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

Between aracer and jamj1974 there seems to be some sense.

So, this general attitude in society, which is apparently perpetuated by such debauchery as this charity calendar, is

part of a global society where wealth, opportunity and power are largely controlled by men. If you are a woman unfortunately how you look and present yourself physically to the world affects how you will be perceived in terms of capability, intelligence and unfortunately how much respect people think you deserve. If you are a man this is less true.

Well just maybe, its not a male conspiracy where all men benefit and all women suffer. Perhaps there are 'ugly men' whose perception in society

in terms of capability, intelligence and unfortunately how much respect people think you deserve

Christ aracer you only have to look a few posts up!

Do you explicitly think the calendar is a 'bad thing'?

I didn't actually say i was taking offense in these reactions. I just pointed out it came across as controlling and believing that you get to validate others opinions or not seems fairly immature to me.

All in all i didnt have a strong reaction to the article or the calendar. Peoples reactions to this are a bit more entertaining but more in a slightly depressing way than any sense of outrage or offense. It is the internet afterall. Hardly worth getting worked up about.

[quote=cumberlanddan ]Christ aracer you only have to look a few posts up!
Do you explicitly think the calendar is a 'bad thing'?

Are you going to name names and quote your evidence then, rather than have me guess what you're referring to? I admit I've not trawled through the whole thread, but what I've read I don't think I've seen anybody say "I'm offended" or a para-phrase of that.

Yes, a bad thing, for the reasons I explained - because it's reinforcing sexism in society.

Christ aracer you only have to look a few posts up!

Basically if you disagree with them then you are offended even when you point out you are not

Bloody hell, no one's actullay offended and it still made 10 pages!!

The best thing about this thread is men trying justify why the calendar isn't sexist in its depiction of women - in response to a woman who feels it is. Why do you think you can challenge the way it makes her feel?

Euro - I am deeply offended by that post and now feel ashamed by my association with Singletrack and indeed all paper and electronic based mountainbiking magazines.

Sorry Dan, didn't mean to spoil your great brand experience.

What if the guys who don't get it, don't get it because they've always thought of gals as almost* equals? What some of you guys see and think when you see the portrayal of women is not what i see or think. I'm just not getting it. Am i not looking things hard enough? Is it like those magic eye images you had to squint at? I struggled with them for years and when it finally clicked, it was utterly disappointing.

When i'm at work tomorrow i'll post up an image containing a female human subject from the last calendar i did done do. You can tell me what i see if you like. Just for fun and grown up seriousness.

p.s. Nice one Ginger. Proof that drama is a human thing and not gender specific.

* Nearly forgot...Almost as in there are a few exceptions - but they're not sexist (i hope).

Ah yes, its the internet and you have to say, "disagree with the proposition" rather than use words like offense or upset because otherwise people will either: be too stupid to understand or wantonly misunderstand.

I hope you realise that is a very polite way of explaining my opinion of your post aracer.

geez now I really am depressed 😉 its been fun and largely entertaining read.
Although the use of women in advertising may not make me want to buy the products more but it does leave a longer lasting memory which is easier to retrieve ( whether that be maxxis babes or monster girls or any other )

jamj1974 - Member
The best thing about this thread is men trying justify why the calendar isn't sexist in its depiction of women - in response to a woman who feels it is. Why do you think you can challenge the way it makes her feel

What makes you think that someone who posts an opinion online in public media shouldn't have their opinion challenged? Is she uniquely privileged by being a woman discussing perceived sexism? Or does this apply to all things? Only mechanics can discuss freewheels for example.

Believe it or not I largely agree with your conclusions, though I still think its a little strong a reaction.

Nowhere near as strong a reaction as the dozens of posts you've made defending the calendar and pretending that people are 'delighting in taking offence' at it.

[quote=cumberlanddan ]Ah yes, its the internet and you have to say, "disagree with the proposition" rather than use words like offense or upset because otherwise people will either: be too stupid to understand or wantonly misunderstand.
I hope you realise that is a very polite way of explaining my opinion of your post aracer.

I'm now trying to work out whether I should be offended by that 😕

I presume what you're saying is that you don't understand how it's possible to think something is wrong without being offended by it 😕

Or when you wrote "many here appear to be delighting in taking offense where none is due" were you suggesting that having the opinion that the calendar is wrong is invalid, rather than referring to people claiming offense? 😕

You'll have to excuse me for being a bit thick.

they must be wearing very tight clothing

How dare they!

