Jump to content
Shyheels

Legs-it Headline

Recommended Posts

For anyone who thought the media had pretty much plumbed the depths and had really nowhere deeper to sink, there was this eye-popping headline on the cover of the Daily Mail this morning. Yes, it's real.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/mar/28/daily-mail-legs-it-front-page-sexist

As one commentator put it, this is what happens when you let your drunken pervy uncle edit a newspaper....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I obviously missed the early edition, as I read the DM on-line.

58da330566800_DMheadline.thumb.jpg.3c8c2db0af8eb1a023e1b496cf6cecd0.jpg

 

Even so, I had two thoughts when looking at this picture ..... Firstly, TM has shiny tights on, very luxurious I concluded. Then looking at Sturgeon, I decided no matter how desperate I might feel, that women is never going to seem attractive to me. For that matter, neither is Teresa May, though she have been attractive in her younger days.

Sadly, I can't counter 10,000 years worth of DNA heritage that gives us all the 3 second 'flight or fight' urge. I suspect part of that DNA training is the (also) intellectually unconquerable thought about attractiveness. (Men vs women.) I've no defence.

That said, I'm not married to a British MP (and sometime Government Minister) and I don't write for a national publication, where intellectual skill and writing ability are judged daily, not least because I'm getting paid to be judged. The more favourably so, the greater my remuneration of course. For a woman in her position to reduce the encounter of two successful women to the shape of their legs, is crass. Not verging on stupidity, but deeply buried in it. What was she thinking? Her husbands career is barely out of the toilet, was she trying to flush it again?

Edited by FastFreddy2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, everybody - male or female - makes subliminal judgements about others as we see/encounter them.  That's just part of being human.

But as you say, this woman is being paid fancy money to offer considered opinions on political topics. This is not a swift subliminal take on sexy (or otherwise) legs, stilettos and outfits, but a feature article that took time write, edit caption and headline - not just be Ms Vine but by the team of editors and copy-editors who put out that paper. And this is what they come up with? This must frank with the infamous Gotcha headline during the Falklands war for sheer stupidity and inappropriateness. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shyheels said:

This must frank with the infamous Gotcha headline during the Falklands war for sheer stupidity and inappropriateness. 

I had to read up about that to understand it. "Apparently", Murdoch didn't see a need to change the headline even when the full story about the sinking (and loss of life) was known. Says a lot about the man really.

As for the DM editorial profile, I think it's stuff of 'legend', and none of it good. I began reading it because of the pictures, my interest being glamorous women wearing high heels. (There is a thread I started here, with me having access to hundreds of images to be included - sometime.) But I have to say, with all the 2015 GE going on, the Referendum, Brexit, I am often motivated to comment. Sometimes on the picture editors ability to show us so many woman with no lower limbs, but 20 near identical photo's if a glimpse of cleavage is seen. I guess he'she used to work for The Sun newspaper?

I remember Sarah Vine getting herself into a lot of hot water over the election of a new leader of the Conservative Party, with her husband's rather foolish route to gaining access to that position and the PM's job. Trying to defend the indefensible .... I wouldn't be surprised if that couple has 4 left feet between them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, as a regular DM reader, I didn't take offence at the light-hearted 'legs' article although I can see why it ruffled so many PC-obsessed feathers.   There are far more serious things to worry about than allegedly offensive words - generally objected to vicariously and vociferously by anyone but the apparent target.   Sticks and stones ...

As to Ms Sturgeon, I admire her guts whilst disliking her attitude and values - and she scrubs up well on occasions, especially in the shoe department.   

I'm just waiting now for newspaper comment (DM or otherwise) about the need for the many foreigners injured in the Westminster attack to be charged in full by the NHS for their treatment.   They should be, if the rules are to be applied properly, but I suspect that any such suggestion will be treated as 'outrageous' by the great unwashed.

I will now duck down behind the nearest parapet ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Daily mail headline was crass because it was crass - because it reduced the lead story of the day to an adolescent guffaw at a silly word play and to the shoes and legs of the women in the photo, not the important constitutional issues which they were discussing.

As far as what they were wearing being worthy of comment - sure. An inside column noting their respective styles and body language would have been worthwhile, but that's not the lead story, nor should it be the front page headline, still less expressed in such a sophomoric way.

On the side of the Daily Mail, it is worth noting the vast number of column inches the self-righteous writers of Guardian devoted to Theresa May's leather trousers not too many weeks ago, and their disapproving coverage of her recent appearance in American Vogue magazine.  I suppose the Guardian writers believe it is all right when they do it because they are, after all, the Guardian and so by definition it would be impossible for them to do anything sexist or non-PC.

I would also add that for all the umbrage expressed by certain female columnists and politicians, and the idea that men would never be subjected to that kind of personal scrutiny - men are subjected to it too. There is just much less of a hoo-ha by the 'victims' when it happens. President Obama, for example, was castigated last year for having the temerity to wear a brown suit, instead of black or navy blue.  David Cameron's hair, and Boris Johnson's too, regularly receive comment.

In terms of worthy commentary, I would say Theresa May is to be commended for her dress sense - she is happy to push the boundaries of what is considered 'susceptible' for women in their 60s by wearing thigh boots and leather trousers as and when she feels like it. And she manages to carry off the look. That speaks of self confidence, strength of character and a willingness not to blindly follow the herd  - good attributes in a politician or a person and worthy of comment. 

Edited by Shyheels
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was unaware TM owned OTK boots. Fair play, though I didn't much like the shape of the heel 'as photographed'. She is still a very plain looking woman with a taste for the avant garde in clothing style. She would seldom be hard to find in a crowd.

