Campaign group launches petition to get Zoo Weekly pulled from sale in Coles and Woolies

Can I start a change.org petition to stop slacktivism change.org petitions? They are a dime a dozen and are becoming completely meaningless.

Feminazi’s strike again…Just because you disapprove or don’t like it, doesn’t give you the right to tell others to remove it. Get off your high-horse and just avoid it.

Anyways, with the way sales are going f they’ll be off the shelves soon as it is, all your whinging is doing is giving the magazine more exposure and attention.

Ban all the things!

I wonder if they’ll go after Cleo and Cosmo next?

Yawn. More predictable and boring blather from another shouty leftie crowd. If they wait another 12 months it will be gone anyway.

Another Nanny State propoganda exercise.

Can I recommend magazines promoting trash celeb culture and the obsession with slimming and diet also be removed from sale as these undoubtedly cause harm to young women’s mental health.

I wonder if this same ‘advocate’ has any issue with the new TV campaign which features a seemingly naked guy wearing only an apron and suggestively having his body smeared with food? Let’s see what heated protest she launches about that one.

Oh no, that’s right – sexist media behaviour is only one way in this country.

Porn is warping the mind of our young people. The recent comments from Luke Ablett regarding violence against women and respectful relationships shows us that sexist attitudes are linked. I wholeheartedly agree with Laura’s petition. The magazine is harmful and Coles and Woolworths are supposed to be family friendly supermarkets.

It is taking things a step to far to align ‘Zoo Weekly’ with ‘rape culture’. This is suggesting that all men need is an image of a scantily clad woman to be turne dinto a ravenous rapist.

What a gross generalisation.

Feminazi alert………….

Good! time to get this trash out of supermarkets!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh2sWSVRrmo

Down with this sort of thing!

@ Two faced

Let me help you with that one…

wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarchy

I’m glad you feel you made a difference there “Laura Pintur”, suffice to say i hope you have a equal opportunity to remove the Women Health, Mens Health, NW, Cosmo, Cleo and other countless rubbish magazines that grace the shelves in these supermarkets! “Why” you might ask? Simple, they ALL contain countless pages of utter rubbish equal on parts with your thorn in the side Zoo magazine! Take Cosmo this month, front page in bold letters “My night at the worlds most exclusive sex party” Take Cleo, again up front and in bold “He might actually want vanilla sex”. I think you get the point “I doubt it though”.

Needless to say pretty well each of these magazines will show a scantly scad 20 something model on the front page in some description, yet when its main target audience is female its somehow justified as being ok? yet when its targeted toward the male counterpart its somehow going to lead to serial porn addicts and violent behaviour? Pfft really Laura? as a male who will at times read the all so horrendous Zoo mag as a way to pass time on the toilet on the afternoon “pardon the pun” I highly doubt anyone is thinking oh Jesus he’s finished! quick go run inside he is now primed up on porn and violence the horror the horror! And to be honest when my partner comes home and sees the odd Zoo mag in the bathroom for light reading “and thats all” she sure as hell doesn’t lock her self in the bedroom and hide under the blankets scared of the beast that may come out to play after reading the pages!

In short Laura, loosen up, grow up, and find a worthy cause to get behind! and this goes to the 1400 odd petitioners you had sign your piece of A4 paper printed on dead tree skin. Jump a plane to Nepal and do some real helping, i can’t imagine the poor homeless hungry souls over there are thinking “well I’m hungry cold and have lost my whole family, but NO stop that Zoo horror first”

Board people sitting at home with nothing better to do than find something to complain about! YAWN now I’m board, off to read some ZOO!

ban everything, PG-13 magazines breed rapists, the sexual revolution was a one way street, you are only allowed to get turned on by feminist approved material…yawn

“A diet of porn and violence”? Sounds a hell of a lot better than paleo…

James, what a longwinded diatribe! Tell us Jamie: what worthy cause have you supported lately? Supported ANY cause in your life? Ever taken a stand on anything? Probably not. Have some cheese with your whine. It doesn’t affect you, so its okay–is that your attitude? Well, I have young daughters and sons. I have to take them through the checkout and witness these ridiculous Zoo headlines about how to groom and prey upon young, inexperienced teen girls. Kudos to the young woman who started this campaign. Wesfarmers, owner of Coles and Woolworths, state in their Values ‘integrity’. Where is the integrity in selling these magazines? Follow the standards you have set for yourself Wesfarmers and stop selling these magazines that only feed rape culture and do young boys a huge disservice.

‘Pulling off’ and Zoo Weekly in the same sentence? I’d like to see that!

I have to say I’m with @James on this one – if you have to go out and do something to get your 15 minutes do it with intelligence and style. Zoo Weekly will die soon enough of its own pathetic and bogan dumb accord.

I DON’T KNOW WHAT WE’RE YELLING ABOUT

I am sure that as soon as the statistics add to up that 1 in every 4 men being a victim of sexual assault then the name calling will be dropped when people stand up to make a positive change in society.