What makes you think that someone who posts an opinion online in public media shouldn't have their opinion challenged?

Is she uniquely privileged by being a woman discussing perceived sexism?

Or does this apply to all things? Only mechanics can discuss freewheels for example.

[quote=Junkyard ]any one can have opinions/discussion the question is which ones you would listen to ,the expert bike mechanic or some random person with no expert knowledge.Depends. Is it about cutting slots into [s]crown races[/s] baseplates?

I always cut mine but, and you have seen my bikes, I am no expert bike mechanic

Scribbles out the "Hot Buns 2016 calendar" from Christmas list and wanders off, whistling surreptitiously......

.....wanders back and writes "Countryfile 2016 calendar" on Christmas list.....

Top 10 calendars of 2015.
Only 1 of the ten at number 10 would be seen as sexist by some and that's Michele keegans.
Although Kelly brook came in at 11.
[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/11244847/Top-10-best-selling-2015-calendars.html ]top 10 of 2015[/url]

Ginger
Another woman here. I am not offended - i am disappointed and saddened but not offended, that is far too strong a reaction. The impression their advertising in this way creates for me is that it is aimed at men to the exclusion of women. Obviously advertising is aimed at particular market segments. If you market segment is fairly unform then you can be very specific. In using this type of advertising i feel that women are being actively excluded as an unimportant market segment and i dont think this reflect a modern understanding of the market and society. Women can be interested in cars (and tyres) and also biking. The impression i gain from this approach to advertising is that I and other women are unimportant to Maxxis. It reflects gender stereotyping that i am hoping will lessen in society as my daughter grows up.

You can disagree with my conclusions but you cannot tell me that i am not allowed to feel or react in a particular way. This is my reaction to this sort of advertising and it does have a negative impact on my attitude to the brand. I have as much right to feel this way as you have to your own reaction. So men telling me i am over reacting or 'offended' and it is because i am 'PC gone mad' or naive comes across as controlling. You might believe that i am these things but that isnt the same thing as saying that i am. If you dont recognise the difference between the statements then that is rather sad.

To be quoted in full for every page of this disappointing but illuminating thread.

For the "it's just a calendar" and "it's everywhere so it's OK" posters, can you agree that if the majority of female bikers have negative reactions to this, Maxxis (and others) might reconsider how they communicate?

Women can be interested in cars (and tyres) and also biking.

It always struck me that Dirt magazine got this right (others mags may also have good coverage, but that's the one I subscribed to)

Nice find op, ordered!

Sheesh, are you all actually men ? Or have I transwarped to transgenderravingfaggotworld.com

We're men... we're genetically pre-dispososed to look at and find women attractive. It's how we reproduce, it's how we populate the world.

If Mrs Weeksy sends me pics of her knockers is the demeaning herself ? OR is she just someone who also is objectified? Hell I don't know.

I wasn't going to buy this calendar, but I think I bloody might do now 🙂

It's not OK just because it's a calendar, it's not OK because it's everywhere... it's ACTUALLY OK, because it's natural to look at and find women attractive. It's also OK for women to dress and be attractive and want to be looked at.

What is wrong with you people ?

I havent reconsidered my postion on wether or not women need calendars, but I have come up with a more nuanced view on what this calendar means and why it's disappointing.

I think the back-street garage comparisson is the correct one. These calendars are only likely to "publically" end up in workshops, tea shacks and other places where women, while not specifically excluded, are not expected to be present. It suggests that an exclusively male environment exists.

The question is not who would be offended and why, but is it acceptable for a workplace or shopfront to have that whiff of inconsiderateness?

It's one tiny rock in the pile of things that keep some women away from the sport and the industry, but it's keeping up the debate.

As for the calendars that end up in teenage boys bedrooms...

We're men...

No, we're not. Some people are women.

Can you think beyond your own interests?

Clearly not!

After reading the few pages that have been added since yesterday, I'll just repeat the statement I made near the beginning, before the more clueless, hard-of-thinking of you had really warmed to, then started absolutely revelling in your mindlessly blinkered, embarrassingly outdated misogynistic theme...

[i]As a father of two young daughters I can say in all honesty that this is the most profoundly depressing thread I've ever read on this forum.

