| |
|
I don't really think the equivalence with the old music&games arguments works. For starters, there are plenty of artistic reasons one might include things which are awful in real life in music and video games. Lads' mags don't really have that excuse; the misogynistic representation of women is more or less the whole point of the magazines. The extent to which they contribute to a misogynistic culture rather than beingmerely symptomatic of it is, for me, up in the air, but I'm finding it hard to think of reasons why yr standard lads' mag isn't really pretty shitty.
As to the distinction with "real" porn, I'd assume the reasoning is based on "acceptability". Obviously, the latter is consumed in vast quantities, but it still retains a level of taboo; it's not read in the same casual way, and the majority of people probably wouldn't rifle through it on a train or leave it on their kitchen table when someone came round. I think there may also be an argument relating to the ways in which the two formats are used. By far the most common use for "real" porn is as a masturbatory aid. The consumption of lads' mags is possibly less clear-cut; undoubtedly, they're still used regularly for the same purpose, but they're also used for, for example, bonding purposes - the bonding often taking the form of giggling and sharing dodgy views about the women depicted.
(Incidentally, Gove talked about "families without fathers". I think it's pretty clear what school of "feminism" he's adhering to in making these remarks.) |
|
|
