Co-Op covers up rude bits, men complain

[JesusFightClub]

The Co-op (they are like a cheap supermarket in the UK, but run by a co-operative and try to keep to ethical policies) have asked that lads' mags with undressed ladies on the cover be covered up with "modesty bag"...

(warning - this is the Fail)

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-238738 ... -bags.html

I don't have a strong opinion about whether these mags should be covered up or not, and I am a regular Co-op customer. But I respect that if some customers were really unhappy then the Co-op does the right thing - they're not saying they won't sell them, just that a half naked woman with the caption "TITZ OUT FOR THE LADZ" or whatever makes some customers uncomfortable and they would prefer to cover that up in the store.

The comments however are brilliant and make me wonder whether men and women live in the same universe.

1. This is the ebil gub'mint/nanny state forcing men to abandon their heterosexuality/pandering to PC radical feminists!

Um no, it's a business making a customer-led decision. It honestly shouldn't take a Marxist to point that out.

2. Well in that case I hope they ban 50 Shades of Grey because it is full of sex!

Again, no. The complaint is not the fact that sex is discussed or described inside magazines or books, it's that an image of a woman with few clothes on coupled with a salacious title on the cover of a magazine is far more visible.

3. What about all the women's magazines like Cosmopolitan which has half naked men on the cover, or Elle/Vogue who have nude women on the cover?

Noooooo. I don't read Cosmo, my mum used to. Never have I seen a half naked man on the cover. If it happened, it was a one-off issue, rather than its sole purpose of existence.

I do read Elle and Vogue now and again because I like to see the styles. I have never possessed a copy of Elle or Vogue, or seen a copy of either, which had a naked woman on its front cover. They're always wearing clothes, which is unsurprising as those magazines sell fashion.

4. This is an attack on men!

Oh, poor dears. You can't see a woman's tits while shopping in the Co-op. I see how that could make your willy limp, your masculinity nonexistent and generally destroy your life. Oh wait, I can't.

:angry-banghead:

[Cran]

Of course they're overreacting... but we don't have brown bags in Germany at all, neither for booze nor for magazines or anything, and the sky hasn't fallen down yet. So a :roll: to both sides.

[Arete]

Look, I have no problem with men buying magazines with a naked woman on the cover with the caption "Meet the new president of the Itty Bitty Tiitty Committee!!!" I do have a problem with going food shopping with my teen niece who will see these magazines in a store and think it's cool to objectify women in that way. So yeah, I would be one of the terrible prudes/evil feminists (take your pick) asking to have the pictures covered when they are displayed in a co-op or supermarket. Not trying to take anything away from the boys, I just don't want the girl thinking objectification is cool.

[JesusFightClub]

Cran, we don't have brown bags for booze but spirits are usually behind the counter because they're easily stolen! :embarrassed: So you would have to ask particularly for them "a half bottle of vodka please...Smirnoff, not Kommissar" or whatever.

The "modesty bag" is like a sort of bag which is black on the front and covers most of the magazine except the title. So it's still on the top shelf, fine, but as you take it to the till you can't see the betitted glory of the cover star until you take it home and unwrap it.

AreteJo, I agree. I dislike such mags but wouldn't want to ban them. However this looks like a good compromise, cover up the women in provocative poses, it doesn't stop anyone from buying them but it does save the self-esteem of a fair few girls who will see them and feel like this is the only way a man could view them as worth his notice.

TBH if that is what Co-op customers have asked for, more power to them. It wouldn't have been the first issue which came to my mind, but it is an important one.

[bookiewookie]

I also think it's a good compromise to cover them up - people are still able to buy them if they want, but still keep them out of eyesight from impressionable teens.

I know someone who is a Lubavitcher and lives in a Hasidic neighborhood - any product at the local grocery store containing "immodest" pictures of women gets modified with markers and stickers so that you can't see bare shoulders, arms, thighs, etc. From the sound of it, the products that get modified the most are the aquatic toys (all those bathing suits).

[Arete]

What makes some Hassidic publications so undeniably creep is that they sticker out the faces of little girls, or the girls period. It's not that they can't look on shoulders, now they can't even look at a 3 year old girl's face in an advertisement, lest their minds wander.