All hail Bauer Media for finally listening to the grossed out people of Australia! Amid plummeting sales, Zoo Magazine is finally DEAD.
Yesterday’s October 12, 2015 edition will be the last from the magazine, with the oh-so-charming team unwilling to give up their last chance for a royal ‘F*ck You!’ to the people who led to their demise.
According to Mumbrella, the final quarter of 2014 saw a huge 36 per cent decline in sales to just 24,122 copies sold.
The final issue includes a delightful editor’s note slamming “all the shouty killjoys who’ve spent years telling us – and you – that we’re horrible people because we like beautiful women and taking the piss out of just about anything.”
Um, sorry, lads. That’s not the problem.
The problem was that you continually shamed themselves with outrageously bigoted and small-minded articles embarrassing Hollywood celebs, local stars, politicians, war veterans, and most commonly – women.
It was an epic eye-roll of a magazine, and one that was about as classy as a can of Lynx deodorant. (About as mature, too…)
We for one are happy to see it go down the gurgler. Sorry, boys.
Top Comments
I wish you would be as aggressively vocal about the equally damaging ( probably more so) women's gossip magazines. But nope....crickets. You seem to feel that women can cope with bad taste articles, gossip and invasive pictures of half naked celebs, while men will be led astray.
At least Zoo paid its models (as opposed to stalking them then mocking them for things like weight gain).
Gotta admit, interesting points there.
God I hate these kinds of comments. Firstly, they are two totally different beasts (although men's mags are unmistakably worse, and anyone who disagrees clearly hasn't compared the magazines or relevant studies). Secondly, there is no benefit in not criticising one beast just because other beast exists.
Zoo magazine is intrinsically sexist - not only in its soft-porn images but also in the way it speaks about women and quotes women (or makes up quotes it pretends women has said...which they've been successfully sued for). Read up on the study about 'quotes from rapists vs quotes from men's magazines' if you have any doubt that men's magazines instill and perpetuate rape culture.
Not all magazine's for men are intrinsically sexist or harmful. But Zoo mag is. Shutting down a sexist publication is a win. It is not *sexism against men* - which you seem to be implying, by suggesting men womynz are only mad about men's mags not women's mags.
Women's magazines are harmful in so far as they perpetuate gender roles/expectations* - but at least they treat women as equal humans, with a range of interests, purposes and goals. Men's mags like Zoo not only perpetuate gender roles, but they perpetuate the most sexist, harmful versions of them; that women are there to be fucked and fuckable.
So, in summary - men's magazines are more harmful than women's magazine. But even if they are both harmful, it's still a win to shut down Zoo. I notice that you haven't even commented on whether you think that's a good thing - you just criticise the achievement on the basis that there is other work to be done.
*(eg wear better make up to look sexier, have wilder sex to be a more pleasing partner, cook this amazing food to impress your friends (but remember not to eat it or you'll get fat!))
Also interesting points!
Devil's advocate:
But don't you think the heavy emphasis that women's magazines place on women's appearance - weight, plastic surgery, post-baby bodies, whether or not to wax, bikini shots is just an evaluation of their fuckability by proxy? The men's mags are just more...er, naked about that evaluation.
While they're not in the same league as rape, paparazzi shots are also a coercive and invasive act - and paparazzo pretty much make their living from media consumption by women.
You also mention the made up quotes accompanying the nude shoots - what about the stuff from women's mags saying 'a source close to the couple/kardashian/woman reveals...insert bullshit' - pretty closely related and are probably pretty psychologically damaging to the subject?
If we accept that men's magazines facilitate or promote a rape culture, do we also accept that women's magazines seed and aggravate body image issues? Which of these two issues is more widespread and damaging to women?
Admiring attractive people, which is really also the basis of women's magazines, is not inherently evil. When male actors/models are drooled over, is this men "there to be f---ed and f---able"?
With the men's magazines quotes, I can only speak for myself, but I am aware when things are being joked about, and I would assume most other men are as well.
As for gossip mags regarding women "having a range of interests, purposes and goals", I politely disagree. I think they perpetuate the idea that women are to be judged solely on their appearance. (And that making derisive comments on people's appearance is completely fine, if not standard and expected.)
Regarding "achievement" and "win", as stated above, I don't think keyboard warriors really had much to do with this. And all this stuff is still available online anyway.
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/...
Hurrah, the editors, employees and shareholders of Penthouse, Playboy and Hustler ( to name but a few) thank you for your work.