Thursday, 1 August 2013

Feminists: Your Opinion Doesn't Mean Shit


Do you live in UK? No? Oh, be grateful. Why? Because this country is turning to garbage.

Basically, to cut a long story short and simplify what ultimately is a boring tale of idiocy, Lads' Mags have been sold in supermarkets in the UK for years and now some dumb-as-shit feminist group are trying to get them banned from store shelves and are warning that supermarkets that do actually sell Lads' Mags can potentially get sued. What for, I hear you ask? Well sexual discrimination and harassment apparently.

If you don't know what a 'Lads' Mag' is, then let me explain. It is basically a magazine that features topless and sometimes fully naked women in it. That's pretty much it. I have no idea if they feature any 'news' stories or anything because I've never bought one, but they're basically meant to give men (and in some cases women too) visual pleasure.

OK so there are many issues with this whole Lads' Mags controversy. So, so many issues.

First of all, feminist groups, your opinions don't mean shit. What you think about the world and 'how it should change for the better' is invalid. You know why? Because 'some people' don't get a say in what happens or how a country is run and what laws are enforced. Why? Well, because if a group of people could turn around and demand something, and have that demand honoured, we'd all be fucked.

I'm not a fan of the Apple company. I'm going to get a group of people together and ask for all Apple products to be banned in the UK. Do you think anyone will listen? Uh, no. Because people can buy what they want and people can do what they want.

You feminists may think: "Lads' Mags are bad. BAN THEM!", but that's just your opinion. And in this world, your opinion doesn't mean fuck all.

That said, there's another issue here, and this issue is that the law is actually kind of siding with these nut head, idiotic, feminist maniacs this time around. Supermarkets may be liable to be sued for stocking Lads' Mags on their shelves in plain view. And this is where everything becomes really dumb. Like, REALLY dumb.

Apparently the handling of these magazines by staff and, in some cases customers, may breach equality rights as well as be sexual harassment and discrimination.

.........

.........

.........

.........

.........

.........

Ugh does anyone really need to explain how this is beyond fucking stupid? Really? Is this what this country has come to? The block on online porn was hit and miss but this is just out of this world stupid.

Here's why there is nothing wrong with supermarkets stocking these magazines:

Lads' Mags are stored out of reach of kids and on the top shelf so only adults can reach and view them.

They do not feature any explicit images on the front cover that can be viewed by the public. You have to purposefully open them up to see the goodies.

It is the CUSTOMER'S choice if they buy or view any Lads' Mags.

Lads' Mags are NOT sexual harassment because harassment implies that the person or persons being 'harassed' are being harassed on PURPOSE and PURPOSEFULLY threatened or made to feel bad and are ultimately being victimised.
If a magazine is guilty of that then you need a fucking brain check. Like, now.

Lads' Mags do NOT breach equality laws. Why? Because the word 'equal' suggests we are both equals, does it not? So we have equal 'rights' ultimately, yes? So how can women still buy and choose from the TONS of magazines aimed at them on the shelves of supermarkets that have topless men on the front but men cannot buy magazines with women on the front? Hang on, if anything it sounds like NOT selling magazines with these model women on the front is being discriminatory AGAINST women as surely women have the right to be featured on magazines in supermarkets too? And where is the line here? How do you decide what you should do? In fact, this ENTIRE argument is sexist against women. Yes, the argument these feminists are making is exist against the very gender they are trying to 'protect'. Why? Because they are ignoring ALL of the WOMEN who like to read Lads' Mags.

In fact, the main reason Lads' Mags DON'T breach equality rights is because BOTH MEN AND WOMEN CAN BUY THEM. You know what a real breach of equality would be? A real breach of equality is stocking Lads' Mags but saying ONLY men can buy them. THAT is not equality, ladies and gentlemen.

In the end, as with everything like this, it is CHOICE. I am a man and I CHOOSE to buy Nuts and Zoo magazine. I am a woman and I CHOOSE to buy Nuts and Zoo too. That, right there, proves that these magazines don't breach any sort of equality laws. It's a choice. A choice that can be made by a man or woman. A choice to buy a fucking magazine.

