are just not needed in the first place. Of course that relies on a change in underlying attitudes (of men mostly) which is more difficult to achieve but the slow nudge, nudge, creep, creep of those attitudes is slightly accelerated by challenging the existing status quo. (I think mol said something similar way back, but I can’t be arse trawling others posts to find out; unlike some.) Of course, knuckle draggers don’t really like being challenged. We’ve had over 20 pages of evidence of that.

So what about the explosion of the porn industry due to he Internet and digital cameras, will that die with the change in underlying attitudes (of men mostly).

To be fair, as stalkerish as it is, I don’t think binners would ever deny being a nasty and unpleasant fecker.

😀

pretty much as I thought mole grips.

So if I was to refer to a woman on an Internet forum as looking like daffy duck would that be sexist?

Ok mole grips
If I was to comment on a woman’s looks, for arguments sake said I thought she was fit (I don’t mean as in looks like she goes to the gym) would I be behaving in a sexist manner.

And if so what if I was to comment on a woman’s looks in a derisory manner would I also be being sexist.

Serious questions.

I believe there’s no harm in this calendar
Would you accept though that if you are a man you might not be best place to assess its impact on women?
Apologies if you are not, of course.

What impact?
Do you know or will you have to ask a woman, being a man.
And how many woman are you going to ask, as they are not all the same.
Or are you going to give me your view based on your take on what it is to be a woman.

I believe there’s no harm in this calendar and it’s possible to believe that and not be the sexist women should be a chef in the kitchen and a slut in the bedroom a woman’s place is in the home 70s dinosaur I have been labelled.

Maybe some of you have evolved from that view point to a 70s backlash inspired feminist new man. Well maybe I am not that relic from the past, but have evolved further again to the view that woman can have it all and still be sexy and feminine people celebrating the female form and enjoy being found attractive and finding others so and still be a marine biologist if you wish and be treated with respect and as an equal. And the two don’t have to be in opposition to each other. And a man can look at a woman and find her attractive and still take her seriously as an equal. I think that whole objectifying women makes you a sexist and a woman who outwardly likes to be attractive excludes them from being a feminist is a sticking point.

There will always be women who enjoy being found attractive (that nigella lays it on a bit thick)and (most) men will always be attracted to woman so the sooner you accept that and that it does not detract from you as a person.

I don’t see their girlie calendar as a piss poor attempt at advertising like some posh watch advert with the women and that pilot. I see them marketing a girly calendar which is a legitimate product in its own right and all for a good cause.

Don’t feel bad maybe we had to go through the stage of the 70s obsessed feminist new man to eventually get to the enlightened ones. 😀

never used them to advatise bike tyres
Appropriate brand association then. My point wasn’t really about marketing terminology.

So because Lisa Snowden and Victoria Pendleton got there kit off to sell lads mags that’s ok.
But if They did the same to sell a tyre companies calendar that’s sexist and wrong.

Mind you, I suppose that’s what you get if you combine a sexism thread with a ‘what tyres’ thread on STW

😀

Macmillan seemed pleased enough with the results of the fundraising maybe someone should ask them if they feel stupid. Or if any of the people benefiting from the great work Macmillan do.
Or ask Adele if Macmillan had gone from hero to zero because of their assosiation with such models.

You compared what Armstrong did to what these models did. It’s exactly the same.

They never used them to advatise bike tyres as far as I am aware.

Surely what lance Armstrong did was illegal.

1 someone is very selective about her complaining, bigging up some people who have done much more risqué photo shoots yet has a problem with this very tame calendar.
In another of her articles she says.

and “that woman just did the roll-up that you’re really scared off,” while pointing to a woman who also happened to be REALLY HOT!.

Is that the same as black people can use the n word but white people cant, would I as a man if describing a woman as hot, be sexist.
Sorry HOT!.

I have got mine in a griffin survivor all terrain.
Think it was £14 of eBay.
Not as bombproof as their 4s offering but good enough.
It has a thin plastic over the home key for fingerprint recognition but providing you don’t use your thumbnail to press the button it’s fine.

Km79 you are the voice of reason.
I have nothing further to add apart from I hope this calendar goes back on line and hope the over dramatic scribblings of a hypocrite has not cost a very worthy charity much needed money.

I am out.

The women look dressed to me.

Have a read of what these wonderful young women (use to) do.

And all you can see is the 70s and big tits.
http://www.maxxis.co.uk/news/corporate/maxxis-supports-macmillan-and-its-fight-against-cancer

No, you are the only one obsessed with the 70s on this thread.

Aaaaaaah the 1970s? Joyous weren’t they.
I’m going to order a calendar to take me back to those halcyon days.
I’m also going to reinstate calling Asian gentlemen ****’s. Because it was fine back then. And in the same way that objectification of women isn’t actually sexism – as you repeatedly and increasingly bizarrely maintain – using the word ****, while having racial conertacions, describing as it does someone’s racial origins – is technically merely an abbreviation, and not racist at all.
And if you’re going to take offence at it then you’re just being oversensitive. Or a troll. Or a bully. Or something.

More drivel, binners.

I think binners understands perfectly

I don’t think he does, maybe if I explain my self through the medium of silly pictures.

Doubt you could afford it sunshine.

Sorry browbeating me with your superior wit.

I do get it.
Have you finished being a cock bullying me yet.

Not according to your mum

No that is far too advanced, that’s at least primary school level.

note that doesn’t mean he’s been trying to make you laugh, simply ridiculing some of the arguments.

Just not very well.