Covering Up The Tits?

The Co-operative has given "lads mags" like Nuts & Zoo until September to cover up their front pages with sealed "modesty bags" or be taken off sale in its stores. Other supermarkets are set to follow.

About time to.

Who wants to look at photos of plastic tits on plastic women?

How do you feel about this? Do you buy these single-man magazines or just go into WH Smith to perve at the covers?

Will having their covers in a bag put you off buying the mags?

What kind of bloke buys a magazine to look a tits?

I don't think I've ever bought a wanking comic. Not arsed either way if mags have women's tits on the front or not. Almost half the world's population have tits (if you count moobs and discount prepubescent females and women who've had a mammectomy) so I don't get what the all fuss is about. They're breasts - I think I find it slightly insulting that our society forces women to cover them up in the first place, although a woolly jumper when it's parky is fair enough.

Boggersbelief wrote:What kind of bloke buys a magazine to look a tits?

A single one, or a long time married one.

Clearly someone is buying them as they outsell all other magazines.

wanderlust wrote:They're breasts - I think I find it slightly insulting that our society forces women to cover them up in the first place, although a woolly jumper when it's parky is fair enough.

So if your daughter came home and declared she wanted to be a page 3 model you'd be happy with that?

There is always someone out there moaning about something. Nat, as a woman - how do you feel about women in bikinis on the front of lads magazines? Does it bother you? Do you feel it degrades women?
I personally find those magazines boring and nothing interesting in them.

Michael Bolton wrote:There is always someone out there moaning about something. Nat, as a woman - how do you feel about women in bikinis on the front of lads magazines? Does it bother you? Do you feel it degrades women?
I personally find those magazines boring and nothing interesting in them.

I have no problem with it in the right environment - but little kids shouldn't be seeing these sort of magazines, being on the front of Zoo should not be an aspiration like being a doctor, astronaut or CEO of Whittam International.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

wanderlust wrote:They're breasts - I think I find it slightly insulting that our society forces women to cover them up in the first place, although a woolly jumper when it's parky is fair enough.

So if your daughter came home and declared she wanted to be a page 3 model you'd be happy with that?

She's 19 so it's up to her, but you're missing the point. IMO showing your tits off shouldn't be a "career". Neither should breathing or displaying earlobes.

wanderlust wrote:She's 19 so it's up to her, but you're missing the point. IMO showing your tits off shouldn't be a "career". Neither should breathing or displaying earlobes.

If she was 6 would you want her seeing Kelly Brook with her knockers out? Of course you wouldn't.

All porn whether hardcore or softcore should be kept behind the counter in a drawer - punters would have to ask for it by name.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

wanderlust wrote:She's 19 so it's up to her, but you're missing the point. IMO showing your tits off shouldn't be a "career". Neither should breathing or displaying earlobes.

If she was 6 would you want her seeing Kelly Brook with her knockers out? Of course you wouldn't.

All porn whether hardcore or softcore should be kept behind the counter in a drawer - punters would have to ask for it by name.

But they are only boobs Nat. You make out a pair of boobs are like seeing two people having sex.

Bloody hell Nat, you're going back 20 years with this one. Think of all those people, men and women, who have been fighting for freedom of the press, etc. I see no real problem with partial nudity, but discretion is a must and none of the lower regions should be shown, (on the front page that is)

Michael Bolton wrote:

But they are only boobs Nat. You make out a pair of boobs are like seeing two people having sex.

Have you ever had your hands on a pair of boobs and not had sex?

Natasha Whittam wrote:

Michael Bolton wrote:

But they are only boobs Nat. You make out a pair of boobs are like seeing two people having sex.

Have you ever had your hands on a pair of boobs and not had sex?

Yes, the last girl I was dating, I remember kissing in the car and feeling her boobs, we didn't have sex though. I love boobs! 

Michael Bolton wrote:

Yes, the last girl I was dating, I remember kissing in the car and feeling her boobs, we didn't have sex though. I love boobs! 

Women you drag into your car don't count as girlfriends MB.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

Michael Bolton wrote:

Yes, the last girl I was dating, I remember kissing in the car and feeling her boobs, we didn't have sex though. I love boobs! 

Women you drag into your car don't count as girlfriends MB.

You are just jealous that they weren't yours I had my hands on.

I'll only agree with what teh co-op are doing if they insist women's magazine cover up teh scantily clad men on the front covers - especially those that show certain bulges in the swimwear - completely disgusting and there for all to see!!!

bwfc71 wrote:especially those that show certain bulges in the swimwear - completely disgusting and there for all to see!!!

Do you seek these magazines out?

Does this mean Hipster will have to wear a bag on his head then.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

bwfc71 wrote:especially those that show certain bulges in the swimwear - completely disgusting and there for all to see!!!

Do you seek these magazines out?

Nope as they are on display on the middle shelves in ALL newsagents here in UK, plus the various teleivision advertisments!

Mr Magoo wrote:Does this mean Hipster will have to wear a bag on his head then.