Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Barnes and Noble censors image of androgynous model.


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Barnes and Noble censors image of androgynous model. Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Barnes and Noble censors image of androgynous model. - 5/22/2011 8:50:07 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

In doing a quick check back on this thread, there are 77 responses, but there were only eighteen individuals that posted.  Of those eighteen, six posters said in one form or another that they thought the person on the cover was female.  If that's a random sampling, and you were Barnes and Noble, would you really want one third of your customers thinking that they wouldn't be back in your store because they *thought* the magazines on display had a half naked chick on the cover? 



And this is what I keep coming back too, LP. B&N doesnt want to alienate its consumer base... especially in this market. Anyone who has been into one immediately sees the kids section, the hot too section, the travel and cooking sections. Its family oriented.

Maybe im wrong, and im sure someone will tell me if I am, but dont they require Playboys to be in wrappings? Not all Playboy covers are sexually explicit. But you have all walks of life in those stores. Why should anyone want the business to open itself up to criticism, complaints, arguments and the occasional gawker?

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to LadyPact)
Profile   Post #: 81
RE: Barnes and Noble censors image of androgynous model. - 5/22/2011 9:16:22 PM   
WantsOfTheFlesh


Posts: 1226
Joined: 3/3/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
Why should anyone want the business to open itself up to criticism, complaints, arguments and the occasional gawker?





_____________________________

"I had lot's of luck but its all been bad"

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 82
RE: Barnes and Noble censors image of androgynous model. - 5/22/2011 10:42:59 PM   
DeviantlyD


Posts: 4375
Joined: 5/26/2007
From: Hawai`i
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: WantsOfTheFlesh

Honestly when I saw the pic in the link on the OP I immediately thought this person doesn't look like a young girl so what's the problem? Its a pic of a transvestite so maybe thats the issue. After all they are still a little taboo aren't they? Now many others on here seem to disagree over what the image seems to represent so maybe I just see this differently!


That may be true for you, but others have posted different impressions. The image is ambiguous.

Edited to add:

Also, you had the added information that the image would be of a male. This would have coloured your perception. Someone walking into a store and seeing the magazine on a shelf would likely not have that foreknowledge.

< Message edited by DeviantlyD -- 5/22/2011 10:45:08 PM >

(in reply to WantsOfTheFlesh)
Profile   Post #: 83
RE: Barnes and Noble censors image of androgynous model. - 5/22/2011 10:48:31 PM   
DeviantlyD


Posts: 4375
Joined: 5/26/2007
From: Hawai`i
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomImus

It's no wonder that hideously ugly fucker is a hit in the fashion world.


Hideously ugly? You'll have to explain that one because he is not ugly, he's beautiful.

(in reply to DomImus)
Profile   Post #: 84
RE: Barnes and Noble censors image of androgynous model. - 5/22/2011 11:57:02 PM   
needlesandpins


Posts: 3901
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer


quote:

ORIGINAL: needlesandpins

if he was made to look like an adolescent boy, but posed provocatively then i'd still have a problem about that sexualisation of minors. however, he's not being posed like a male, he's fully made up to look like a female, as he actually is in an awful lots of his shots. even where he does model male clothes he still looks like an awkward girl in boys clothes. mostly i have no probs with him looking like a girl, he pulls it off very well, but i have a problem with him looking like a sexualised adolescent girl.

i haven't read the book you are talking about so can't comment on that itself. however i'm not sure what is meant by appreciation of the adolescent body is actually supposed to mean. maybe it's a lack of context that i'm not getting, but something about that doesn't sit right with me.

needles



I'm with you on the phrase "appreciation of the adolescent body" - it's, ah, questionable, very.

I didn't know that Pejic had, in other pictures, been made up to look like a woman and that the net result is that he looks like an 'awkward girl'.

