what absolute nonsense. There has been a revolution in attitudes among the population regarding gay people, to give just one example. All you have to do is track the last 25 years of Social Attitude surveys to see it happening
There's far more acceptance of gay people today, that's for sure, but I'm sceptical of the accuracy of surveys. Some people will answer how they think they should, rather than how they really think. I don't think we've come as far as you say we have, (but we have progressed, and continue to)
Evidence of which sits on DS as we speak on this very TV Shows forum. "Best Boobs On TV" seems to be the most popular by far thread with over 3 MILLION views and over 7,200 written comments, and is on part 2 as well.
People get banned for mild quips, yet that whole thread stays there to the shame and embarrassment of this entire forum.
I thought it quite an interesting programme. I turned 4 in 1970 and turned 13 in 1979, some of the programmes and adverts I remember, some I don't. I don't remember my parents ever watching the likes of Benny Hill or Miss World.
It is interesting that even in the 70's some of these programmes were considered a bi too much. The Alison Steadman programme that was pulled and the Leslie Phillips programme that was shifted to a later slot. Also the shampoo advert that was pulled. So there was some uncomfortable feelings even then.
As it I watched the programme I wondered who was behind these programmes? And the same question was asked b one of the contributors towards the end. And it was middle aged men who were in charge of TV production. It was these people that felt this acceptable. There were only 3 channels then, an even then only 2 were popularly watched, BBC1 and ITV. So viewing figures of 10-15m are not really indicators of popularity. That was all there was to watch.
It is of course easy to sit here, 40 years later, and mock what we watched then. We have the jungle programme on at the moment, and no doubt we will see in our newspapers in the next few one of the female contestants as the shower, wearing a bikini! No doubt on factor some female singer will appear wearing very little and no doubt the next series of BB will be hoping for a quick flash of female flesh at some point.
Just watched this today and agree with others about the faux shock/outrage expressed though of course it's trendy now. Personally i thought they needed to wind their necks in, stop behaving like a bunch of prudish sissies, and learn how to laugh.
Terry Wogan judging a beauty contest..."how old are you love"...."16"....."wow you are a big girl". I could hear the feminist fundamentalist fruit loops screeching 'perve'...'sexual harassment' and all the other rubbish.
Lewis Collins diving on top of Pamela Stephenson to rip her blouse open and expose......oh shockerrr....a white bra (ermmm it's the same thing as a bikini top folks). Well, at the time Collins was Mr Hot Rocks for the girlies and Pam Stephenson did it for the men.
Nice tits.
I was over 20 by the start of the 70's so nothing 'shocked' me back then just as what i saw on this documentary did nothing other than to remind me of how normal life was back then and how priggish and uptight folk have become since.....particularly those born during the 70's and after!
It is of course easy to sit here, 40 years later, and mock what we watched then. We have the jungle programme on at the moment, and no doubt we will see in our newspapers in the next few one of the female contestants as the shower, wearing a bikini! No doubt on factor some female singer will appear wearing very little and no doubt the next series of BB will be hoping for a quick flash of female flesh at some point.
But it works both ways...............its just that when women ogle men people conveniently choose to ignore it.
Every single year on Strictly the male celebs and male dancers are encouraged to rip their shirts off and show their muscley bare chests. The judges and presenters swoon and comment on their physique. On X-Factor the guys will also be seen wearing revelaing clothes and be leered at and perved upon as much as any women.
Also at "respectable" sporting events like Wimbledon, whenever a hunky male player takes his shirt off to change it, we are met with hundreds of female wolf whistles and whoo whoo's. This is laughed off and seen as perfectly acceptable. Imagine if men in the crowd started wolf whistleing and shouting "phwoooor" whenever Maria Sharapova bent over. I hope you get my point.
Quite a strange coincidence, but I watched 'Gotham' on Channel 5 last night and a character called Harvey Bullock had a line which was pretty much the same as the 'Therapist/The Rapist' joke by Ted Rogers in '3.2.1.'.
