quote:

---

it all goes back to the media.

---

And then you can trace it all back to all of us, the consumers, paying the media good money to brainwash us. Beautiful, isn't it?

I really must object to the gratuitous use of the word "whore." Do you actually know a lot of prostitutes -- women who get paid money to have sex -- or are you just demeaning your sexually active peers by using a very hurtful derogatory term? Plenty of women aren't virgins AND aren't "whores."


Love, Jenny

P.S. Sinope, I find it interesting that you're the only man in this conversation too. In most topics that I'm really into on these boards, I find that I'm the only woman, or almost the only woman. Weird, no?

nice.

Damn, sinope... I thought it was just another annoying commercial. The mind of the teenage guy... :P But have you seen the one with the woman eating the mint skittles? One hairy man (who looks like he could use some serious hygiene there) dismounts his horse, goes up to her, and pecks her on the lips! Oooh, a peck! How ROMANTIC! ::being as sarcastic as possible:: );P Then, there's the previous mentioned commercial with yet another smelly man and the five fairy-wonderland "chicks"... I think this just says it all about the point I've been trying to make here.

It's also amusing how stupid commercials are when you think about them. Take the skittles commercials, for example: it's as if they're showing the hallucinogenic effects of skittles when eaten...

hahaha. whores huh? i don't know what it is about all these underage pregnancies these past few years. something in the water. has it always been this bad?!?!?!? my sister is 21 and has 2 kids. what's going on!!!

i bet t.v. subliminaly brain washes people into sexual feelings and urges with suggestive material..... that's why theres so many whores.(of both gender). i noticed that minty skitl commercial with all those hott females floating around that dude and putting sktls in his mouth laughing, looking all sexy and like it was five to one ratio and some orgy;
i almost got off right there!!!!!!!!sick i know. but COME ON (hehe) it's a bloody candy commercial!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

it all goes back to the media. count commercials when you see them and try to figure out who they're targeted at.

why am i the only guy discussing this s*** with you honeys? notice that? i guess thats because most guys don't know what mis-og-on-knee means.killyourtv!!!!!

at my school, the girls are *****es, whores and they act like it...its only september and theres already at least 4 pregnant ppl...last year there where 9....all they talk about is SEX thats it...i know cuz i hear it all the time, they dress like whores, talk like whores, so they are whores...i admit not all are though, i am not a whore. i hang with a bunch of ppl and me and about 2 other ppl are virgins, thats it. and its getting worse, do you see how little 4th graders are dressing??whore clothes, heavy make-up, i am discussed by how ppl are these days. no offence to anyone who is like me. not a whore. and then they go and insult ppl who are not as "good looking as they are"...im sick of it

Quote: the character Clare in 6 Feet Under:
"I wish that just once people wouldn't act like the shallow clichés that they are".

This sums up my opinion. You're right sinope, it's tragic.

Yes, please call me Jenny (or sweetums, whichever people prefer...HA! Sorry, I'm just trying to amuse you...)

While I refuse to believe that the majority of the adult population is as superficial as Allure and Maxim would ahve us believe, I also understand that LOTS of people are willing to pay money to read that s***. So the only way to change it is to refuse to give the people who produce the crap any money for it. If it's profitable, someone's doing it. (So let's make it so that it's not profitable.)

I know, it sounds like a lot, but it has to be done one person at a time, right? The hundreth monkey, man!


Love, Jenny

the only magazine i actually read is Discovery (the best up-to-date scientific discoveries, projects and findings magazine on the planet ) and rolling stone- which i'm getting kind of tired of it's commercial overexposing of bands that i have to hear fifty times on the radio anyway.....

maxim (and maxim ripoffs) would be the only conventional magazine that appeals to a large male target audience. and yes jill i'm sorry to say that is because it's what guys are really interested in. me and my friends pick it up for entertainment purposes but i think those magazines give guys what they really want because they know guys better than most guys know themselves.... sad but true.

i'll never understand womens magazines though. that whole bias thing. but if it's anything similar to mens mags than i can only conclude that the majority of the population are shallow, superficial walking talking stereotypes. theres nothing we can do jill. nothing.

I used to read Allure myself, but I never really loved it, or even liked it that much. I read it because I'm a makeup fanatic, and Iove all the colorful pictures and free samples and whatnot. Yeah, it's REALLY superficial, and it frequently got on my nerves; not only is it shallow in the areas that Jenny talked about (can I call you Jenny? ), but it's very snobbish. They mostly feature very high-priced department store makeup and haute couture clothing, and focus on the lifestyles of uptown New Yorkers. Ugh... I almost gave up on it, but since I got bored reading only newsmagazines, I resubscribed to it... I feel so cheap... ;( The sad thing is, Allure is one of the most tasteful women's magazines. Have you guys ever read Glamour or Cosmopolitan?? YEESH!! They're all about looking sexy, getting and pleasing a man... it's like all the teen magazines, but with sex tips! Sometimes I do wonder: are women (at least the average heterosexual woman) really like this? Is that why these magazines continue to sell? Or are average women brainwashed by the media?