I just despair in the attitudes being expressed by some of you

Mind you, as a signpost to point out complete tools to be avoided at all costs, this is right up there with private number plate ownership. So every cloud eh?[/i]

There's nothing more I really feel like adding to that.

Sheesh, are you all actually men ? Or have I transwarped to transgenderravingfaggotworld.com

We're men... we're genetically pre-dispososed to look at and find women attractive. It's how we reproduce, it's how we populate the world.

I'm a heterosexual, cis-gendered man, yes. I don't understand how this reductive and silly argument is supposed to apply to me. I find (specific) women attractive. That doesn't mean that I have to be surrounded by colour photographs of women in various states of undress. In fact, my heterosexual orientation and breeding capability can survive for several [i]days[/i] at a time even if I'm completely deprived of pictures of naked ladies.

That (a proportion) of women aren't keen on something is a perfectly decent reason not to bother with something that isn't remotely necessary for my well-being or contentment.

🙂

Are you rehashing the "what about pics of half-naked men" argument? As also explained several times, if we lived in a totally equal society with no difference in power then you'd be right about them being the same.

They are the same, you can't complain that ladies on a calandar is sexist, which is an incorrect description anyway, but say its ok to have half naked men on a calandar. I'm all for equality on both sides but moaning about a calandar that a company makes is just stupid.

Googled "sexy colander". Was not disappointed.

[img] [/img]

yes poah you are the very embodiment of the struggle for equality.

We're men... we're genetically pre-dispososed to look at and find women attractive. It's how we reproduce, it's how we populate the world

Ah so we should do it all the time at every moment and never stop doign anything but check out the fecundity of every single female we ever see. FWIW some of us are able to not act like out cavemen ancestors even you if you push yourself 😉

If Mrs Weeksy sends me pics of her knockers is the demeaning herself ? OR is she just someone who also is objectified? Hell I don't know.

I wasn't going to buy this calendar, but I think I bloody might do now

What is wrong with you people ?

WHat binners said this thread is just the sad 70's neanderthals revelling in their dinosaur attitudes. Its not a debate anymore its just both sides taking the piss.

Sheesh, are you all actually men ? Or have I transwarped to transgenderravingfaggotworld.com

:-/

I evolved.

Into what though ? a daily mail hand wringing big girls blouse ? And somehow this is something to be proud of.

It amazes me this place time and time again, this is just another step in the coffee making, ale drinking, wood burning holier than thou type sterotyping we see time and time again.

In simple terms, you're all turning into big fairies...

a daily mail hand wringing big girls blouse ?

It amazes me this place time and time again, this is just another step in the coffee making, ale drinking, wood burning holier than thou type sterotyping we see time and time again.

In simple terms, you're all turning into big fairies...

whilst you remain a bigot who seems to want to cal us disrespectful names for homosexuals because we dont want to look at this type of shit

Then don't look at it fella... don't buy it...

But how can you defend the girls that don't necessarily want to be defended ? You realise this is their chosen career ? It's what they do to make money ? They're not being exploited, that's their job... to be pretty and have their picture taken. None of them were dragged into the shoot and tied up for the pics... they went, did their job and then spent their wages looking even prettier...

You (and others) are getting all bent out of shape for someone who actually doesn't want or need your sympathy.

You really do think a lot of yourself don't you binners?

As the father of one young girl, and one young boy, i really don't think calendars like this will have any material impact on either of their day to day lives, prospects for the future or happiness in times to come, unless i don't do my job properly and instill in them some sense of proportion which allows them not to be offended by every the slightest thing they disagree with.

Oh dear, that was a long sentence.

[img] [/img]

Just watched that manon carpenter video again and saw it was sponsored by shimano and continental.
Hope Adele likes SRAM because I wouldn't want her to feel stupid.

[img] [/img]

Looks like Adele is going single speed.

You really do think a lot of yourself don't you binners?

You have just realised?

Some of you guys just love to argue don't ya?

As promised/threatened a couple of images from my 2016 calendar. This is not for sale and no money goes to charity. I work for a printing company and it's to promote the quality of our colour printing (for any designers out there, it's printed on 160gsm Image Impact which is a nice sturdy offset that takes ink very well and keeps the image bright 😉 ). I'd be genuinely interested if anyone finds these images offensive/distasteful.

I should really issue a prude warning at this point (level 3) as there is some bare skin content. If you're not trapped in the 70's i'd not look any further...

