This is why “lad’s mags” are horrible. You can just about avoid looking at the covers on the newsstands and ignore the rampant sexism inherent in them most of the time. But then they slip up and reveal what they really think of women and their own readers.
Danny Dyer’s advice column in Zoo magazine is currently doing the rounds on Twitter, in which he suggests (I’m guessing “ironically”) that a reader cuts his ex-girlfriend’s face so no-one wants to go out with her anymore.
Zoo, you’re amazing. And if Dyer was actually stupid enough to write this, as oppose to a staff writer doing it for him, he’s amazing too. I have some level of faith that the majority of your readers, while having shitty taste in reading material, are not interested in cutting girls up after getting dumped. Neither are they interested in laughing at the idea of girls – their sisters, friends and girlfriends – getting cut after they dump someone. Because, Zoo, THAT’S WHAT PSYCHOS DO.
Those of them with brains will realise that promoting domestic violence in a national magazine is vile, and whether or not you try and label us as screaming harridans for making a complaint, they will agree with those calling you up on this. Perhaps that why the readership is plummeting.
There’s certainly no way I’d be interested in reading a magazine that belittles, objectifies and incites violence against men. I would love it if lad’s magazines died on their arses. They’re a horrible part of a society that in lots of ways still treats girls like objects. We’re way off getting rid of that, but kicking magazines like Zoo in the balls is a start.
Zoo is on Twitter @ZOO_UK, and some Twitter users have suggested targeting the companies who advertise with them and requesting that they stop. Kelloggs, Gilette and Love Film all do so.
Image via Paul Bailey's Flickr