Huge rise in intensely sexualised pictures of women

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... --men.html

Huge rise in intensely sexualised pictures of women

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... z1V7tuHWjJ

This seems ridiculous even to me. The only reason it is happening is because men want to see it. I doubt that it adds to violence against women. Men have to take responsibility. However, I do think it shows where society is in all this. Magazines sell what is popular.

Bill O'Reilly often gets outraged about this too, as he shows us many example photos. lol

Huge rise in intensely sexualised pictures of women

Hooray!

The only reason it is happening is because men want to see it.

Correct.

I noticed that the women are not interested in sexualised pictures of men. To each his/her own.

Maybe it has become more lewd but I remember Cosmo covers from the 70's and they are much more racy than the current ones.

And I do think you are likely to see many more men on magazine covers without their shirts on.

And maybe we are more repressed, almost never see Playboy for sale in retail stores. Just pretenders like Maxim.

I don't care what men look at in private, but it does bother me to see this stuff plastered EVERYWHERE. It's sleazy and unfortunately I think it's a sign of how sleazy our culture has become. We cheapen everything.

SS109 wrote: Maybe it has become more lewd but I remember Cosmo covers from the 70's and they are much more racy than the current ones.

Maybe Cosmo covers just seemed more racy back then when the general level of sexualization was a lot lower? For sure the newer one shows a lot more skin. But truthfully, they don't seem that different in terms of "sexualization".

1974



2009

Cosmo is an interesting one, because their audience is women, you think they would push for more male dominated covers.

I know Playboy doesn't put too many men on their covers.

This has been around for many years. It is like any thing you find distastefull at the present time, you will find all around you.
Women are doing the posing, it must be all right with them and they do not mind people looking at their bodys. Somebodys making a dollar at it.

As for Bill Riley. I would not waste my time on that Horse`s Butt.

AspenValley wrote: back then when the general level of sexualization was a lot lower? For sure the newer one shows a lot more skin. But truthfully, they don't seem that different in terms of "sexualization".

1974
[/img]

True. Back in the 70's, I was only a pre-teen and the covers seemed much more racy. Back then bra commercials didn't even have women wearing them, just see-through forms.

SAM1 wrote: Women are doing the posing, it must be all right with them and they do not mind people looking at their bodys..

Now THAT I find sexist. So if some women find it alright, then no woman should be bothered by it?