The femi-islamification of the UK proceeded apace this week with the news that ‘indecent’ advertising billboards will be outlawed everywhere. Indecent in the UK now apparently means any image of a female in a sexually suggestive pose. Advertisers can still dare to risk fines or imprisonment by showing women in bikinis, but if she is in an ‘indecent’ pose – for example with her hands on her hips – then the the advert will be deemed illegal and a threat to the sexual innocence of children.
The move comes ahead of a Downing Street summit this week between David Cameron and companies involved in leading the Coalition’s campaign to combat the sexualisation of children.
Banning raunchy billboard adverts near schools was one of a number of recommendations made in May this year following a Government-commissioned review by Reg Bailey, chief executive of the Mothers’ Union.
While billboards will be allowed to carry posters of models wearing bikinis, they will not be allowed to show them in poses that are deemed to be sexually suggestive, the ASA guideliens rule.
This will cover everything from images of stockings and suspenders to poses where the legs are parted or even hands are placed on hips.
Reg Bailey is the head of the fundamentalist Christian/femiservative group ‘the mother’s union’. The UK is supposed to be a secular society, with less than 3% of the population attending church regularly. The present coalition government includes ‘the liberal democrats’, which to a naive person, should have something to do with pursuing policies that are liberal and democratic – rather than imposing religious edicts that a Saudi Arabian mullah would approve of.
The original report into the sexualisation of children was written by Linda Papadopoulos, an American pop psychologist and feminist now living in the UK, and somebody who loves to attend children’s charity galas in incredibly revealing and sexualised outfits.
Of course, the logical next step is to control what children wear. Dressing up billboard models with burqas instead of bikinis won’t, in itself, have much impact on the vast numbers of barely pubescent girls walking around in semi-transparent spandex leggings and g-string in every town and city in the UK (and giving conservative middle-aged men uncomfortable erections). Not when every other 20 year old woman in the UK is wearing the same and the younger girls are noticing all the male attention that such clothes attract.
In fact, the ‘review on the sexualisation of children’ has already made a recommendation that fashion brands stop making children’s clothes with ‘inappropriate’ materials. Unfortunately, as far as feminists/femiservatives are concerned, this won’t be enough to stop 15, 16 and 17 year old ‘children’ displaying their perfectly near naked and fertile rumps to every man who passes them – unless you actually ban the selling of such clothes to anyone under 18, ID checks and all – which is probably where we’re heading. In the Islamic world, it is only when girls begin puberty (i.e at 12 or 13, when they cease to be children in the land of non-feminist reality and start to become attractive to men) that they are required to cover themselves up. In the Western feminist world, we will soon have a sort of curious ‘reverse’, at least for a while. Only ‘children’ will be required to cover themselves up – under the pretence that it is to save ‘children’ from being ‘sexualised’. Of course, what feminists and femiservatives are really trying to do is to stop and disempower the the most fertile and desirable group of females – teenage girls – from attracting male attention and driving their own aged haggard selves crazy with sexual envy and fury.
Meanwhile, as children’s innocence is protected by the billboard burqa police, probably every other teenage ‘child’ in the land is watching videos of mexican drug gangs beheading rivals with chainsaws and the like. And reading, with a curious erection, of the latest dirty pedo to be disemboweled in prison – wot, no video?
On a lighter note…there are a number of videos on YouTube where sexy young women have attached spy cams to parts of their body to show what disgusting dogs men are, through secretly capturing every glance at their see-through spandex clad butt. Well here’s a video where the tables are turned. A muscular, fit young man attaches cams to every part of HIS body, and then goes out and meets women. What do you think these non-objectifying women are going to be staring at?
Yeah they use children as weapons, emotional and politically to attain their ends by the means of blackmail. Personally I wouldn’t do that to anyone but it shows what unhealthy type of minds they have to use children to destroy liberty.
Feminists and prudes are only slightly different flavors of nanny-statists, more allied than not. Both see the need to invent “victims” to present to the media, just as the alcohol prohibitionists did 90 years ago.
It’s not a coincidence that the century of nanny-statism began when women got the vote. The tyranny will continue until we take it away again.
Papadopoulus is such an amazing hipocrite. Her pic is with her wearing some extremely suggestive clothing AND actually standing with “hands on hips” the exact same pose that is proposed to be banned
The underlying motive behind much of feminism’s opposition to the portrayal of women is that they cannot compete in terms of looks or any other form of attractiveness with the models and actresses being represented. Envy is their driving force.
Same phenomenon in Brazil. No sooner does the country get a female president than sexual-trade unionism gets unleashed:
http://www.nerve.com/news/love-sex/brazils-ministry-for-women-wants-to-ban-giseles-sexy-lingerie-ads.
Had Ingrid Betancourt been elected to high office in Colombia, instead of sitting out her time in the jungle in the hands of guerrillas, I have no doubt item number one on her political agenda would have been to clean Colombian society of chicas younger or prettier than herself.
I love the directive that recommends banning raunchy billboards near schools. As far as I know, there are no recorded cases of models in bikinis with their hands on their hips jumping out of billboard ads and assaulting kids.
Anyway, the stuff girls currently wear in the street of their own free will leaves most ‘raunchy ads’ for dead! These new destroyed, ripped, shredded denim micro-shorts must really piss off the old hairy armpit and overalls brigade.