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

^^ That ladies puppies are hanging out 😯

Ok.

It's ok to appreciate the beauty of members of your preferred sex. Including women.

It's ok for consenting adults to indulge in whatever they want, porn, whatever.

It's ok to take pictures of consenting women and look at them, in private.

BUT

It is not ok to use them as marketing eye-candy, and here's why:

Through most of history, women have been dominated by men in various ways. Treated as chattels, denied rights, denied voice, objectified, and so on. Think about what 'objectified' means. It means seeing a woman as a something to be looked at and ****ed, nothing more, rather than a full human being.

This attitude is remarkably persistent, and women still suffer from it even in "modern" society. Ok so it's getting better, but it's still there. You still hear men saying things like 'look at the tits on that'. An object doesn't have rights, and it doesn't have feelings. Even if it did, you could ignore them, cos it's just a thing.

Now, imagine you're a woman. How do you think you might feel standing next to some bloke on the train, having them look you up and down and smirking. Do you think you'd feel threatened? Nervous? Sexual violence still exists after all. What would you say to that man? You'd probably be thinking that he should consider your feelings. Well, that's right - he should. People should not do things directly to others that make them feel bad, obviously. I'd not want a bloke to insult or abuse me, either. But there is context to the man vs woman issue, history, baggage if you like.

The problem with sexy calendars is that the women are presented as sex objects. And this reinforces this problem, rather than helping solve it. If the calendar was full of female MTBers clothed, on their bikes, winning races, covered in mud and full of the joy of MTBing then that'd be different, although still one-sided of course.

The calendar is to be *displayed*, on the wall somewhere, and anyone can see it. Some men might have their latent sexism encouraged, and some women might feel threatened. Despite what the maker or purchaser of the calendar intended.

It's not just about equality. It's about removing negative and corrosive attitudes that damage society, instead of reinforcing them. The fact that many of you men have no idea why this calendar is a problem is probably a good thing. I didn't when I was younger, but I'm learning about the world all the time.

[i]But how can you defend the girls that don't necessarily want to be defended ? You realise this is their chosen career ?[/i]

@weeksy - some would argue that's internalised oppression...

molgrips and Big Dummy have it.

and it is either pathetic trolling by [b]weeksy [/b]- or he is a just a teensy bit uncertain of his [i]own [/i]sexuality and has to wave a "I'm macho and like calendars with boobs" to convince himself he is still straight... 😉

As my wife has also contributed:

Because it's on public display, latently sexist men can see it, women threatened by sexist men can see it, but also kids can see it. I don't want my daughters growing up thinking that this is sexy, that this is how you please men - by being complicant and submissive, and showing your arse. You don't have to offer yourself as an object.

I think the reason so many men here don't get it is because they *aren't* sexist, not because they are.

As promised/threatened a couple of images from my 2016 calendar.

And off we go into 'Art? Or cheap titillation/objectification?' Territory

Bicycle companies (not specifically tyre-related) have a reasonably long history of exploiting the female form. Some I view as art, and some as cheap 70s man 'phwooaaAhlookitKNOCKAzonTHAT?!'

Far be it from me to judge which is which on behalf of someone else. To some men, all 'knockers' are on 'that'. They are the type that see product (female flesh) selling product (rubber) and this is a naturalised state of affairs in their cultural niche (garage walls in male-dominated workplaces)

I don't want my daughters growing up thinking that this is sexy, that this is how you please men - by being complicant and submissive, and showing your arse. You don't have to offer yourself as an object.

Why then is Lovehoney so Popular ? Victorias Secret opening lots of new shops ? Why do women go out and spend fortunes on underwear ? Because being sexy is GOOD. Being sexy makes both the man and the woman feel good... you're not being submissive, you're doing what's completely natural. Showing your arse is a GOOD thing... Jeez.

How do we feel about this:

POTENTIALLY NSFW

http://www.hotshotscalendar.com/pages/help-for-heroes

Page 3 girls and similar do a calendar. Not strictly nude from what I can tell. Proceeds go to Help For Heroes

[quote=weeksy ] Jeez.

Congratulations on summing up my thoughts every time I read one of your posts

Euro - what other properties does that paper have? for example, is that smutty filth wipe clean?

Am I the only one who's utterly incredulous that we're 11 pages into a a raging argument about sexism and not one person has suggested a cup of Chamomile tea to calm everyone down.