I'm not really interested in her dress sense, although I would consider it novel. What I'm more concerned about, is her delivering what the general populace want. So far, she seems to be moving toward doing just that. Much to my surprise, I'm glad to say. B) As with millions of others, I am expecting news today, I never really thought would arrive. Interesting times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do agree that the prominence of the 'legs' item in the DM was ill-judged, given the significance of the occasion.   But, in difficult times - Brexit, Westminster - a tongue-in-cheek diversion can help to retain the public's sense of proportion and help us all to 'keep calm and carry on'.

TM stands out as much for her height and slightly gawky gait as for her clothing choices.   She makes an effort and generally looks smarter than many of her contemporaries.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FastFreddy2 said:

I was unaware TM owned OTK boots. Fair play, though I didn't much like the shape of the heel 'as photographed'. She is still a very plain looking woman with a taste for the avant garde in clothing style. She would seldom be hard to find in a crowd.

I'm not really interested in her dress sense, although I would consider it novel. What I'm more concerned about, is her delivering what the general populace want. So far, she seems to be moving toward doing just that. Much to my surprise, I'm glad to say. B) As with millions of others, I am expecting news today, I never really thought would arrive. Interesting times.

I too have been very pleasantly surprised by Theresa May. My initial dismay at seeing her made the prime minister has given way to admiration for the way she has taken the reins and is going about delivering - intelligently - what the populace voted for, even though it mightn't have been her first choice. I think we are lucky to have her there.

She famously wore otk boots to meet the queen a couple of years ago - something that got a lot of press, but which she carried off with some style.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Puffer said:

I do agree that the prominence of the 'legs' item in the DM was ill-judged, given the significance of the occasion.   But, in difficult times - Brexit, Westminster - a tongue-in-cheek diversion can help to retain the public's sense of proportion and help us all to 'keep calm and carry on'.

TM stands out as much for her height and slightly gawky gait as for her clothing choices.   She makes an effort and generally looks smarter than many of her contemporaries.

She does indeed look smarter than her contemporaries - which no doubt has a lot to do with why she was in American Vogue. She has style and does not let her age interfere with it, but at the same time doesn't pretend she's a thirty-something.

Humour and a light touch is a good thing - just not on the front page and for such a serious story. Save it for inside the book. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Shyheels said:

She famously wore otk boots to meet the queen a couple of years ago - something that got a lot of press, but which she carried off with some style.

I can assure you, a couple of years ago my interest in TM on a scale of 1 to 10, would had a minus sign in front of it.

Her previous record, was not good. Talked much, but delivered little (as is often the case with politicians) even as Home Secretary. However, if she only ever does one thing, it's done and I'm happy for her to be where she is because she got it done. And unlike previous PM's, when Sturgeon came calling looking for further inducements (money) to stop whining on about "independence", Sturgeon was sent away with nothing. Made good reading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just love how Theresa May is being accused of blackmail by the EU over her references to security in describing the need to forge some kind of a deal. And this after the UK has been menaced with all kinds of threats and blackmail by the EU, for months, not least of which is this demand for €60 billion before talks can get under way. 

Blackmail, bluff, whatever you call it - the UK has dealt itself into a of extremely high stakes poker. If Ms May is not using every bluff, joker, ace at her disposal - and yes, blackmail, where and when the opportunity offers itself - she damned well ought to be! Anyway, there's my rant for the morning....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She's just reminding the EU what's at stake if they believe a complete separation is attractive. Her big bargaining chip is actually EU residents currently in the UK. Sending them back home would mess up several EU economies, including the UK to an extent. But, stopping medical care and welfare help wouldn't harm the UK economy but would harm the EU countries. That's the one the EU doesn't want, hundreds of thousands of "dependents" moving back onto the mainland, leaving healthy money earners in the UK.  

Edited by FastFreddy2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think both sides will be playing that game. Lots of sabre-rattling, and for some months yet. Both sides will ask for conditions they know won't be met, and maybe can't be met. Eventually, something will be offered so both sides can say they 'won' the negotiations. Sadly, The UK doesn't usually do well when negotiating, though Thatcher did better than was expected. If the UK starts off from the position there's no access to a single market outside of WTO trade tariffs and work from there, anything else is a plus.

I have my doubts the EU want WTO tariffs on either side of the import/export situation since we buy from more than we sell to. I'm wondering if VAT is/was an EU tax. Dumping that would make us VERY competitive. If I remember, the UK gets most of it, but the EU got a chunk too? No, the big worry is 3-4 million economic migrants. Europe is very happy sucking money out of the UK economy to send back home (into the EU) and would not want that to stop. Nor would many large UK businesses want their cheap employees sent back home either. High stakes for businesses then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These negotiations won't be for the faint hearted. As you say there is much at stake for both sides. The EU enjoys the benefits of a largely compliant media and the remainers here are highly vocal and given a generous platform from which to air their views and do their best to sabotage talks and negotiations. 

Britain does not do well in these sorts of negotiations, being far to conciliatory. Hopefully Theresa May will be harder headed than the others before here. I see signs that she may be. We can but hope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Shyheels said:

Britain does not do well in these sorts of negotiations, being far to conciliatory. Hopefully Theresa May will be harder headed than the others before here. I see signs that she may be. We can but hope.

I won't mind if she grows a small black moustache and starts raising her right hand to say 'hello' to people. 

Given the reduction in the standard of living endured by the UK over the last 15-20 years, I would say the bulk of the UK electorate (which includes the bit that doesn't vote), has had enough of 'conciliatory'. Most of us believe we've been taken-for-a-ride by the EU which has become something of a goblin, only taking and never giving. We may never recover from pouring money into what increasingly looks like a lost cause, but the sooner we stop the flow of cash into the bottomless pit, the better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...