Last night that was, not the 1970s.
But it works both ways...............its just that when women ogle men people conveniently choose to ignore it.
Every single year on Strictly the male celebs and male dancers are encouraged to rip their shirts off and show their muscley bare chests. The judges and presenters swoon and comment on their physique. On X-Factor the guys will also be seen wearing revelaing clothes and be leered at and perved upon as much as any women.
Also at "respectable" sporting events like Wimbledon, whenever a hunky male player takes his shirt off to change it, we are met with hundreds of female wolf whistles and whoo whoo's. This is laughed off and seen as perfectly acceptable. Imagine if men in the crowd started wolf whistleing and shouting "phwoooor" whenever Maria Sharapova bent over. I hope you get my point.
You, and others who've made similar comments, seem to resent the fact that after thousands of years of being second class citizens women are now so empowered that they can openly treat men like sex objects. This is something to celebrate, not castigate.
Let's never lose sight of the fact that it's only the last 30 years where women (and non-whites and gays) have started to get to a position in society that by any reasonable measurement represents equality. This is why we're debating this on a thread devoted to a programme that is dedicated to 1970's television, and why it was a programme that is genuinely jaw dropping to generations born after. It is another world, and very hard to understand how any rational person could deem it a better one.
You don't have to be an islamic fundamentalist to hold some antiquated cultural views, which presumably their relatives still do back in Iran.
and you know this how? I have no idea what relatives Shappi has 'back in Iran', let alone what their views are - as I said, do you go in for stereotypes much?
We seem to be living in a genderflipped version, where MEN are seen as subhuman...
Being autistic - I was frightened by the ramifications of Jessica Valenti suggesting that men be paid less for reasons, and Emma Watsom wanting to enslave me - or set whiteknights on me to kill me because sor some reason I am a "creep" for breathing.
Or something.
Or Krista Femitheist wanting to kill me - because when Gender Feminism took over from Equity feminism (got no problems with Christina Hoff-Sommers - but Gloria Steinem scares me as an autistic male), its calculus would suggest that to them I shouldn't exist as I am disabled and male.
Indeed, have a look at the S Club 7's CIN Performance thread where you'll find this pearl of wisdom.
Rachel fit as ever,
Jo banging tits, wink!
But surely if you believe in equality you'd recognise that women often speak about 'fit' men in the same way wouldn't you?
When it comes to sex and sexual fantasies don't men and women objectify the opposite gender to some extent? Isn't that quite natural?
I know that everyone has individual takes on this, but personally in this show I had more of a problem in some clips not with women being objectified in itself, but that they were objectified and treated as if they are dumb in general.
As long as the opposite gender isn't objectified in normal everyday interactions where everyone should have the right to be treated with equal dignity and respect as a human being, then the sexual objectification thing isn't as much an issue with me, for the reason I gave above.
When it comes to sex as a separate thing I think men and women often objectify each other, and as long as there is a mutual agreement and no boundaries are crossed in that particular situation I don't see it as terrible as it is often made out to be by some.
I only see it as a problem when people take that sexual objectification, and their view of the opposite gender is distorted in everyday real life. And that has more to do with children being brought up in a grounded and reasonable way where they have the ability to perceive context.
I think that this show was quite poorly researched because I thought that the examples they showed were quite mild for the most part, and there have been much worse clips that could have been shown from the 1970s which have been on other modern retrospective shows in recent years. They probably missed a trick if their intention was to show the worst examples.
You, and others who've made similar comments, seem to resent the fact that after thousands of years of being second class citizens women are now so empowered that they can openly treat men like sex objects. This is something to celebrate, not castigate.
Let's never lose sight of the fact that it's only the last 30 years where women (and non-whites and gays) have started to get to a position in society that by any reasonable measurement represents equality. This is why we're debating this on a thread devoted to a programme that is dedicated to 1970's television, and why it was a programme that is genuinely jaw dropping to generations born after. It is another world, and very hard to understand how any rational person could deem it a better one.