Nobody.

I is disappoint.

<flounces>

How about a white wine for the little lady?

[img] [/img]

[b]weeksy[/b]

The love honey and other stuff is about women taking control and owning their sexuality. Women like sex too.

The calendars and page 3 type stuff is about men deciding and determining what it, and women's roles should be.

Got that?

This is a good point from molgrips

"I think the reason so many men here don't get it is because they *aren't* sexist, not because they are"

I've been reading the posts all along in this thread, and struggling a little. I may get flamed for this, but I like looking at pictures of naked ladies. A large number of the replies in the 'against' category have been making me question whether I am indeed being sexist/stuck in the 70's etc for that reason. I'm fairly sure I'm not!

POTENTIALLY NSFW

Going back to the late 80s (don't know what it's like now, any mechanics/factory workers here may enlighten) - 'NSFW' would be sort of redundant, at least concerning the female form. Worked in a garage and a few factories where gynaecologically fecund middle-page spreads where evidently 'SFW'!

This place is crazy.

Men look at women. It's how it works. That's why over millions of years women look the way they do. They look better than men. men like it.

You can argue about the last 100 years all you like, but you are fighting against millions of years of evolution.

for what ever reason, men have evolved to be more visual than women when it comes to sex.

There is a reason why men are physically stronger and more aggressive than women, they are disposal. Hence they are the ones who hunt and fight to support their "tribe". Women are more important for the continuity of the species. In theory, 1 man can reproduce more than once per day, a women takes 9 months. If you lose 90% of your men, you can still come back, lose 90% of your women and you're ****ed.

Women are attracted to "powerful" men, men who can protect them and their children. Anyone going to dispute that?

[quote=wilko1999 ]I've been reading the posts all along in this thread, and struggling a little. I may get flamed for this, but I like looking at pictures of naked ladies. A large number of the replies in the 'against' category have been making me question whether I am indeed being sexist/stuck in the 70's etc for that reason. I'm fairly sure I'm not!

I like looking at pictures of naked ladies, and I'm in the against camp. It's possible to like looking at pictures of naked ladies and not think using them as a marketing tool is acceptable.

I'm thinking this a big part of where some people's misunderstanding comes from - it's all about context. Nobody is suggesting there is anything wrong or "70s" about natural desires. You can also do what you like in private. Having such pics up in public is an issue because it makes some women feel uncomfortable and reinforces stereotypes. Having such pics on marketing material is wrong because they might be put up in public, and even if not it's still reinforcing societal sexism.

In summary, nothing at all wrong with your natural feelings.

There is a reason why men are physically stronger and more aggressive than women, they are disposal.

Who is 'disposal' (sic)? The man who dies in pursuit of his womans dinner? She just gets a new man, right? Or the woman who dies whilst protecting herself and children from an attacker while her man is at work looking at naked calendars? He just gets a new woman? Right? 🙄

You can argue about the last 100 years all you like, but you are fighting against millions of years of evolution.

And tigers eat their offspring, and chimps engage in infanticide, cannibalism and rape.

Great argument....

(edit - apologies to self and others if have responded to a trolling)

chimps engage in infanticide, cannibalism and rape.

Errr..... so do humans......particularly that last one.

"I think the reason so many men here don't get it is because they *aren't* sexist, not because they are"

I'd thought something along those lines yesterday but didn't post it as i'm not really into internet arguing. My theory was that perhaps the ones who protest so much used to think about women in the 'bad way' but have now seen the light. They maybe assume that everyone else thinks the way they used and feel the need to convert all men into think as they do now. The fact is that not everyone treats women as objects and there's no need to try and convert us. (perhaps weeksy needs a bit of work 😛 ) It's what i'd like to call the 'Born again identity' theory.

Euro - what other properties does that paper have? for example, is that smutty filth wipe clean?

I've not tested it on anything other than coffee. Does that make me gay? 😀

[i]Men look at women. It's how it works. That's why over millions of years women look the way they do. They look better than men. men like it.

You can argue about the last 100 years all you like, but you are fighting against millions of years of evolution.

for what ever reason, men have evolved to be more visual than women when it comes to sex.

There is a reason why men are physically stronger and more aggressive than women, they are disposal. Hence they are the ones who hunt and fight to support their "tribe". Women are more important for the continuity of the species. In theory, 1 man can reproduce more than once per day, a women takes 9 months. If you lose 90% of your men, you can still come back, lose 90% of your women and you're ****ed.

