NOTE: You may be thinking, "Where did the other, harsher version go to?" After getting tons of flak from it, mainly that it made me look like a sexist asshole, I have decided to write a kinder, gentler version of this post.
So, here goes....
My favorite models are the glamour models from the United Kingdom. UK glamour models have actual curves... Unlike most American models that look like they are going to fall over and die any minute due to lack of nourishment. In other words, they look like they eat a cheeseburger every now and then.
You see them on Page 3 of the Daily Star and in lad's mags like the UK version of Maxim and UK-only Zoo. For simplicity sake, I'm just going to group them into "glamour models" or "glamour photography."
Glamour models, and glamour photography itself, are constantly under attack from people who spout the 3 phrases mentioned in the title.
Contrary to what most people are thinking (Which included me until recently), it isn't just women who look like Momma June from Honey Booboo who do the complaining and spouting of those phrases. Hell, it isn't just militant feminists either. It's "outraged mothers" who decry "think of the children!," prudes, and both men and women of the "that is someone's daughter / what if it was your daughter" crowd.
For the sake of this blog, I'll just refer to them as "people."
---
"Degrading to women."
Whenever I see a people saying that any glamour publication showing an attractive woman is "degrading to women," I have to wonder why she came up with that conclusion. For starters:
1. Models who pose for lad's mags are doing so out of their own free will, they are not forced into posing and are not doing it with a gun to their head.
2. Models can get paid handsomely for their work, especially if they become well-known and popular.
3. They get to travel to cool places that people like you and me would never get to visit otherwise.
4. They get an actual fan base, something they would never get on a regular job.
Based on the observations above, how is a posing for a lad's mag "degrading?"
One person was quoted as saying, "You would never see a male model being asking to pose in that manner." Well, DUH! That's because men in the same type of poses would look just plain stupid.
Then there is another bullshit line that I heard a militant feminist say one time that, and I'm paraphrasing here as it was a while ago, "Skin mags are like violent video games, they desensitize the user and can drive an unstable person to commit acts of violence, in the case of skin mags sexual assault."
Now, let's comment on what this person said. Can a man be "desensitized" by a lad's mag? He can, but not in a "I'm going to go out and rape someone tonight" sort of way. It's more likely that after seeing so many beautiful women in lad's mags his standards go way up causing him to have trouble getting dates with regular women, much less being able to have sex with them (I googled that after someone mentioned it on a forum.... it's true). As far as the sexual assault bullshit, multiple studies have found that in countries where any sort of adult-oriented content is outlawed, rape and other sexual assaults are actually higher than in countries where it's legal (Again, you can google it). So not only were the comments by this person stupid, it's obvious that she didn't do a shred of research to back up her claims.
The funny thing is, I have seen countless covers of Cosmopolitan (or as I call it, the opposing team's playbook) where the models at times dress and pose more provocatively than the model's do on the cover of lad's mags, and I do not hear any of the "concerned" people complain about that. Actually, I do remember one having something to say. When asked why she doesn't complain about the cover of Cosmo, she said (And again I'm paraphrasing), "It's not the same, when a model poses for Cosmo it's to make their readers feel sexy." Wait.... what? I guarantee if you were to take a Cosmo photo and superimpose it on a Maxim or Zoo cover, the person making that stupid statement would go right back to the "degrading" bullshit.
Quite possibly, the number one reason why people say that lad's mags are degrading to women is because "they portray women as objects that only exist so men can look at them and envision kissing and groping them, stripping them and having sex with them."
Well then. I guess everything is degrading to women then, because us men hardly need a lad's mag to do that. No matter where she is, a heterosexual man with taste is going to look at an woman he's attracted to, and envision kissing and groping her, stripping her and having sex with her. She can be working at a supermarket, answering phones at her desk in an office or lounging at the local beach or pool. IT DOESN'T MATTER. Which is why singling out lad's mags is stupid.
---
"Negative body image."
I hear this quite often by certain people. But what exactly does "negative body image" mean? To be honest, many of the glamour models actually live healthy lives that would actually indicate a positive body image, not a negative one.
I recently asked a glamour model about how they can call it a negative body image and this is what she said:
"My point exactly and I do eat right but I don't refuse myself food if I want it- I eat take outs just not all,the time! I party every now and then but I don't do it to excess, I love working out but if I can't be bothered to I don't beat myself up, I'm really just normal, healthy and average!"
You would think an answer like that would be enough to satisfy the people concerned, but apparently not.
A couple of months back I caught a BBC program where they had a (different) model on and she basically said that same things as the woman above. They had a feminist on who made these comments:
"It's not about you and your personal habits. You are causing young girls to look at your pictures and think that is what they have to look like to get famous. You are causing young girls to think that in order to be thought of as beautiful and desirable to a potential partner you have to look like that. Flaunting the fact that you hit the gene pool lottery is just not a good thing to be doing to young girls."
Let's break down those comments, shall we?
"You are causing young girls to look at your pictures and think that is what they have to look like to get famous."
I'm going to steal a piece from one of my other blogs as it fits here:
NEWS FLASH! Modeling is a job, and just like any job, there are job requirements. If you want to be a model, you have to be a beautiful woman. Of course, everyone's definition of "beautiful" is different, but let's just say that if you look like Momma June from Honey Booboo, I seriously doubt you'll be getting calls from talent agencies. There are plenty of good-paying jobs out there that don't require a woman to flaunt her assets for in front of the camera, and thus aren't looks based. Keep in mind, those jobs have requirements too. Why pick on one industry for having a set of requirements?
