The magazine finally arrived, and everything was fine until I got to page 41...

So, is it going to become normal practice for NSU to advertise this kind of card set? I can handle the occasional scantily-clad female, the Benchwarmer and Playboy adverts, because those kind of cards are going to sell when the vast majority of card collectors are male.

However, correct me if I'm wrong, but when you have to stick a banner over a certain part of a woman's anatomy it's pretty obvious you're dealing with a certain type of card?

I for one wasn't impressed, sorry. I know it's money for the magazine, but if far more innocent 'topics' are going to be censored on this board I think that we should see some consistency, that's all. I'd like to hear the other female opinions on this as well as the male...

--
xSaBx :: Mistress of Stuff ::

'I swear I am completely unimpressed by clever answers'
REMEMBER: Take out the 'removemefirst' from my e-mail address to reply...

Ah hah! Someone else noticed too!! I alluded to it in my rants about people's objections to Wendi's post. We can't infer or suggest certain things, but the magazine can run ads like the one in question -- as well as near-nudity from Playboy and Benchwarmers -- and (as you already accurately pointed out) the male element can comment on whatever, whenever, they please.

That was what brought on my point about double standards. If there are going to be explicit standards, we all must live by them (not only when it's convenient).

Regards,

Paul Russell

"Don't touch that please, your primitive intellect wouldn't understand things with alloys and compositions and things with...molecular structures." -- Ash, Army of Darkness

This topic has come up before (a little over a year ago) when a previous issue of NSU (7 issues ago) had ads that related to this subject. You may wish to CLICK HERE to see what Card Talk Members thought then.


@@@ ScottEvil

"I am a WATCHER, part of a secret society of men and women who observe and record but never interfere, we know the truth about immortals ....... In the end there can be only one !"

I'm female.

Ah, it doesn't bother me. I've seen pictures like that in magazines since I could pick up a magazine. I dislike pictures depicting physical violence more than girlie pictures.

I just turn the page. I leave the censorship to others.

"...whatever floats your boat..."

Happy Stargating!

Hmmmm, in the thread linked above Harris stated, "When ads are pictorial in nature, we usually scrutinize them more carefully." This is considered careful? I'd hate to think what would appear if it were scrutinized haphazardly.

Frankly, I'm not trying to knock the ad. It doesn't bother me...the hypocrisy of this whole censorship issue is the crux of my problem. NSU/Card Talk can't have it both ways.

Regards,

Paul Russell

"Don't touch that please, your primitive intellect wouldn't understand things with alloys and compositions and things with...molecular structures." -- Ash, Army of Darkness

quote:

---

Originally posted by MiniMe:
You may wish to see what Card Talk Members thought then.

---

Sorry, Mini, but this isn't the same, this is a woman who has deliberately had a part of her body blanked out to make her 'decent'. If you look at the other two ads in the mag for 'female photography' cards they are tasteful and acceptable. This one is not, I'm sorry.

--
xSaBx :: Mistress of Stuff ::

'I swear I am completely unimpressed by clever answers'
REMEMBER: Take out the 'removemefirst' from my e-mail address to reply...

--- xSaBx:

- You may wish to refer back to that issue of NSU (13.3) where the ads (which featured live models) ranged in degree of provocativeness in about the same levels as they do in this issue.


@@@ ScottEvil

"I am a WATCHER, part of a secret society of men and women who observe and record but never interfere, we know the truth about immortals ....... In the end there can be only one !"

quote:

---

Originally posted by MiniMe:
You may wish to refer back to that issue of NSU (13.3) where the ads ranged in degree of provocativeness in about the same levels as they do in this issue.

---

Okay, let's say this slowly, before I get mad.

This ad (singular) HAS A BANNER OVER A PAIR OF WOMAN'S BARE BREASTS. You may think this is a similar example from what has previously been used, I DON'T. You can keep telling me to look back at the past but it is NOT relevant, plus it won't change how I feel in the current situation.

