Inappropriate covers on magazines.

Sorry about the typos - tired and fumbling

I couldn't agree more, Flower. I'm turning into a grumpy old woman where magazines are concerned. Most of my DGCs are teenagers now but I still feel angry that such graphic, blatant attention grabbing titles are shoved in their faces.

I have thought this for quite a while now - I have given up buying the magazines which have these covers

I think sensational headlines like that belong on the same shelves as the girlie magazines. Words can be as disturbing to children as photographs. That would meet resistance for being "censorship" though, from some people.

I agree Flower. I'm struggling to express how distasteful I find those attention seeking headlines. The sexual abuse of children with families is horrific for those affected by it. I feel strongly it shouldn't be exploited as a means of selling trashy magazines.

I share Elegran's view that these sensational mags should be out of the sight of children, and to be honest, out of sight full stop. I accept it would be seen as censorship, and that many people would disagree with me.

Another here who is in favour of putting these mags out of sight of children. I know there is a censorship debate, but child protection comes first. Children should learn about what gives on in the world at age-appropriate times, not when it is imposed on them before they are ready to deal with it.

I stopped buying weekly magazines for the very same reason,I even felt embarressed leaving the mags around the house when just mr.g. and I where at home as some of the titles where very near the bone so to speak,the thing is I used to enjoy buying a copy of "Take a Break" years ago as it kept the grey matter working with the quizzes etc but not anymore I'm affraid.They remind me of Jeremy Kyle in print.

Some years ago a friend of mine had her story told in one of these magazines. I think the headline was "I just want to give my son's killer a hug!" It was a tragic story and devastating for her, but it just came over as tawdry and sordid in print. I think she was quite happy with it but I can't imagine who wants to read this stuff.
I fine a lot of the titles quite jaw dropping - heaven knows what children must get from them.

Indeed - who might want to read this stuff? - but someone must do or they would not sell them.

My GS of 5 reads way way beyond his years. The other day he asked me what the periodic table of elements was and I asked him where he had heard of this and he said "I read it on Grandpa's mug!" He would be well able to read this dreadful magazine titles and how would we explain them to him when he is so small?

What joy though Mishap, to have your GS aged 5 reading so well. My father used to get the NoW, but mum cancelled it when I was 3 as I was (so they say) beginning to put letters together. I don't think I've been an over protective parent, and I understand the theoretical debate about censorship. BUT I do not like the idea of children being exposed to adult stuff before they're of an age to have some understanding of them

My OH was a very early reader and it is said that when he arrived at school on his first day aged 4 he sat and read the newspaper in which his pumps were wrapped!

I do think they are really tawdry and unsuitable for kids to be seeing. Unsettling for children for whom the experiences are miles away from their own and bad for those whose lives may be closer to those headlines as they accept that is 'normal' ..which it may be for them..but sad.

These magazines should not be in the sight of children of any age and it worries me that mothers of young children will probably be buying them too.

Who publishes such sensationalist tat? Child abuse is horrific and shouldn't be displayed on the front page of a cheap magazine. It would also be very upsetting for any victims of child abuse to see headlines like these.

I was spelling out something to DD the other day not realising that DGS knew exactly what I was spelling. He is just 6.

Well maybe we should take collective action folks. If there is an offensive cover, pick up the offending magazine and ask to see the manager. Ask them if they can put such magazines in a position where small children cannot easily read them. And while we are at it complain about the naked women.
There has been some success with women complaining to chain stores about "girls toys" and "boys toys" categorisation I believe. If we all complained more....

WH Smith were in trouble a while ago for putting the offensive 'girlie' mags at children's eye level. As far as I remember they resisted but then capitulated. I can't remember who campaigned.

www.christian.org.uk/news/whsmith-refuses-to-hide-lads-mags-from-children

Do any of you remember the 'Top Shelf' campaign in the 70s. I was very involved with that. We used to go into shops and point it out to the owners and ask them to put the offending mags on the top shelf.

Mumsnet indeed rosequartz ... thanks for clearing that up. I guess this is one of the few areas in which christians and feminists are as one.

Not the only one! Read Vicky Beeching's blog on Christian Feminism.

My mother used to read Take a Break. She had complained it had changed and was finding it difficult to find something to replace it as Woman's Own had already sensationalised itself. Is Peoples Friend next?

I gave up reading magazines when the price went over £2.50 and I was finding it difficult to spot the articles amongst the ads.

Flower This is a very good point. These "misery true life" magazines are dreadful.
Glamma Definitely Jeremy Kyle in print.

I think just tackling the newsagents is pretty pointless. This debate needs needs to aimed higher up in the Magazine industry production chain. Not so much headlining of theses graphic abuse stories. There is an element of salacious story telling going on here.

Nelliemoser - agree with you. I loathe this "salacious story telling". It's important that the reality of the risk of abuse within families is openly talked about/written about. Sadly, as the debate has opened up it's been followed by this kind of misery, sensational "real life" type stories as books, or in magazines. Salacious is a good word to describe it.
I agree with rose quartz about the issue of exposing children who either have or haven't had direct experience of the awful experiences that are being sensationalised as "entertainment", and for no other reason than for tawdry magazines to make a profit (at the expense of misery)

To digress slightly - sorry -but is anyone else annoyed by those thick inserts that now litter glossy magazines. they are usually full page advertisements for some overpriced beauty product and the stiffness prevents you from flicking through the pages with ease. I now just cut them all out and throw them away before I start browsing. So put that in your pipes and smoke it, you advertising executives!

And yes I agree about the explicit references on magazine covers - wouldn't buy one on principle.

I only ever see women's magazines at the hairdresser's. I never really noticed that I had stopped buying them, so can't remember when it was - but I don't miss them at all.