What's more, imagine if these mags didn't exist and in their place were Girls' Mags featuring nude men. Would this be an issue? No, I don't think so. But, in the end, that would never happen, because men are the more sexually driven gender and thus our sex driver attracts us to magazines like Nuts and Zoo. Women on the other hand aren't really fussed. It's all about choice and preference. Don't like something? Don't involve yourself in it. It's not hard. If this whole Lads' Mags argument was about whether the magazines should be displayed on the top shelf instead of the bottom one for all kids to see then yeah, sure, that makes sense. Get them on the top shelf and make sure the kids can't get hold of them. It's a no brainer. But these feminists are crazy. They try to get rid of everything THEY don't like without taking any notice of others who either do like it or are indifferent. And if anything, they're sexist against their own gender by ignoring the women who do like to buy Lads' Mags.

Feminists: shut up already. Your opinion doesn't mean shit.

10 comments:

  1. From reading your post, it appears like these specific "feminists" have no real concrete reasoning behind banning the type of magazines you mentioned. I do want to highlight that I don't necessarily agree with your statement that seems to indicate that all feminists' opinions are "shit." I believe in the true meaning of feminism, which is to seek equality for the female gender. However, these individuals you wrote about appear to have a skewed vintage point on what the feminism movement is about. I don't support that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Certainly, I am all for equality. Don't think I am sexist or anything like that. But feminists like this are mental and, quite frankly, if you don't agree with them then you're a sexist and if you do then you're in the right. There's no balance. It's ludicrous!

      Delete
  2. The thought of you being a certain type of bigot never crossed my mind. For one thing, I enjoy taking pleasure in your passionate writing. It just that, to me, it read that all feminists were ridiculous zealots and that would not be fair for individuals who truly embody the significance of feminism.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry about that, I didn't mean it to cone across like ALL feminists are crazy or stupid. It's just generally the term 'feminist' is given to those who feel very strongly about women's rights to the point where it doesn't necessarily make logical sense for a society to listen to them. I think, like with all things, including feminism, you must have perspective and balance and the lengths and extremes the group mentioned in my article take it to is beyond illogical. Wanting women to be respected as equals is one thing, but preaching about how men can't make sexual advances to women either or read 'Lads' Mags' is way over the top. Just me though!

      Delete
  3. Ah, I remember when this used to be a gaming blog...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Haha I still do a lot of gaming articles, but this IS my personal blog. I mean, I'm not called 'Michael The Gamer' lol. There's many things that interest me that I want to cover! Sorry if you don't necessarily like this other content but there's still gaming stuff to read too! =D

      Delete
  4. Bah feminists. Really dislike them ever since I studied Sociology. Everyone else in my class were like 'Ooh yeah feminism yipee equality!'. I was the only one in that class who thinks men will always be superior to women, and I like the idea of that, or does that make me strange?
    Anyways about your article, absolutely ridiculous. Feminists want to bring equality into society but surely taking those magazines away is taking away those rights of people who buy them?
    I'm not sure if you seen another feminist issue in the news recently about a women protesting that Anne Frank should be on bank notes? And then had someone arrested who threatened her on Twitter and called it sexual harrassment. *sigh* It just blatantly annoyed me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Haha you're not weird, although I think there are obvious things men and women are good at separately, like men will always be physically stronger and more full hardy.

      Anyway, the fact that taking the magazines away is only harming everyone's rights and not promoting equality is exactly right. What would it actually do? Or achieve? Nothing lol.

      As for the whole bank note issue, I hadn't heard of it no, but what a stupid thing. Not that threatening people is OK, but it's like the moment you do it to, for instance, a black person, or a woman, you're a racist and/or a sexist. If people want racism and sexism to die then you first have to treat every 'crime' or threat against these people like any other crime or threat, otherwise if race or sex plays a part in the investigation and case, that's not exactly ignoring racism or sexism is it? Ah well, the world is mad anyway lol

      Delete
    2. They weren't just threatening her they were sending her fantasies whereby they killed and or raped her and in the UK that's illegal.
      Also it's Jane Austin that IS being put on the bank notes.
      I do think the extremists is too far, but I do want the pay to be the same. If I am doing /exactly/ the same job as a man why should I be paid less for it because I have boobs?

      Delete
    3. I'm not really informed as to the issue of the bank notes and death threats. I was simply saying what I thought based on the little information I was given.

      But I totally agree with your last part. I don't see why women are frequently paid less than men. Sexism in the working industry is something I don't understand or agree with.

      However, as Ray William Johnson said, you have to consider the employer's side. I don't know much about it but he said that companies may pay women less because they have less insurance that she will be there longterm (kids and other commitments may be more important to her) or other issues I know nothing about lol. In the end though, it's not fair in my opinion and is something that needs tackling sooner rather than later.

      Delete

Your Thought Box. Leave Your Thoughts Here.