So no, I don't get your point.
I'm sorry but I think you're being rather ignorant there . I just don't think you're giving the 70's it's due (rather like the programme) .
The 70's saw huge advances in the social culture for everyone , just go back to 1960 - you couldn't openly discuss straight sex , let alone gay or any other . By the 70's there was a lot more freedom and openess , there were openly gay people on tv , something you couldn't have had 10 years earlier ..
and women's rights and ethnic issues did make a lot of progress in the 70s , this was when the culture/tv really started to talk about these issues .
you can't just look back at a time and deride it in comparison to now (we have little idea what now is like , they'll be telling us that in 50 years ) you have to gauge a period by what had gone before it , and I think the 70s made a lot of progress and brought much into the open .
The 70's saw huge advances in the social culture for everyone , just go back to 1960 - you couldn't openly discuss straight sex , let alone gay or any other . By the 70's there was a lot more freedom and openess , there were openly gay people on tv , something you couldn't have had 10 years earlier .
Series 1 of Porridge (1974) is currently available on Virgin's on demand. I was quite surprised at how matter of fact the characters treat Lukewarm's homosexuality given it was only 7 years after legalisation.
Of course there are many questionable references to homosexuals and some very dubious racist language - but overall the main characters are very liberal in their attitudes given what a dark age channel 4 seems to think it was. Even Mr Mackay despises all prisoners equally!:D
Series 1 of Porridge (1974) is currently available on Virgin's on demand. I was quite surprised at how matter of fact the characters treat Lukewarm's homosexuality given it was only 7 years after legalisation.
Of course there are many questionable references to homosexuals and some very dubious racist language - but overall the main characters are very liberal in their attitudes given what a dark age channel 4 seems to think it was. Even Mr Mackay despises all prisoners equally!:D
he's been probably in the nick for years before due to his preferences and those who generally seem to be serial offenders would of been used to 'insert anti gay name' being around them and would of actually of learned more about tolerance since they spent more time with them than those outside
I'm not sure how old Lukewarm is, but Christopher Biggins would've been 19 in 1967 when homosexuality was legalised, so I doubt the character would've served time for his sexuality - though his partner Trevor looks quite a bit older.
I'm pretty sure Lukewarm was in for petty theft - Wiki says we don't know his crime, but he did manage to steal Barrowclough's watch off his wrist.
It is of course easy to sit here, 40 years later, and mock what we watched then. We have the jungle programme on at the moment, and no doubt we will see in our newspapers in the next few one of the female contestants as the shower, wearing a bikini! No doubt on factor some female singer will appear wearing very little and no doubt the next series of BB will be hoping for a quick flash of female flesh at some point.
Not just a bikini but a bare bum. Of course the context is entirely different from, say, a woman being reduced to her underwear in a Benny Hill sketch and it would be churlish to chastise anyone these days for appearing semi-nude in a game show, after all we're more relaxed about depicting the human body in a non sexualised context than in previous times.
But of course that doesn't stop the tabloids taking it out of context and happily all reproducing a titillating photo of Kendra's bum, alongside articles about celebrity vacuum Kim Kardashian posing nude or actress Jennifer Lawrence accidentally exposing her breast in a low-cut dress.
So sexist depictions of women are no longer the staple of prime time TV but there's no denying that there is still a significant interest in glimpses of female celebrities without their clothes on. Even if it's by and large women choosing to appear nude of their own volition.
I think we've very rightly come a long way from those depictions of women as dumb, as mindless sex objects, as "pieces of meat" paraded around under the admiring male gaze in beauty contests, as mere mannequins to have their garments torn to reveal them in their underwear. Now we can appreciate women as equals with brains and personalities and treat them with respect and dignity. Except we're still thinking "phwoar, nice tits" or "nice bum" but we know that it's no longer acceptable or appropriate to say those things out loud, except in the safe anonymity of the internet in reader comments and discussion forums.