Women are attracted to "powerful" men, men who can protect them and their children. Anyone going to dispute that? [/i]

@gobuchul - please tell me this was a joke post....

[quote=gobuchul ]

chimps engage in infanticide, cannibalism and rape.

Yeah, let's not fight millions of years of evolution

Gotta do the weights to get the dates!

If you aren't six foot plus and built like a brick shithouse; you aren't getting laid.

Nicely put molgrips.

If it's anything, many years ago I would've put up the "I'm a strong independent female and I'm not bothered by this, I can give as good as I get in banter and don't need anyone to argue for me" line.

I am now much more aware of we females are viewed in society and how really aggressive and nasty (yes I have deliberately chosen those words) some people's views and actions are. I didn't think I was particularly affected by this type of behaviour but looking back I can see I was very fortunate to have many strong, supportive male role models around me who probably did a lot to protect me from those people and their opinions.

However, some things did happen that I just thought "oh well, that's blokes for you, get over it" and now I see that these I shouldn't have let people get away with certain behaviours (nowt that bad, I'm not about to disclose or anything!). I too am learning about the world all the time and can see that whilst I am not necessarily bothered by something, certain things should be challenged because the effects are often much further reaching than I in my nice protected world can see.

My experiences are based on working on-site in the construction industry and the outdoor industry in the 90's. I have spent most of my working life in male dominated industries and was usually the only female on-site these guys had ever worked with. It was an interesting and generally positive time, although one guy completely defaced my lovely pic of George Clooney ( I think it was him) I had up above my workbench. It was a headshot only and there were loads of scantily clad lady calendars all over the workshop!

Errr..... so do humans......particularly that last one.

tell me when...I have a wager...

[img] [/img]

although one guy completely defaced my lovely pic of George Clooney

That was me. Sorry. 😳

Worst. Batman. Ever.

All this hand-wringing 'evolution means women should stay-at-home/take clothes off for tyre companies' talk makes me wonder what happened? Female Britons of the Iron Age taught combat with swords. Did they not get the Memo From The Future via Keith in Marketing? Or did successive millennia of Christianisation put a different slant on women's 'place', and one that we are only just realising? Women in Western Europe only just got beyond chattel status/to vote in the grand scheme of things. They have had more freedom/power in prior/different cultures - as such I would guess that it's not a foregone conclusion that the female of the species remains 'emancipated.'

Reminds me of that book/film - 'Orlando'. Powerful stuff. Can't remember if it had knockers in it.

Once again - the level of outrage expressed by people like weeksy is far, far in excess of the 'outrage' in the initial article (or by anyone here who thinks the calendar is crap). But apparently she's overreacting? Hmmm....

Molgrips and Binners have nailed it.

Can we end the thread now, please?

STW Overlords - can we also have a Trail Dog Calendar for 2017 please?

Go and spend some time in SWT favourite nirvana of Scantinavia Scandinavia and a few saunas will sort everyone's hang ups (or down) out....

My experience from living in Scandi-land is that men enjoy looking at pictures of naked ladies, and that ladies treat them as silly boys rather than getting bent out of shape. It's also my experience that you can talk to a beautiful woman without her glaring at you like you're a mad rapist. Whether the equality came first, or the attitude came first, I have no idea.

You can argue about the last 100 years all you like, but you are fighting against millions of years of evolution.

You seem to have confused what our ancestors did and what is moral and what we should do now.

We also used to invade other areas, kill all the men folk and children and rape the women. I dont think it would be a convincing defence in court if i just blamed evolution if i did this now.

Secondly its easy to over rule evolution - I assume you manage to go the working day without feverishly copulating with any fecund female. Its really not hard to overcome our "genetic programming"

My theory was that perhaps the ones who protest so much used to think about women in the 'bad way' but have now seen the light.

I dont even know what "think about women in a bad way " even means in this context and i have always [ from about 14] had females as my closest friends.

Why then is Lovehoney so Popular ? Victorias Secret opening lots of new shops ?

Perhaps exactly because of the calendars?