*Sigh*. Frigging advertisers. A while ago it was 'Heroin chic' and deadly-thin, pale, sickly-looking models. They got their furore out of that, but now it's all a bore. So, they go for something unpleasant in a whole new and exciting way. It's all just comprehensively tacky and tawdry, to me.


i didn't mean he looks like an awkward girl when made up as a woman, he looks at his most comfortable then. but more when he's supposed to be modeling male clothes. he looks like a girl made to wear boys clothes instead of a pretty dress.

for anyone interested, a link to his pics.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&rlz=1R2ACAW_enGB377&q=andrej+pejic&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&wrapid=tlif130613358309510&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&biw=1345&bih=562

needles

(in reply to PeonForHer)
Profile   Post #: 85
RE: Barnes and Noble censors image of androgynous model. - 5/23/2011 1:58:11 AM   
sunshinemiss


Posts: 17673
Joined: 11/26/2007
Status: offline
Sunny
Quote of the Day
goes to
DomImus

for
If he had any more angular contours
he'd be a geometry equation.



http://www.collarchat.com/m_3684905/mpage_4/key_/tm.htm#3687083
Thanks to dcnovice for pointing out this thread.

_____________________________

Yes, I am a wonton hussy... and still sweet as 3.14

(in reply to DomImus)
Profile   Post #: 86
RE: Barnes and Noble censors image of androgynous model. - 5/23/2011 1:58:58 AM   
VaguelyCurious


Posts: 5264
Joined: 12/2/2009
From: United Kingdom
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: WantsOfTheFlesh

Should society have social rules based on how things look or how they are?

It is still cracking me up that people are saying this about a *magazine cover*.

The model is not the image. The image is the model plus lighting plus hairstyling plus makeup plus photoshop. The identity of the model is irrelevant.

_____________________________

Sthetic on FetLife.




(in reply to WantsOfTheFlesh)
Profile   Post #: 87
RE: Barnes and Noble censors image of androgynous model. - 5/23/2011 2:10:53 AM   
PeonForHer


Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: needlesandpins


i didn't mean he looks like an awkward girl when made up as a woman, he looks at his most comfortable then. but more when he's supposed to be modeling male clothes. he looks like a girl made to wear boys clothes instead of a pretty dress.

for anyone interested, a link to his pics.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&rlz=1R2ACAW_enGB377&q=andrej+pejic&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&wrapid=tlif130613358309510&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&biw=1345&bih=562

needles


Gotcha.

I think we should lose the word 'androgynous', here. He doesn't look halfway between male and female in those pictures, he looks female.

_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com


(in reply to needlesandpins)
Profile   Post #: 88
RE: Barnes and Noble censors image of androgynous model. - 5/23/2011 12:24:06 PM   
WantsOfTheFlesh


Posts: 1226
Joined: 3/3/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DeviantlyD
quote:

ORIGINAL: WantsOfTheFlesh
Honestly when I saw the pic in the link on the OP I immediately thought this person doesn't look like a young girl so what's the problem? Its a pic of a transvestite so maybe thats the issue. After all they are still a little taboo aren't they? Now many others on here seem to disagree over what the image seems to represent so maybe I just see this differently!

That may be true for you, but others have posted different impressions. The image is ambiguous.

Edited to add:

Also, you had the added information that the image would be of a male. This would have coloured your perception. Someone walking into a store and seeing the magazine on a shelf would likely not have that foreknowledge.

I know and I acknowledged that. Only some agreed with my view. Yes its possible knowing its a male model may have colored my view but honesty don't think so. Maybe a very fleeting glance wouldn't register it but looking at the images posted he seems clearly male. Most taking an interest in the cover for whatever reason would look more closely.


quote:

ORIGINAL: VaguelyCurious
quote:

ORIGINAL: WantsOfTheFlesh
Should society have social rules based on how things look or how they are?

It is still cracking me up that people are saying this about a *magazine cover*.

The model is not the image. The image is the model plus lighting plus hairstyling plus makeup plus photoshop. The identity of the model is irrelevant.

