The potential censorship ramifications of the campaign are huge, and it also misses the opportunity to create productive dialogue around gender and desire, argues Nichi Hodgson.<\/p>\n
Fashion magazines are arguably also demeaning to women. Photograph: Getty Images <\/p>\n
Its not often that a feminist call to arms trends on Twitter. How unfortunate that the censorious Lose the Lads' Mags campaign being led by UK Feminista, Object and a bevvy of equality lawyers, is it. <\/p>\n
In principal, I wouldnt be sorry to see the demise of lads' mags, in the same way I wouldnt be sorry to see the demise of the Daily Mail, Snog, Marry, Avoid and inane rom-coms where the dramatic tension is derived from women thinking the presentation of a princess-cut diamond translates to a life time of teak sideboards and babies and the men believing they'll get an endless supply of proper dinners and blowjobs. But would I actively seek to prosecute any of the above on the basis that they are \"deeply harmful\" to women? Well, no. Because that would be an undemocratic infringement of civil liberties. It would also do nothing whatsoever to tackle the underlining attitudes and values that encourage such an over-simplistic framing of sex, desire and male and female roles and thus create a consumer base for lads' mags in the first place. <\/p>\n
If lads' mags are \"deeply harmful to women\" as UK Feminista director Kat Banyard asserts, then what are womens magazines? As a teenage anorexic, I created a pre-Pinterest \"thinspiration\" board by cutting out images of models with gaping thighs from copies of Vogue and the new defunct Looks magazine. Let me be clear: fashion magazines did not cause my anorexia; they merely \"fed\" my perfectionistic compulsion, a product of emotional turmoil at home and my hot-house schooling at a competitive girls academy. Ironically, it was working for a sex magazine that helped me to construct a multi-faceted sexual self predicated on more than just my vital statistics. The consumer magazines I read, selling both inspiration and aspiration to their readers, enabled me to objectify womens bodies in a way that damaged my relationship with sexuality and selfhood for years afterwards. But the problem lay in my psyche, and with my response to psychological and emotional stress. Banning fashion magazines would not have saved me. <\/p>\n
The Lose the Lads Mags campaign presents the relationship between harassment and pornographic representation as an a priori truth. Both Object and UK Feminista are convinced that female objectification can be nothing but demeaning. The notion that it is possible for women to be \"active objects\" and in control of their own sexual representation, or that sex, power and desire entwine in a trickier amoral triadthan equality legislation can conceive of may fall beyond the remit of this campaign but neither UK Feminista nor Object engage with these complexities any where in their public-facing campaign work. Instead, the message is quite simply \"button up, or youre being degraded.\" <\/p>\n
Granted, its hard to think of a commercially distributed magazine (for either a male or female audience) that presents sexuality in a more empowered or nuanced way. The womens sex magazine Scarlet did a stellar job of creating a space for female desire but sadly packed up in production in June 2010. When I worked for the Erotic Review, a magazine that deigned to engage the brain rather than just the loins when it came to desire, we couldnt get WHSmith's to stock us. The reason? Because our explicit erotic photography (featured inside the magazine, not on the cover, mind), artful, inspired and sex positive as it was, disqualified us. <\/p>\n
The potential censorship ramifications of an \"all pornographic representation demeans women\" approach are huge. How long before similar arguments are used to prosecute UK-registered adult businesses, for example? Or any number of advertisements (surely the largest depositary of \"objectifying\" images of women, explicit or otherwise)? Or explicit material designed for sex education that features naked adults engaging in consensual erotic acts? Already, businesses are taking up the censors mantle in a bid to protect profits and address corporate responsibility in a heightened political climate of anxiety about sexuality. Just try googling E L James in Starbucks and see what happens. I cant even visit my own sexual politics website over coffee any more, such is the prohibitive creep. <\/p>\n
What we should be moving towards isnt well-intended fig-leafing, but the promotion of alternative sexual representations of both men and women. So many within the contemporary feminist canon are not only censorious but ill-informed about the range of sexual representation out there to begin with. <\/p>\n
Its on this basis that I relish my role, however cursory it may seem, as a sex columnist for Mens Health magazine. Ultimately, engaging with male stereotypes and expectations of women and sex is the only way a notion of mutual pleasure and respect can be conceived. I only hope that, led by the Lose the Lads' Mag campaign example, a group of irate male supermarket employees dont try to refuse to handle Mens Health on the basis that its damning ideal of the Spartan physique is oppressive.To lose the chance to create dialogue around gender and desire will only widen the breach. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
View original post here: The potential censorship ramifications of the campaign are huge, and it also misses the opportunity to create productive dialogue around gender and desire, argues Nichi Hodgson. Continue reading
\nCensorship and over-simplification: the problems of the Lose the Lads' Mags campaign<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"