Perhaps the underwear is not a great example - but how about something like make up? It's time consuming and not that pleasant to wear, and causes hassle, but many women feel the need to do it. Now, they might be doing it for themselves, because they want to look pretty for themselves - but a) why do they feel better when they look pretty? And b) who defines pretty?

a) Maybe because they feel that women need approval, because society is constantly talking about how women look as if it's really important...?

b) Maybe pretty is defined by the men who make the calendars and the movies and the pop videos and the men who look at the calendars and the videos and approve...

Just to re-iterate, it's nothing to do with appreciating your preferred sex visually. That is NOT the issue at all - we all do it. That's how we've evolved. [b]It's about how we communicate[/b] because as social creatures we are influenced by the behaviour of everyone else.

Weeksy and others - a serious suggestion. Perhaps you should read some feminist literature or watch some movies, with an open mind - then you would hear the other side of the argument.

It's all very well saying that this isn't a problem when you simply haven't experienced it - and you're not likely to, cos you're a man.

C) maybe the like to feel attractive and like to look pretty in their own eyes.

Malvern Rider - Member

All this hand-wringing 'evolution means women should stay-at-home/take clothes off for tyre companies' talk makes me wonder what happened? Female Britons of the Iron Age taught combat with swords. Did they not get the Memo From The Future via Keith in Marketing? Or did successive millennia of Christianisation put a different slant on women's 'place', and one that we are only just realising? Women in Western Europe only just got beyond chattel status/to vote in the grand scheme of things. They have had more freedom/power in prior/different cultures - as such I would guess that it's not a foregone conclusion that the female of the species remains 'emancipated.'

I don't think anyone is saying that all women should stay in the kitchen (to paraphrase a little). There is nothing to stop women who want to wield swords from doing that and there shoudl be nothing to stop women who want to get the tits out from doing that either (non that that is happening in this calendar). The two things are not mutually exclusive. To make the leap from one slightly risque calendar, to the above quote is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read.

I do accept the last point about emancipation and all that, but I reckon theres far more to be lost than gained by taking offense at a very innocuous calendar. It potentially devalues all the other arguments which are far more significant.

think you missed the point molgrips was making chip : /

Adele has worked in exactly that "beauty" industry for all her professional life, Molgrips. She does beauty columns for the very magazines that most strongly promote the make up (Adele's speciality as far as I can see) lingerie, physique and attitude that make up the "perfect" women according to women"s media. She talks about renewing her lip gloss in the final seconds before going to an important interview.

That's all fine, who am I to criticise? However I can't see much difference between a swim suit feature in Marie Clair and calendar girls except that the calendar girls are less likely to look anorexic.

There is nothing to stop women who want to wield swords from doing that and there shoudl be nothing to stop women who want to get the tits out from doing that either

You're now arguing that as all avenues are equally as open to everyone, regardless of gender, and therefore sexism doesn't exist?

It potentially devalues all the other arguments which are far more significant.

Only with people who aren't very bright

[quote=cumberlanddan ]I don't think anyone is saying that all women should stay in the kitchen (to paraphrase a little).

I'm guessing you didn't read gobuchul's [s]troll[/s] post about not fighting evolution.

C) maybe the like to feel attractive and like to look pretty in their own eyes.

Do you think if a shipload of little girls washed up on a desert island and were looked after by wolves they'd grow up to worry about makeup and lingerie? Really?

Society defines pretty. Look at those societies in wherever it is that value huge arses on their women, or the African ones that multilate their faces. And so far, most of that definition has been done by MEN indirectly, through such means calendars like these.

[quote=Edukator ]However I can't see much difference between a swim suit feature in Marie Clair and calendar girls except that the calendar girls are less likely to look anorexic.

You really don't get the difference in context?

You're now arguing that as all avenues are equally as open to everyone, regardless of gender, and therefore sexism doesn't exist?

Er, what? No i'm not. I'm saying "who the **** are you to tell women what they should or should not do?".

As you (and I'll spell this out because I know you wont get it otherwise - by "you" I mean the contributors to this thread who are of the opinion that this calendar perpetuates some fantasy male dominance over all women) seem to be saying to me.

Only with people who aren't very bright

Quite so.

Stalemate?

No i'm not. I'm saying "who the **** are you to tell women what they should or should not do?".

Re-read. I'm not saying women shouldn't make themselves pretty or whatever else they want. I'm saying people should not create and display calendars like this. Because of the implications.

Implications of which you are seemingly unaware. Which might be a good thing, because it means they are not universal.