Not just a bikini but a bare bum. Of course the context is entirely different from, say, a woman being reduced to her underwear in a Benny Hill sketch and it would be churlish to chastise anyone these days for appearing semi-nude in a game show, after all we're more relaxed about depicting the human body in a non sexualised context than in previous times.
But of course that doesn't stop the tabloids taking it out of context and happily all reproducing a titillating photo of Kendra's bum, alongside articles about celebrity vacuum Kim Kardashian posing nude or actress Jennifer Lawrence accidentally exposing her breast in a low-cut dress.
So sexist depictions of women are no longer the staple of prime time TV but there's no denying that there is still a significant interest in glimpses of female celebrities without their clothes on. Even if it's by and large women choosing to appear nude of their own volition.
I think we've very rightly come a long way from those depictions of women as dumb, as mindless sex objects, as "pieces of meat" paraded around under the admiring male gaze in beauty contests, as mere mannequins to have their garments torn to reveal them in their underwear. Now we can appreciate women as equals with brains and personalities and treat them with respect and dignity. Except we're still thinking "phwoar, nice tits" or "nice bum" but we know that it's no longer acceptable or appropriate to say those things out loud, except in the safe anonymity of the internet in reader comments and discussion forums.
have we come a long way tho ? what about all the anorexic Fashion models , the catwalks etc. these zombies that are still affecting how women feel about themselves .
I find that far more dangerous than those old beauty pageants .
have we come a long way tho ? what about all the anorexic Fashion models , the catwalks etc. these zombies that are still affecting how women feel about themselves .
I find that far more dangerous than those old beauty pageants .
.
Well I'm talking in the context of 1970s TV shows but we'll digress a little to discuss fashion. Ironically it's got nothing to do with male sexist attitudes, in fact quite the opposite. Fashion designers don't want catwalk shows to be like beauty pageants. They're there to sell clothes, not the women wearing them. So they have systematically desexualised women (no curves, flat chests etc.) so that models are largely anonymous so that people notice the clothes and not the people wearing them. Fashion models are basically just walking coat hangers. They're not expected to think or talk but just to walk up and down with fixed, blank expressions. The clothes are the main attraction.
You can bet your bottom dollar that if straight men were in charge of fashion then models would look like glamour models with big boobs and bums
But fashion models do get noticed in spite of their anonymity - they are, after all, real people with real thoughts and feelings and sadly that means that young women in particular have been fooled into thinking that the "model" look is aspirational and fashion designers have done absolutely nothing to disabuse them of that notion - why should they? They need a steady supply of new meat so if girls want to be models then it's all grist for the mill.
Comments
There's far more acceptance of gay people today, that's for sure, but I'm sceptical of the accuracy of surveys. Some people will answer how they think they should, rather than how they really think. I don't think we've come as far as you say we have, (but we have progressed, and continue to)
Now let's get this right. You think that you are the majority in the way you think, but that they think they are the majority in the way they think.
I'll have to have more of a think on that one.
It is interesting that even in the 70's some of these programmes were considered a bi too much. The Alison Steadman programme that was pulled and the Leslie Phillips programme that was shifted to a later slot. Also the shampoo advert that was pulled. So there was some uncomfortable feelings even then.
As it I watched the programme I wondered who was behind these programmes? And the same question was asked b one of the contributors towards the end. And it was middle aged men who were in charge of TV production. It was these people that felt this acceptable. There were only 3 channels then, an even then only 2 were popularly watched, BBC1 and ITV. So viewing figures of 10-15m are not really indicators of popularity. That was all there was to watch.
It is of course easy to sit here, 40 years later, and mock what we watched then. We have the jungle programme on at the moment, and no doubt we will see in our newspapers in the next few one of the female contestants as the shower, wearing a bikini! No doubt on factor some female singer will appear wearing very little and no doubt the next series of BB will be hoping for a quick flash of female flesh at some point.
bbl bbl bbl
You're confused about hard facts that are freely available? The prejudiced are in the minority, it's really very simple.
