Up Front: Newsflash: Women Have Eyes : Public Address

Change text size...

Recent Blog Posts (RSS)

OnPoint: Rational, then 10:24PM on 22 Mar 10
Cracker: Air New Zealand: Flash as a Chow on a Bike 6:34PM on 22 Mar 10
Field Theory: Friday at the test 4:04PM on 22 Mar 10
Hard News: The Internet in New Zealand 11:27AM on 22 Mar 10
Up Front: This is a Photograph of Me 12:11PM on 18 Mar 10

View all posts on Public Address

Ads by Scoop

Public Address Cafe (RSS)

System > Public Address Cafe >

Public Address
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 1658

RSS

Up Front: Newsflash: Women Have Eyes

Posted at 1:47PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

In many ways, Suraya Singh's story is a typically Kiwi one. Grew up in New Plymouth, moved to Wellington, headed off to do her OE, never quite came back. She loves living in London, but Shihad's Home Again and family pictures make her homesick. It all sounds pretty familiar, right up to the bit where she gets frustrated at the newsagents and starts her own porn mag.

Read More Original Blog Entry

This month, Suraya has launched Filament, a quarterly erotic magazine aimed squarely and solely at women. In a recessing market, where Playgirl has recently gone under, it seems like a big gamble. And we all know women don't have Gaze, right? That's for men, objectifying women. So why would women want to buy a magazine full of pictures of attractive men who've mislaid their shirts?

Sorry, what was the question?

Suraya didn't just jump into this blind. She did what any smart person would do first: she asked LiveJournal what women wanted to look at. Compared with the kind of images of men women are usually presented with, the results might be surprising. It turns out that Janet is right: women don't like men with too many muscles. They prefer more lightly-built men, with slim, feminine faces. This is, of course, an averaging of the feedback, and probably about as useful as asking women what kind of coffee women like and then giving them all that. I couldn't possibly comment. Nevertheless, it does seem to indicate a gap between what women like to look at, and what they're being given.

It was this feedback, too, that led Suraya to publish in magazine form:

I asked many, many people how they would prefer to consume the product that I had in mind. They said, "Everyone else will want it online, but I'd prefer it in print."

Magazines do also, it seems, appear to be recession-proof. While major titles find their circulation dropping, niche magazines appear to be thriving.

Filament does something else as well that's intriguing - or rather, it's what it doesn't do. Filament has no dieting advice, no gossip, and no articles on women's appearance. No fashion, no make-up tips. To compare, I did a quick survey at female-marketed magazines in the supermarket on the weekend, and more than half featured a cover story about a weight issue.

So: sexy men yes, appearance bitching no. Now to find some sexy men.

"I've asked strangers at clubs and for example, messaged someone after seeing their picture on Facebook. I have only had one man say 'no' to modelling, and that was because he wasn't allowed to do that kind of thing because of his job, not because he didn't want to."

Lying around all over the place, apparently, just hanging out to be asked to get their gear off in front of a camera. Isn't this compounding a problem, though, rather than solving it? Surely allowing women to objectify men just legitimises objectifying women?

Being turned on by an image of someone exposing their body is not necessarily objectification just because you don't know that person. I thought a lot about what the difference is between the two and making sure our images are about the people in them, not just of the people in them - for example, the models often took quite an active role in designing the shoot. Additionally, our photoshoots sit alongside interviews with the models about who they are as people, for example, not what they're like in bed.

We also don't touch up our images in ways that make the models appear something they're not - thinner or younger for example. So we think we're promoting a reasonable and achievable beautifulness in men, not unrealistic ideals.

Suraya says the main criticism of Filament that she's had from women is that it simply isn't explicit enough, and this certainly gels with what I've seen elsewhere (link NSFW). She is currently, however, negotiating the difficult world of the British censor, and hopes to be able to move to more explicit images in later issues. It's a matter, too, of getting a photoshoot that works naturally, and doesn't just yell 'look, a penis!'.

Certainly the idea that women aren't visual doesn't seem to be getting in the way of women perving. It's a remarkably persistent myth, though, to the point where every time an ad or a movie features a scantily-clad man, it's suggested that it's playing to its 'huge gay fan-base', as if there are more pervy gay men than pervy straight women. It seems incredible to suggest that David Boreanaz's shirt used to come off in about every second episode of Angel because it kept the female fans happy, and yet also incredibly obvious. Eye-tracking experiments have shown that in fact, when watching sexual material, men look at faces more than women do. The ladies were all about the groinal action.

The mythology around marketing to women interests Suraya in general:

I'm not so much interested in erotica and women's consumption of it as the assumptions that are made about women by any market, broadly speaking - things like, the way you can only get women's running shoes or razors in pink, or that hi-fi headphones are only made to fit man-sized heads. I don't think it's as simple as supply and demand, because you can't demand something that isn't there.

To say that straight women aren't sexually aroused by images of men is, in fact, to imply that it's not okay: that if you're a woman who is turned on by erotic pictures, there's something wrong with you, and that side of your sexuality is best suppressed. It's oppressive. I don't mean to imply that every woman likes ogling, or that girl-perving is somehow in itself a 'feminist' action, but allowing women to be honest about expressing their sexuality, and having a society that admits and encompasses female desire, can only be positive.