When Harris gets back I'd like a statement from HIM about this, you telling me what's already happened is just not the same, and repeating it is not going to help. Sorry, I don't mean to get short with you, but in this case I think the advert is unacceptable, especially in light of what has been censored on this board IN THE LAST WEEK.

Okay?

--
xSaBx :: Mistress of Stuff ::

'I swear I am completely unimpressed by clever answers'
REMEMBER: Take out the 'removemefirst' from my e-mail address to reply...

--- xSaBx:

- My initial post was not intended to engage you in "Combative Posts" nor was it to state my opinion or try to "sway" you in your opinion. You had asked what other Card Talk Members thought. I merely provided a link to a previous discussion that was brought up from a NSU issue last year that had the same range of pictorial ads. (which was what my second post was explaining, but you didn't want to hear that.)

(Also note the timestamps of Paul's and my initial posts. I had composed my response before his had posted and was not responding to his post or disregarding what he'd said in his post).

- I suppose since you're speaking slowly, so should I. The ads in that previous issue ranged from tame to provacative (the latter being fairly "descriptive"). I was not going to describe them in detail as tempers were already flaring and I didn't what to be accused of inflaming them through "callous detailed descriptions", hence the carefully worded phrase which I thought you'd understand what I was saying.

- Yes, please express your views. By all means discuss it with Harris when he returns from SDCC. But please do not let your anger (which is understandable) lash out at other members. That's all I have to say in this matter.


@@@ ScottEvil

"I am a WATCHER, part of a secret society of men and women who observe and record but never interfere, we know the truth about immortals ....... In the end there can be only one !"

I have deleted this post because, quite frankly, I was out of line. MiniMe, if you are reading this, please see my public apology in the 'User Announcements' Thread.

--
xSaBx :: Mistress of Stuff ::

'I swear I am completely unimpressed by clever answers'
REMEMBER: Take out the 'removemefirst' from my e-mail address to reply...

[This message was edited by xSaBx on July 19, 2003 at 08:32 AM.]

**
This ad (singular) HAS A BANNER OVER A PAIR OF WOMAN'S BARE BREASTS
**

Funny thing was, the other ad, the Sports Illustrated ad was in a way MORE explicit then this one as I'm pretty sure I can see stuff through that suit that's hidden in the censored ones...
Sigh, conflicted on this one I am. I adore Harris and NSU in a big waybut, I too, found a few of the ads a bit much, but, but, but, we can't deny that they likely generated alot of revenue in all those ads, one that can't be ignored in this sort of economy.
I've obviously missed whatever thread was censored this week that is causing some distrss, but I would think it owuld be alot different for a carefully placed, censored ad to be moitored, then it is a bunch of crazy gooks like us. With so many people interacting and so many different personalitys and tastes, it makes sense to be more strict in a board situation then an ad, as it can quickly go awry here and become messy, something not as likely to happen in a print ad that just sorta sits there. As I said, I'm not sure what censoring took place, so I may be talking outta both sides of my mouth

quote:

---

Originally posted by STCardGeek:
I too, found a few of the ads a bit much, but, but, but, we can't deny that they likely generated alot of revenue in all those ads, one that can't be ignored in this sort of economy.

---

We all know that those kind of ads (always full page) make money. The other two are considerably more tasteful, that particular one just looks like it could be the front of a tacky pornographic magazine! I think I would be fine with the ad if the picture were different: the woman could actually be wearing less, but if she at least had clothing on her breasts and not a label which is only there to allow the ad to be used in the first place...

I should point out I am well aware that because I am in a minority when it comes to card collecting (ie female) there are some things I just have to put up with. I don't mind that at all, but there are limits to what is tasteful and what is tasteless...

--
xSaBx :: Mistress of Stuff ::

'I swear I am completely unimpressed by clever answers'
REMEMBER: Take out the 'removemefirst' from my e-mail address to reply...