I'd like to ask guys a similar question: what do you think about men's magazines? I've been through one before, and it wasn't the trashiest of them all (forgot which one... Details, or something), but it really gave a negative image of men as crude perverts. I've heard that one issue of Maxim (I think) described to men how to get a woman into bed, which included lying to her to fulfill this goal. I felt sickened when I heard about this, and I'd like to hear what the "other sex" thinks about this.

I will admit to haveing had a time were all i thought of was how fat i was (5'4",115 lb's,not over weight)and how ugly my legs were ect.ect.
I eventually became a veggietarian just to loss weight which eventually lead to bulimia ( i have gone to tons of classes and am no longer bulimic)
well all im saying is i was never FAT and am not FAT now(100 lb's) but if you think you are most likely you aren't.

quote:

---

do you suppose it's in a young womans genes and pysiological\biological makeup (no pun intended) to be drawn and preoccupied with such trivial hubblala;( referring to girl magazines); or do you think that is a social stereotype that is being fed by the media? or is it a stereotype for a reason?

---

Well, a lot of girls I know, or know of, are very image-conscious (I mean I'm fairly image-conscious myself, it kinda comes with teenagedom). And a couple of them are very BOYS BOYS BOYS. But the thing about girl magazines is they seem to encourage shallow thinking. This is what gets me. I mean, ok if girls are boy-mad, you can still have stuff about boys and quizzes about crushes etc. and be interesting about it. It's all this superficial cr*p and encouraging stereotypes that seems unnessecary to me. I mean wouldn't it be great if magazines were a bit more inspiring? They're a cultural influence, and they're so conformist! I mean I was reading J17 (British mag) recently. It claims to be a bit more edgy than other magazines but it just isn't… they're all the same. In one magazine I read it had HOW TO BE POPULAR and one of the tips was 'get yourself a cool boyfriend, he'll help you into the in-crowd'. It doesn't even matter what he's like, just use him and lose him, all for the sake of Cool. Great message. Even if girls are all shallow and superficial, magazines shouldn't be encouraging that. And I think there's a market for more intelligent magazines. I mean ok you can have the regular ones, but why can't there be some that are a bit different and groudbreaking as well? It's not like they'd have to be totally bookish and one-market-only, I just want something a bit more witty, a bit more open-minded and a bit more interesting…

It's an area of the media that could be improved on in so many ways…

Well, actually this is about women's magazines. I went to an awesome alternative high school my junior year, and instead of taking the regular, state-required pro-government American history and American literature classes that everyone else did, we had a four-unit core class: Expressing Dissent, The Nation Grows Up, The Boom Years, and How Do You Rectify Social Injustice? Anyways, we talked a lot about the women's lib movement during that last unit, and I did a little project comparing a couple women's magazines.

Allure vs. Curve

Now I think we can all agree that Allure is based largely on hetero female sexuality, and Curve ("The Best-Selling Lesbian Magazine") is similarly based on **** female sexuality. I drew as many parallels as I could between the two and compared.

I found, as I predicted I would, that there were some similarities (Allure had a quiz, "Are you a woman, girl, *****, babe, or lady?" and Curve had another, "Are you a butch, femme, or ***?" -- and I'm a woman and a ***, if you're wondering), but for the most part, Allure was very detrimental to women's self-esteem, body image, social/sexual roles, etc. (The two main articles were titled, "Look Better Naked: Hollywood Rule No. 1: It's what's inside (your Armani gown) that counts. Six celebrities help you prepare to bare all." and "Model Boot Camp: Even models have to be whipped into shape before they go into battle (or onto the runway). How they get into fighting trim--fast.") while Curve was overall more wholesome and was actually about real women and their lives (The two main articles were titled, "You Say You Want a Revolution: With the help of a few good women, Brigette M. Moore works like an arsonist, setting off sparks and blowing on the flames of feminist revolution in the heart of Brooklyn" and "Dyke Drama: How to Build a Parent Trap" -- about helping your parents accept your sexuality).

Why do you think there's such a discrepancy? I mean, Allure's very mainstream, and Curve is about as mainstream as lesbian culture gets, so why aren't they more similar?

I think it's because lesbians have already gone through the process of shedding their old sexual roles, and as a result have taken a hard look at women's social roles, while the majority of heterosexual women just haven't had that experience. Then again, that's just me, and I'd really like to hear from what y'all think.