There is so much popular mythology about what women want, both sexually and out of life. These myths are often used to form what the market decides to give women and therefore puts parameters on our lives. Mythbusting is a wonderful pastime; everyone gains from it

Image credits Filament Magazine and Lesley Malone.

Hide Full Article Original Blog Entry

« Older

Newer »

Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Mark Graham
From: Auckland
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 120

Posted at 1:47PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

Wow.

No one's asked me yet.

And not too sure about niche magazines being recession proof.

giovanni tiso
From: Wellington
Since: Jun 2007
Posts: 4393

Posted at 1:50PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

In a recessing market, where Playgirl has recently gone under

Wasn't there a theory that Playgirl was never in fact aimed at women but rather at gay men, and that the proof was in the advertising? I never had occasion to verify, just throwing it out there.

Emma Hart
From: Christchurch
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 2629
Moderator

Posted at 1:50PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

And not too sure about niche magazines being recession proof.

I'll defer to people with more industry experience on that one. It was what her research seemed to show, though as she said (I have screeds of great stuff from Suraya I couldn't fit in) there wasn't really anything doing what she wanted to do in the market, ergo nothing to compare with.

Emma Hart
From: Christchurch
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 2629
Moderator

Posted at 1:52PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

Wasn't there a theory that Playgirl was never in fact aimed at women but rather at gay men, and that the proof was in the advertising?

Ah, big gay fan base... I believe for a while Playgirl was the only source for naked man pics, ergo I'm sure it got picked up by gay men. They did move to having online forums though, which were populated by women, and to making porn films, which were heterosexual.

Russell Brown
From: Auckland
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 9068
Moderator

Posted at 1:57PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

Interesting point about what chicks dig, physique-wise.

It does sometimes seem to me that what gets presented to women as porn/erotica for them actually looks like porn/erotica for gay men, at least in its solo form.

Not that there's anything wrong with that, but I've wondered if they're really that interchangeable.

Aidan
From: Canberra, Australia
Since: Feb 2007
Posts: 29

Posted at 2:08PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

I think Singh may be from New Plymouth, not Palmy.

(Don't want the `Naki to feel .. umm .. shafted ..)

Emma Hart
From: Christchurch
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 2629
Moderator

Posted at 2:13PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

I think Singh may be from New Plymouth, not Palmy.
(Don't want the `Naki to feel .. umm .. shafted ..)

Oh shit, you're right, it says so right there. I'll go fix that. And, um, put it down to the fever I'm currently running.

Interesting point about what chicks dig, physique-wise.

Yeah... sometimes I have to remind myself I'm not a heterosexual woman and I shouldn't be speaking for them, probably. What she's talking about seems to be more James Marsters than David Boreanaz, and they both have their fan bases, straight and gay. But traditionally, men in erotica (even Mills and Boon covers) have tended to be more of the Boreanaz type. (Except all that long hair those men traditionally have? Do make their faces look longer and more feminine.)

Emma Hart
From: Christchurch
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 2629
Moderator

Posted at 2:17PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

Heh, also in the interests of full disclosure I should mention that I got this interview in the most Kiwi of ways. Suraya is an old friend of an ex-flatmate of mine, and like Corset-Making Jo, she's ex-KAOS. I'm starting to think that organisation is actually GOOD for people.

Gareth Ward
From: Auckland, NZ
Since: Mar 2007
Posts: 1379

Posted at 2:18PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

Any chance Richard Worth is the sneaky centrefold of the first issue?
Ya know, just asking...

JackElder
From: Wellington
Since: Mar 2008
Posts: 467

Posted at 2:54PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

Actually, I'm pretty sure that the last time I saw Suraya in the flesh was at a party where the person she came with ended up taking pictures of my nipples. I seem to recall consenting provided I got a few bob when the pictures inevitably ended up on the internet. This was in the aftermath of my brief history as an (inadvertant) model on a german gay porn website, and I was determined that while I didn't mind this sort of thing happening, I at least wanted to make a couple of bucks off it.

Disclaimer: I went to uni with Suraya. Though we did run into her at parties in the UK, based on mutual (English) friends-of-friends, proving that there is some odd flocking behaviour going on all over the place.

Emma Hart
From: Christchurch
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 2629
Moderator

Posted at 3:03PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

I seem to recall consenting provided I got a few bob when the pictures inevitably ended up on the internet.

Awesome. Which one is you?

(In the large photos there you'll be able to tell that the guy on the cover has dirty bare feet. Woof.)

Sacha
From: Ak
Since: May 2008
Posts: 5331

Posted at 3:19PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

Saw story about Suraya's "thinking woman's crumpet" over the weekend. KAOS, eh? Hot.

Emma Hart
From: Christchurch
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 2629
Moderator

Posted at 3:22PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

Hot.

Not wishing to be objectifying or anything, but fucking ay.

Russell Brown
From: Auckland
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 9068
Moderator

Posted at 3:30PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

I'm thinking Jack must be quite hot too.