But it works both ways...............its just that when women ogle men people conveniently choose to ignore it.
Every single year on Strictly the male celebs and male dancers are encouraged to rip their shirts off and show their muscley bare chests. The judges and presenters swoon and comment on their physique. On X-Factor the guys will also be seen wearing revelaing clothes and be leered at and perved upon as much as any women.
Also at "respectable" sporting events like Wimbledon, whenever a hunky male player takes his shirt off to change it, we are met with hundreds of female wolf whistles and whoo whoo's. This is laughed off and seen as perfectly acceptable. Imagine if men in the crowd started wolf whistleing and shouting "phwoooor" whenever Maria Sharapova bent over. I hope you get my point.
And women are all fine upstanding pillars of the community who don't perve over men at all?
You stated that we have returned to Victorian times, which really is complete bollocks.
Last night that was, not the 1970s.
You, and others who've made similar comments, seem to resent the fact that after thousands of years of being second class citizens women are now so empowered that they can openly treat men like sex objects. This is something to celebrate, not castigate.
Let's never lose sight of the fact that it's only the last 30 years where women (and non-whites and gays) have started to get to a position in society that by any reasonable measurement represents equality. This is why we're debating this on a thread devoted to a programme that is dedicated to 1970's television, and why it was a programme that is genuinely jaw dropping to generations born after. It is another world, and very hard to understand how any rational person could deem it a better one.
So no, I don't get your point.
You might be right, but what evidence do you base that assertion on, and what makes you trust that evidence ?
Indeed, have a look at the S Club 7's CIN Performance thread where you'll find this pearl of wisdom.
Rachel fit as ever,
Jo banging tits, wink!
and you know this how? I have no idea what relatives Shappi has 'back in Iran', let alone what their views are - as I said, do you go in for stereotypes much?
Being autistic - I was frightened by the ramifications of Jessica Valenti suggesting that men be paid less for reasons, and Emma Watsom wanting to enslave me - or set whiteknights on me to kill me because sor some reason I am a "creep" for breathing.
Or something.
Or Krista Femitheist wanting to kill me - because when Gender Feminism took over from Equity feminism (got no problems with Christina Hoff-Sommers - but Gloria Steinem scares me as an autistic male), its calculus would suggest that to them I shouldn't exist as I am disabled and male.
Am I a Western version of a Dalit?
Actually i think Tina looked the hottest
But surely if you believe in equality you'd recognise that women often speak about 'fit' men in the same way wouldn't you?
When it comes to sex and sexual fantasies don't men and women objectify the opposite gender to some extent? Isn't that quite natural?
I know that everyone has individual takes on this, but personally in this show I had more of a problem in some clips not with women being objectified in itself, but that they were objectified and treated as if they are dumb in general.
As long as the opposite gender isn't objectified in normal everyday interactions where everyone should have the right to be treated with equal dignity and respect as a human being, then the sexual objectification thing isn't as much an issue with me, for the reason I gave above.
When it comes to sex as a separate thing I think men and women often objectify each other, and as long as there is a mutual agreement and no boundaries are crossed in that particular situation I don't see it as terrible as it is often made out to be by some.
I only see it as a problem when people take that sexual objectification, and their view of the opposite gender is distorted in everyday real life. And that has more to do with children being brought up in a grounded and reasonable way where they have the ability to perceive context.
I think that this show was quite poorly researched because I thought that the examples they showed were quite mild for the most part, and there have been much worse clips that could have been shown from the 1970s which have been on other modern retrospective shows in recent years. They probably missed a trick if their intention was to show the worst examples.
I'm sorry but I think you're being rather ignorant there . I just don't think you're giving the 70's it's due (rather like the programme) .