I said it in a hypothetical situation regarding the rules of society. Dont think its unreasonable to suggest there could be possible implications if cases like this exist. You're right that photoshop is used a lot with fashion and the image may not reflect reality but its still possible that it could. Can't see how the gender identity is not relevant if some see masculinity.

_____________________________

"I had lot's of luck but its all been bad"

(in reply to VaguelyCurious)
Profile   Post #: 89
RE: Barnes and Noble censors image of androgynous model. - 5/23/2011 1:09:02 PM   
PeonForHer


Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline 		FR

Just to add: Ahhh, hasn't the fashion industry learned its lesson well? At one time, all women had to look like dangerously thin young girls whose bodies looked like they might snap if they were ever to have sex. Now, though, the fashion industry has set a thrillingly new target - women must now aspire to looking like thin young boys who look even more delicately but aesthetically ill!

I wish women would stop buying this shit. Don't buy the magazines, don't read about it, don't even think about this guff. It's perverse, way beyond anything ever said on this website. The people who purvey this stuff are disgusting, degenerate little parasites, regardless of how much money they rake in or how much the more brainless of journalists write their drivel about them. Let them piss off and witter their pointless crap amongst themselves.

Rant finished; as you were.



_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com


(in reply to WantsOfTheFlesh)
Profile   Post #: 90
RE: Barnes and Noble censors image of androgynous model. - 5/23/2011 2:34:39 PM   
DesFIP


Posts: 25191
Joined: 11/25/2007
From: Apple County NY
Status: offline 		Wants, to me he looks clearly female and knowing he is male, I would guess tg, not tv. However, around here, I am the typical customer at B & N, a middle aged housewife who doesn't read this particular magazine and never will be interested in it. I buy books for my kids, little kid books for my grandkids, and I gravitate to fiction for myself. Mystery, sf and romance genres. Not a magazine for hipsters with an exceedingly small circulation.

And I've got to tell you that I wouldn't want the teen son to be staring at what appears at first glance to be a naked pre-pubescent female between the ages of 8 and 12. Nor the 8 year old grandson for that matter. And since here you have to walk through the magazine aisle to get to the restrooms and the entrance to the cafe, it appears likely that lots of kids would walk past this image. And lots of affronted middle aged mothers, who buy a lot more in B & N than do the readers of this particular magazine.


_____________________________

Slave to laundry

Cynical and proud of it!


(in reply to PeonForHer)
Profile   Post #: 91
RE: Barnes and Noble censors image of androgynous model. - 5/23/2011 4:22:22 PM   
VaguelyCurious


Posts: 5264
Joined: 12/2/2009
From: United Kingdom
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: WantsOfTheFlesh
I said it in a hypothetical situation regarding the rules of society. Dont think its unreasonable to suggest there could be possible implications if cases like this exist. You're right that photoshop is used a lot with fashion and the image may not reflect reality but its still possible that it could. Can't see how the gender identity is not relevant if some see masculinity.

Of course it's not unreasonable to suggest there would be implications - all laws boil down to the restriction of one person's rights in order to preserve another's. The question is whether it's fair to restrict a magazine's right to use sexualised child-like images to market their product where children can see it, in order that children do not see it. And I'm inclined to think that the answer is yes - their right to advertise themselves however they like is secondary to a parent's right not to have their child exposed to the image in a family store.

But the guy walking down the street is not an advert being used to increase the sales of a product, he's a guy walking down the street. I'm pretty sure a judge could tell the difference between the two.

_____________________________

Sthetic on FetLife.




(in reply to WantsOfTheFlesh)
Profile   Post #: 92
RE: Barnes and Noble censors image of androgynous model. - 5/23/2011 5:26:41 PM   
WantsOfTheFlesh


Posts: 1226
Joined: 3/3/2009
Status: offline 		Guys I don't have any strong opinions on the issue and the mag doesn't matter. Never even knew it existed. It was more about what is right to censor and what is legitimate when we allow some fairly sexualised imagery already and the showing of male body torso types generally. The points bout implications were just hypotheticals so YMMV.

quote:

ORIGINAL: VaguelyCurious
quote:

ORIGINAL: WantsOfTheFlesh
I said it in a hypothetical situation regarding the rules of society. Dont think its unreasonable to suggest there could be possible implications if cases like this exist. You're right that photoshop is used a lot with fashion and the image may not reflect reality but its still possible that it could. Can't see how the gender identity is not relevant if some see masculinity.