"You are causing young girls to think that in order to be thought of as beautiful and desirable to a potential partner you have to look like that."
Side note: Can't they just say, "potential boyfriend?" Anyway....
I'm going to give a car analogy. No young person who likes cars is going to hang a poster of an Accord or Camry on their wall and be like, "When I get older I'm going to drive a Camry." Not happening. That's why magazines like Automobile or Car & Driver focus on cars like a 911 Turbo, Challenger Hellcat, Corvette Z06 or GranTurismo. Because cars like those are what people hope to have one day . Now before anyone gets on me for this next bit, a man can be intelligent without ever stepping foot in a college, and successful even if he's flat broke. So don't think I mean "rich guy." Intelligent and successful men don't want a woman who makes them feel like they settled, or makes them feel like they could have done better, or makes them never want to whip out their phone and take a random candid of her as she is sitting across the table from him.
Like the car mags, it's the same thing with Lad's mags. The women featured in lad's mags are the ones that men hope to have one day, or at least try to find one that looks like them. Please keep in mind, a woman doesn't have to look like a glamour model to be thought of as beautiful by a man. Everybody's taste is different, after all. What any person with logical thought process should agree with, however, is that an intelligent and successful man wants a woman who makes him feel like he hit the lottery without ever actually winning a monetary jackpot. No one on either gender wants to feel like the other person is only with them because they have "given up trying." Please note, that I am not referring to a man that just wants a "trophy wife/girfriend." Going out with someone just because she is pretty is just as bad as "giving up trying" and settling for someone that you are not attracted to.
Now for the gene pool lottery comment, that deserves its own response....
----
"Flaunting the fact that you hit the gene pool lottery is just not a good thing to be doing to young girls."
I decided to give that phrase a whole new section as it warrants it. I have a news flash for people who spout this utterly ridiculous phrase....
THERE IS NO GENE POOL LOTTERY.
Got it? Good.
First, let me say that this applies to both genders, male and female. This isn't some lottery where you pick six numbers, hand it to the clerk and you stand a chance of winning something big.
Models who have the "look" and a figure that is good enough to get noticed by a modeling agency didn't get it that way by luck. They worked hard for it. They made sacrifices for it. Having the gall to tell them that they hit the gene pool lottery is a pure slap in the face to them....
Or anyone, really. Can you imagine a male reporter going up to a champion male bodybuilder and telling him that "You might hurt average guys feelings by flaunting that you won the gene pool lottery?"
No, you wouldn't. For some reason, although it applies to both genders, when people say this phrase it's almost always uninformed people saying it to beautiful women in the modeling industry. It's because they know that unlike the bodybuilder a female model most of the time won't tell them off (best case) or straight up clock them upside the head (Worst case). It's always about picking the easiest target, sadly.
---
Now here is some random stuff I want to mention that the crowds mentioned will sometimes, okay quite a few times, say....
1. Many glamour models are doing it to pay for school. To which you'll hear some know-it-all say, "Can't you waitress or something to pay for university?" To compare: Unless it's at a high end steakhouse, the average salary of a waitstaff is 500 dollars per week. One or two days of doing a glamour shoot can net that much plus you don't run the risk of being screamed at if you make a mistake and get someone's soup order wrong. See why the model would rather.... model?
2. About the fan base I mentioned in the beginning of the post. Many people, especially militant feminists will say, "But those fans only care about your body, they have no interest of getting to know you on a deeper or more personal level." First off, that just sounds creepy! Secondly, any time you get a fan base in any part of the entertainment industry, most fans don't care about getting to know you on a deeper and more personal level, they just care about what you are there to do. Case in point? I'm a big Joe Bonamassa fan. I have no interest in getting to know him on a deeper and more personal level, I just want to see/hear him sing and play the crap out of the guitar!
3. Many people seem to have a notion that many glamour models are drug-addled junkies. This is actually not true, as I referenced before glamour models lead healthy, productive drug free lives.
----
Now to mention some of those people by group, in particular the "think of the children" crowd and "That's someone's daughter / what if it was your daughter" crowd:
1. To me, many times the "think of the children" crowd lose me because they'll freak out at a lad's mag or swimsuit mag because "OMG he might see boobs!" then have no issues with letting little Timmy play a game or watch a movie where people are getting their heads blown off. Yeah, seeing a model's boobs might traumatize him, but seeing violence won't. Riiiiiiiiiiiight.....
2. To the people who say, "that's someone's daughter," are you supposed to make me feel bad or something for looking at a beautiful glamour model? News flash: Every woman is "someone's daughter." It's not a hard concept. As for the other half, "what if it was your daughter?" I don't have a daughter, so maybe I won't fully understand, but sheesh modeling is just a job like any other!
----
There is something I want to type before the conclusion, just so that people know I'm not picking on certain people:
Some people recognize that it takes a lot of nerves and confidence to put yourself out there in front of the camera. That after taking care of yourself you are being paid to show off the fruit of your efforts to the rest of the world. That you have fans that adore you and buy your calenders/pictures/etc. They know when to look at a beautiful model and admire her rather than tearing her or the glamour industry down. In short, these people "get it."
----
In conclusion, I know that as long as there are certain "crowds" these three phrases that try to tear down the glamour industry will continue to circulate. You can't stop them, but least I did my best here to counter it....