Love, Jenny

P.S. Sorry this post's so long, I usually try to keep 'em down.

P.P.S. Your key to navigating the censorship system:
*** is a derogatory term for a gay man.
**** is a derogatory term for a gay person.
***** is a derogatory term for a mean woman.

do you suppose it's in a young womans genes and pysiological\biological makeup (no pun intended) to be drawn and preoccupied with such trivial hubblala;( referring to girl magazines); or do you think that is a social stereotype that is being fed by the media? or is it a stereotype for a reason? i would in no way put most the girls i know into that stereotype, especially you guys(girls; sorry. habit); but it seems to be the case more often than not. why else would such magazines be so successful?

or is it just the general dull, superficial AUDIENCE (of both gender) that gets targeted and just make up a good percentage of the population? i'm curious to what you suggamomma's think.

I agree with you completely! I can barely even look at girl's magazines... it's sickening, really, ESPECIALLY the ads! You'd think all teen girls were a bunch of boy-crazy, fashion-obsessed, shallow bimbos from the look of it! One of the worst here is Seventeen; there was one article mentioned on the cover entitled "The cutest butts in Hollywood"... It's just revolting! And it was once my favorite magazine back in middle school, too... sigh...
There was one magazine called Jump, which was my favorite. It was advertised as a magazine "for girls who dare to be real." They didn't always live up to this mantra, but at least they made a real effort. Needless to say, Jump only lasted about two years at most; it couldn't compete with all the phony B.S. magazines like Cosmo Girl and Seventeen. It didn't have enough pictures of 'N' Sync or how to get Britney's fried blonde bleach job or something. );( The world needs more intelligent magazines as a whole... so go for it!

Amelie is soooo cool!

Just thought I'd agree with Sinope there.

Hmmm, I don't really care what kind of film it is, as long as it's good. I mean, you can say, 'I hate sci-fi' but then you might see a sci-fi film that's really brilliant. But I like films with more thought behind them, I don't like brainless blockbusters… I mean ok if it does well, but it has to be quality too. I like Sixth Sense, American Beauty, Amelie, A Room With A View, Star Wars (I was raised on those films), ummm… Lord of the Rings… Moulin Rouge… When Harry Met Sally… Woody Allen films are great.

I agree the media can be really shallow. I was reading a teenage magazine recently. It's like the most important thing in the world is to be cool and have a boyfriend. I mean, can't they write something with any real depth behind it? Me and my sister (penmagic) want to do an online girl magazine that's actually got something for the deeper-thinking teenagers of the world (sorry, does that sound really snobby? But seriously I just find girl magazines don't give people credit for being intelligent, it's all "HOW TO BE COOL" and "DOES THAT CUTIE HAVE A CRUSH ON YOU?" )

which movies are you referring to with alot of ads in them?

no. but just about. i find it a guilty pleasure to watch such movies (star wars; spiderman; spy kids 2, halloween 10 part 2, etc.etc.) but i appreciate them for the crap they are! see. there's a difference. Amelie`. french flick. highly recomend. (subtitles bother alot of people though-and zero explosions). Creativity is a must for a good movie, and the quality of most lack to me, because there is none there. i still like movies of all kind. it's rare to find good ones these days, though i'm sure they exist.killyourtv.

Sinope, do you think that an otherwise beautiful movie that has a lot of ads connected to it is crap? Many of my favorite movies had a lot of advertising connected to them, and I wouldn't call them crap...

fwegan. i'm a HUGE movie buff and i love foriegn "films"(notice i say film not huge blockbuster movie coming to a theater near you), i love the vanguarde and i love those crazy conceptual pieces, don't get me wrong!!!!! i'm as artsy as they come. i was basically referring to t.v.; and the movies that come out every friday that milk merchendise, books, and every other fascit of commerce...... they make these movies so they make money off them. that's not art. that's crap.(which we can not escape from AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.)

p.s. have you ever seen the movie 'solaris', made in the 70's. i just heard that they're making a remake of it with george clooney!!!!!!! another neo-classic ripped to shreds by the greedy unoriginal money hungry thieves of the ad world........ and that last thing you said was sweet.killyourt.v.

You reminded me of this thing that I wrote a while ago for a creative writing class... (don't know why I'm saying this, I kinda feel like I have to...weird.)

Yeah, I agree that TV is usually pretty evil stuff, but I think you're taking is a bit far when you claim that movies are "basically mediums for ads." Haven't you ever seen a really moving movie (hehe) that can actually be considered a piece of art?

Not to say that you shouldn't kill your TV. I'm quite addicted, and I'm really looking forward to moving into a house without one.


Love, Jenny

P.S. You know how pretty much everyone gets drug ed. and alcohol ed. and tobacco ed.? I think learning about TV and food addictions should be regular curriculum too.