Of course it's not unreasonable to suggest there would be implications - all laws boil down to the restriction of one person's rights in order to preserve another's. The question is whether it's fair to restrict a magazine's right to use sexualised child-like images to market their product where children can see it, in order that children do not see it. And I'm inclined to think that the answer is yes - their right to advertise themselves however they like is secondary to a parent's right not to have their child exposed to the image in a family store.

But the guy walking down the street is not an advert being used to increase the sales of a product, he's a guy walking down the street. I'm pretty sure a judge could tell the difference between the two.

Don't quite agree with how you understand all laws but thats for a different thread. I agree in principle that it is right to restrict images that are child-like. Yet as another poster said there isn't a consensus on whether the image is child-like (Peon now seems to think he looks more like a male) so the questions I had before may still be relevant. I hope a judge could tell the difference between the two scenarios but if the image is objectionable (assuming an accurate representation) there might be implications, e.g. if the same character was nearby without a shirt. Would mothers find it disturbing? Possibly. Thats why I think if a certain male body type is objectionable on a cover then it could be in real life too.


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP
Wants, to me he looks clearly female and knowing he is male, I would guess tg, not tv.

And I've got to tell you that I wouldn't want the teen son to be staring at what appears at first glance to be a naked pre-pubescent female between the ages of 8 and 12. Nor the 8 year old grandson for that matter. And since here you have to walk through the magazine aisle to get to the restrooms and the entrance to the cafe, it appears likely that lots of kids would walk past this image. And lots of affronted middle aged mothers, who buy a lot more in B & N than do the readers of this particular magazine.

I take your you point but wonder if this is as much of an issue in the internet age with children seeing explicite imagery sometimes with internet screening? Just personally I see his face having some masculine features, more deeply set eyes and wide chin. I think he looks more TV assuming a TS would be on female hormones, as Imus said he looks angular.

_____________________________

"I had lot's of luck but its all been bad"

(in reply to PeonForHer)
Profile   Post #: 93
RE: Barnes and Noble censors image of androgynous model. - 5/23/2011 5:49:30 PM   
littlewonder


Posts: 15659
Status: offline 		when I first saw the photo and without knowing it was a male because I just clicked on the link and looked at the photo, I thought it was a little girl pretending to be Madonna in her "Vogue-Strike A Pose" days.

So yeah I'm one these middle aged moms who finds the picture to be a bit disturbing and completely understand the reason for B&N's stance and I'm fine with it.

(in reply to WantsOfTheFlesh)
Profile   Post #: 94
RE: Barnes and Noble censors image of androgynous model. - 5/25/2011 12:35:30 AM   
DeviantlyD


Posts: 4375
Joined: 5/26/2007
From: Hawai`i
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: WantsOfTheFlesh

Most taking an interest in the cover for whatever reason would look more closely.


I think you're missing my point. If a conservative person, particularly a conservative parent and especially a conservative parent with an impressionable kid in tow saw it, possibly viewing it as a young topless female, they are not going to look more closely. For someone less than liberal in their sexual viewpoint, seeing a young person as a topless female would likely put them off. That is the type of reaction I'm speaking of. Yes, there will be those (even those who would be described as conservative) who would look at it closer (in the sense of "am I seeing what I think I'm seeing?") and there will be those who may see it as male up front. But there are definitely going to be people who see it and have the mistaken impression that the cover model is a young topless female and be upset by having that visual so openly on display. And I don't think the latter group is going to be such a small minority as to be dismissed by a large retailer like Barnes and Noble. Are they right to do so? It all points back to perception being reality. In marketing perception is reality and this is what Barnes and Nobles is acknowledging.