I just want to know where the half naked men ads are? I'm getting kind of tired of always seeing Playboy and Benchwarmer ads for the guys? It's our turn! Equal Rights

I have always, always, supported NSU's right to print whatever they wanted in the magazine, but even I took a step back when I saw the Asian Ecstasy ad...

Maybe the banner should be a little bigger next time (not that she had anything to hide- I've shown more cleavage in Philly show photos- unintentionally, of course )

Personally, and I may be in the minority here, I would prefer not to see any ads for adult/porn cards in NSU. I'm sure the ad revenue is usefull, but this is a family magazine.

As for the question of censorship, censorship occurs when the government denies a person their first amendment right to speak. The publishers of a privately owned magazine can print whatever they choose. If they don't want to show pictures of scantily clad women (or men) this is their choice. Obviously NSU has chosen to print these ads.

Well, we could always donate the finds Harris owuld lose if he said no
Still, I'm woth OWM. Maybe Harris can solicte some beefcake ads.
Still, thereis a point to be made that cheesecake vs. *booping* out nudidity (is that a word???) is a bit different, it does have a more oooogey air to it and it's not something that all are wanting to see, but, in the end, our biggest freedom is our fingers, flip that page or tear it out . NSU gets the revenue (and they make these sets cause there is interest) and we don't have to look at them!

Having just seen said advert, I wonder whether NSU stated that the banner had to be put there in order to be included, or whether the manufacturer has that intentionally in all their advertising.

I do agree with xSaBx though that the whole ad looks rather tacky and somewhat reminiscent of a cheap adult magazine, or something you would find in a telephone box here in London. Both of which, I wouldn't care to comment on further, thank you...

-----
"Who knows where thoughts come from? Sometimes, they just appear."


Buffy/Angel collector?
http://www.buffycards.co.uk

quote:

---

Originally posted by buffycards_webmaster:
I do agree with xSaBx though that the whole ad looks rather tacky and somewhat reminiscent of a cheap adult magazine, or something you would find in a telephone box here in London. Both of which, I wouldn't care to comment on further, thank you...

---

Thanks, B-W, I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought this.

--
xSaBx :: Mistress of Stuff ::

'I swear I am completely unimpressed by clever answers'
REMEMBER: Take out the 'removemefirst' from my e-mail address to reply...

Women are in the minority in this hobby, but we are a sizable minority. If enough of us (and some men too) are uncomfortable with ads such as this (and I for one am), I would hope that NSU would take our feelings into consideration. Where do you draw the line? I honestly don't know, but this ad definitely crossed it.

"I only hope that we don't lose sight of one thing - that it was all started by a mouse." ~ Walt Disney

I have to agree with xSaBx here - whilst the other ads (for Benchwarmers, etc) were at least sastefully and prefessionally done, and actually looked like a proper sell sheet, the ad in question was of a highly dubious quality. If I was that image (with or without the obstruction) on a website somewhere, I would assume it was a link to a pron site - and a particularly low life one too.
I have no problems with nudity or semi-nudity, when presented properly. This was not.

That said, NSU is a business, not a hobby, and it needs to continue to generate ad revenue if it is to continue offering the excellent product it does every couple of months. There isn't an answer to this - it's the same in lots of other, more general interest, magazines and newspapers.

Au Res.,
Paul

Sometimes, one pack is not enough...
http://www.users.waitrose.com/~paulbines

quote:

---

Originally posted by buffycards_webmaster:
I do agree with xSaBx though that the whole ad looks rather tacky and somewhat reminiscent of a cheap adult magazine, or something you would find in a telephone box here in London. Both of which, I wouldn't care to comment on further, thank you...

---

After this was brought to my attention, I looked at this ad. It does look tacky. I can handle the ads for the Benchwarmer and Playboy sets because they show some class in their advertising. The Asian Ectacy series ad looks like something you'd see outside an adult book store.

Unfortunately, in our society "sex sells." Why else would bikini-clad women in stiletto heals be draped over a new sports car at the car shows? Or for that matter, why are these same women leaning on a chopper?

This ad crossed the line.