Russell Brown
From: Auckland
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 9068
Moderator

Posted at 3:34PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

Oh. Totally not.

81stcolumn
From: Nawthshaw
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 508

Posted at 3:37PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

Not that there's anything wrong with that, but I've wondered if they're really that interchangeable.

Personal experience suggests not.......

Chicks don't dig me but........

JackElder
From: Wellington
Since: Mar 2008
Posts: 467

Posted at 3:37PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

Disclaimer: I am not, nor have I ever been, a model in this magazine. I'm more just confirming that I would have been if I'd been asked. ;) The gay German porn site thing is true, though, but it's totally unrelated. Actually, it was a piercing fetish website run by a group of German guys, so I'm not sure you'd really call it porn, but the story sounds better that way.

Frankly, I am not the typical phenotype for models from this publication. I'd be a bit more suited to appearing in publications with titles like "Big and Beardie" or "Long-Haired Hippy Layabouts".

JackElder
From: Wellington
Since: Mar 2008
Posts: 467

Posted at 3:38PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

2nd disclaimer: I am not, nor have I ever been, a cabinet minister. Though I did used to get his crank calls back in the 90s when I was a student (he had an unlisted number, I didn't = late night calls from drunk people wanting to annoy the minister of police).

Sacha
From: Ak
Since: May 2008
Posts: 5331

Posted at 3:38PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

The best Auckland KAOS hit I saw was dropping a cardboard fridge box on someone in the quad from the infamously hazy student common room. These days, it'd be a Youtube phenomenon.

Xeno
Since: Oct 2008
Posts: 13

Posted at 3:39PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

Heh, also in the interests of full disclosure I should mention that I got this interview in the most Kiwi of ways. Suraya is an old friend of an ex-flatmate of mine, and like Corset-Making Jo, she's ex-KAOS. I'm starting to think that organisation is actually GOOD for people.

Not wanting to be presumptuous, she's more of a new friend than an old friend, she had been and gone from Vic KAOS before I got to Wellington. We have a bunch of people in common.

Of course, in the most Kiwi of ways, I've been passing the link to women who post pictures of pretty boys on the internet, many of whom I used to know at Uni.

Russell Brown
From: Auckland
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 9068
Moderator

Posted at 3:49PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

Frankly, I am not the typical phenotype for models from this publication. I'd be a bit more suited to appearing in publications with titles like "Big and Beardie" or "Long-Haired Hippy Layabouts".

Ah. You're a bear.

My friend Dave in London used to look with great lust at pictures of the Grateful Dead. No, really.

giovanni tiso
From: Wellington
Since: Jun 2007
Posts: 4393

Posted at 3:57PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

This may just about definitively prove that I'm not a woman, but is it me, or is Filament in fact the *least* sexy word in the English language?

Emma Hart
From: Christchurch
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 2629
Moderator

Posted at 4:03PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

This may just about definitively prove that I'm not a woman, but is it me, or is Filament in fact the *least* sexy word in the English language?

Not quite - that'd be 'moist', or 'turgid' or something, but I did wonder. Suraya says:

A filament is:
* the bit of a light bulb that lights up.
* the part of a flower that holds the male reproductive stuff.
* the largest structure in the known universe.

(Stamens have two parts, a filament and an anther. The biology nerd in me twitched.)

Alan Perrott
From: Auckland
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 117

Posted at 4:16PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

So it's flowery word for knob?

Now that's class.

Rich Lock
From: Devonport
Since: Feb 2007
Posts: 907

Posted at 4:17PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

This may just about definitively prove that I'm not a woman, but is it me, or is Filament in fact the *least* sexy word in the English language?

Feel free to post your alternatives.

I'm quite curious to see what people suggest.

giovanni tiso
From: Wellington
Since: Jun 2007
Posts: 4393

Posted at 4:18PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

the largest structure in the known universe.

The frankest admission that size does matter I've come across to date.

Emma Hart
From: Christchurch
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 2629
Moderator

Posted at 4:22PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

The frankest admission that size does matter I've come across to date.

Male Friend: I thought size didn't matter.

Me: Yeah, women lie.

giovanni tiso
From: Wellington
Since: Jun 2007
Posts: 4393

Posted at 4:26PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

Me: Yeah, women lie.

Males had a hunch.

Rob Hosking
From: South Roseneath
Since: Nov 2006
Posts: 705

Posted at 4:27PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

is Filament in fact the *least* sexy word in the English language?

It would have to be WAAAYYY behind words like 'infrastructure' or 'depreciation' or 'polypropelene'.

I actually had the opposite response - what a great name. Nothing to do with the actual meaning, all to do with the way the consonants play together.

JackElder
From: Wellington
Since: Mar 2008
Posts: 467

Posted at 4:34PM on 3 Jun 09. Permalink.

Everyone lies, man.

Good divisive word: "moist". People either think it's sexy or revolting.

« Older

Newer »

Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Please login to post a reply.

Public Address | System (Home)

Recent Blog Posts (RSS)

Ads by Scoop

Public Address Cafe (RSS)

Up Front: Newsflash: Women Have Eyes