The 70's saw huge advances in the social culture for everyone , just go back to 1960 - you couldn't openly discuss straight sex , let alone gay or any other . By the 70's there was a lot more freedom and openess , there were openly gay people on tv , something you couldn't have had 10 years earlier ..
and women's rights and ethnic issues did make a lot of progress in the 70s , this was when the culture/tv really started to talk about these issues .
you can't just look back at a time and deride it in comparison to now (we have little idea what now is like , they'll be telling us that in 50 years ) you have to gauge a period by what had gone before it , and I think the 70s made a lot of progress and brought much into the open .
.
Series 1 of Porridge (1974) is currently available on Virgin's on demand. I was quite surprised at how matter of fact the characters treat Lukewarm's homosexuality given it was only 7 years after legalisation.
Of course there are many questionable references to homosexuals and some very dubious racist language - but overall the main characters are very liberal in their attitudes given what a dark age channel 4 seems to think it was. Even Mr Mackay despises all prisoners equally!:D
he's been probably in the nick for years before due to his preferences and those who generally seem to be serial offenders would of been used to 'insert anti gay name' being around them and would of actually of learned more about tolerance since they spent more time with them than those outside
I'm pretty sure Lukewarm was in for petty theft - Wiki says we don't know his crime, but he did manage to steal Barrowclough's watch off his wrist.
Yes quite...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2838481/I-m-Celebrity-Kendra-Wilkinson-shows-jealous-fears-Nadia-Forde-outshine-her.html
http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/im-celebrity-2014-kendra-wilkinson-4644061
http://www.dailystar.co.uk/showbiz-tv/im-a-celebrity-get-me-out-of-here/410894/I-m-A-Celebrity-Kendra-Wilkinson-Nadia-Forde
Not just a bikini but a bare bum. Of course the context is entirely different from, say, a woman being reduced to her underwear in a Benny Hill sketch and it would be churlish to chastise anyone these days for appearing semi-nude in a game show, after all we're more relaxed about depicting the human body in a non sexualised context than in previous times.
But of course that doesn't stop the tabloids taking it out of context and happily all reproducing a titillating photo of Kendra's bum, alongside articles about celebrity vacuum Kim Kardashian posing nude or actress Jennifer Lawrence accidentally exposing her breast in a low-cut dress.
So sexist depictions of women are no longer the staple of prime time TV but there's no denying that there is still a significant interest in glimpses of female celebrities without their clothes on. Even if it's by and large women choosing to appear nude of their own volition.
I think we've very rightly come a long way from those depictions of women as dumb, as mindless sex objects, as "pieces of meat" paraded around under the admiring male gaze in beauty contests, as mere mannequins to have their garments torn to reveal them in their underwear. Now we can appreciate women as equals with brains and personalities and treat them with respect and dignity. Except we're still thinking "phwoar, nice tits" or "nice bum" but we know that it's no longer acceptable or appropriate to say those things out loud, except in the safe anonymity of the internet in reader comments and discussion forums.
have we come a long way tho ? what about all the anorexic Fashion models , the catwalks etc. these zombies that are still affecting how women feel about themselves .
I find that far more dangerous than those old beauty pageants .
.
Well I'm talking in the context of 1970s TV shows but we'll digress a little to discuss fashion. Ironically it's got nothing to do with male sexist attitudes, in fact quite the opposite. Fashion designers don't want catwalk shows to be like beauty pageants. They're there to sell clothes, not the women wearing them. So they have systematically desexualised women (no curves, flat chests etc.) so that models are largely anonymous so that people notice the clothes and not the people wearing them. Fashion models are basically just walking coat hangers. They're not expected to think or talk but just to walk up and down with fixed, blank expressions. The clothes are the main attraction.
You can bet your bottom dollar that if straight men were in charge of fashion then models would look like glamour models with big boobs and bums
But fashion models do get noticed in spite of their anonymity - they are, after all, real people with real thoughts and feelings and sadly that means that young women in particular have been fooled into thinking that the "model" look is aspirational and fashion designers have done absolutely nothing to disabuse them of that notion - why should they? They need a steady supply of new meat so if girls want to be models then it's all grist for the mill.
Well, we're waiting.