(in reply to WantsOfTheFlesh)
Profile   Post #: 95
RE: Barnes and Noble censors image of androgynous model. - 5/25/2011 9:27:17 AM   
DesFIP


Posts: 25191
Joined: 11/25/2007
From: Apple County NY
Status: offline 		The other thing is that it isn't censorship. Censorship is imposed by the government. I bet there are plenty of news stands in NYC that will display this magazine without requesting it be wrapped. But B & N's target audience will be offended and possibly go to Borders next time. I go to B & N because it's a couple of miles closer than the Borders, but if I was upset I could just as easily decide to drive the extra three miles.

Them choosing not to upset the wider customer base is just good business. In exactly the same way that letter writing campaigns to advertisers will get them to pull their commercials from a tv show. They aren't obligated to, they choose to in order to keep selling their product. B & N could just have easily decided not to carry this particular magazine in the future, they don't carry every single one on the market and it would have been an easy business decision to drop them and substitute a less controversial one, say on stamp collecting.


_____________________________

Slave to laundry

Cynical and proud of it!


(in reply to DeviantlyD)
Profile   Post #: 96
RE: Barnes and Noble censors image of androgynous model. - 5/25/2011 9:47:27 AM   
xssve


Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline 		People who get hysterical when their gender bias's are challenged should be wrapped in plastic.

(in reply to DesFIP)
Profile   Post #: 97
RE: Barnes and Noble censors image of androgynous model. - 5/25/2011 10:43:13 AM   
DesFIP


Posts: 25191
Joined: 11/25/2007
From: Apple County NY
Status: offline 		Xssve, around here the B & N's try real hard to get an  elementary school class or two to visit once a week. Say 30 - 50 kids come through, with five or ten dollars to spend on a book, a bookmark, a pack of pencils or so on. You really think B & N wants to give up $250 -$500 weekly in order to sell ten copies of a magazine tagged at $7.99? Economically, it just doesn't work out.

_____________________________

Slave to laundry

Cynical and proud of it!


(in reply to xssve)
Profile   Post #: 98
RE: Barnes and Noble censors image of androgynous model. - 5/25/2011 10:57:53 AM   
DeviantlyD


Posts: 4375
Joined: 5/26/2007
From: Hawai`i
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: xssve

People who get hysterical when their gender bias's are challenged should be wrapped in plastic.



Hysterical? I doubt anyone would get hysterical. And you can't finger "gender bias" as the problem. The knowledge of gender identity and related issues has really only come to the forefront very recently. The vast majority of western society (the segment of the population we are really talking about here) grew up without this knowledge. So the initial impression people might have doesn't come from a willful disregard of the possibilities but of one from their ingrained knowledge base of feminine is usually female, masculine is usually male.

(in reply to xssve)
Profile   Post #: 99
RE: Barnes and Noble censors image of androgynous model. - 5/25/2011 1:09:39 PM   
OttersSwim


Posts: 2860
Joined: 9/1/2008
Status: offline 		America is a land very caught up in being parochial about sex.  We will show violence to kids of any age and allow them to engage in it via video games, TV and the like, but God forbid that we show them a human body...

For me, this is a "pick your battle" sort of issue and in the grand idea of raising awareness of gender fluidity, the cover has already done its work - creating discussion and awareness among a segment of the population and regardless of opinions for or against, it has made those that have seen it at least consider their views and in many cases discuss it with others.

It is a note sounded in what will be a decades long symphony that eventually will add up to a whole - if not, a more tolerant and giving society, then one that will at least grudge less those persons of gender variance room to live their lives out unmolested. 

At least, that is the hope...

< Message edited by OttersSwim -- 5/25/2011 1:10:28 PM >

_____________________________

I am on a journey of authenticity and self.

(in reply to ParappaTheDapper)
Profile   Post #: 100
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Barnes and Noble censors image of androgynous model. Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.125