For the record and in the interest of honest disclosure – the group behind this petition is Collective Shout, who recently removed the list of founders from the website but they are all Christians associated with various conservative and right wing groups. They are running an anti sex Christian morals crusade disguised as feminism.

Sorry Felicity, you’re actually trying to link sexual assault to Zoo and violence towards women? Pity that there is no peer reviewed evidence to show a link. Meanwhile you and Collective Shout aren’t doing a damn thing in relation to the Federal Government’s funding cuts to crisis shelters for women and children. Not a thing. Not even a lame Change.org petition.

I’m sure the women and children who have nowhere to turn to from their violent partners will thank Collective Shout as Coles and Woolies are finally had enough bullying and pull the magazine. Hooray, once Zoo is gone the women’s shelters will magically open again!

And let’s not mention last week’s Four Corners showing that Coles and Woolies are using Australian suppliers who are making tourists on 457 visas work in slave labor-like conditions and wages. Nope, the biggest problem going on here is a magazine you don’t like that has tumbling sales figures (a 36.4 per cent decline this year).

And unlike you if I have a problem, I go see my local MP. Adding a name to Change.org petition or bullying people and companies on twitter and Facebook does nothing.

All the critics of the petition should read the petition request on change.org.
It contains two quotations from the magazine that should not have to be read by ANYONE, male or female, adult or young, and especially not by teenaged boys who are still trying to find out the best way to treat women.
Both quotations outline how wonderful it is to force unwanted sex on women & to get them drunk so you can rape them.
Is that your idea of wholesome instruction?

While I agree this magazine should not be viewed by children the same thing can also be said about some of the women’s magazines like Cleo, Cosmopolitan and New Weekly which appear to be sex and body image focused with some of the imaginary not that different to men’s magazines. I don’t believe in banning though, instead they should be placed higher up the shelf and not at the check-out.

It’s not feminazi – it’s collective shout ( aka Hillsong supporters who dislike rude slang words for a Sheila’s body parts. Oh the horror.

It makes me feel very disturbed reading many of these comments (especially James – how weak!) and how complacent and desensitised people are towards our highly sexualised culture.I applaud Laura for taking a stand against such a disgusting and misogynist magazine that is on display in supermarkets for all to see.

Well done to Laura for taking a stand against the sexualisation of women rather than the complacency seen in many of the comments written here. Zoo Weekly is a disgusting magazine that should not be on supermarket shelves for all to see and I hope that Coles and Wooleys make a positive stand to get rid of it.

Here’s an idea, how about you ban the knuckle dragging illiterate bogans who actually cobble together a few dollars from their dole check left over from buying three packs of horizons, from coming into woollies and Coles and buying zoo. That way, the waste of eye site that is zoo will go out of business, and the rest of us can happily get reamed for our groceries because we got conned by a scantily clad Samantha jade to come to the store in the first place.

You can ban Zoo but 14 year old boys will just find another way to look at boobs, it’s called the internet.

Newsflash, rape existed before women were ‘overly sexualised’ in media…

Unless the headline was ‘Go Rape Women’ it’s hard to see how this mag supports rape culture as the petition claims. Yes, the mag portrays scantly clad women and gives suggestive commentary, but it in no way shape or form suggests it’s EVER acceptable to engage in sexual acts with women without their consent.

There is nothing wrong with having fun with our sexuality, and oggling at members of the opposite sex – it’s what makes life fun (a concept most feminazis can’t comprehend).

‘Rape culture’ usually takes place in societies where women are forced to cover up.

Sarah @11 May 15 9:47 pm, you and Collective Shout seem to believe that a magazine that has seen some serious declines in sales over the last couple of years is somehow a bigger threat to women than the closure of women’s shelters due to federal government funding cuts.

You also seem to think that both Coles and Woolworths should focus their time and energy on bowing to your will to remove this magazine rather than sort out their food suppliers who are clearly exploiting workers on 457 visas by illegally underpaying them and making them work excessive hours.

You have a policy that is clearly putting women in real physical and psychological harm (funding cuts to women’s shelters) and the exploitation of foreign workers which not only put’s Australia’s reputation at risk internationally, but is putting people’s health and well being at risk (the Four Corners report also highlighted several women who were being sexually harassed by supplier’s employment agents).

Collective Shout claims to be champion against the exploitation of women and children, but haven’t campaigned on either of these issues. Instead they’re concerned with a magazine. Seriously. The sale of Zoo is apparently more important than women’s shelters or foreign tourists on 457 visa being exploited (financially and sexually in some cases) . Their members then have the gall to get upset and belittle people for not sharing their concerns. I mean seriously, Collective Shout’s priorities are totally out of whack with the rest of society’s views on this matter. It’s baffling why they refuse to understand why this is.

Nick ^ you are spot on ! No feminazi at all – it really is more like Christian Shout – the internet provides much information on these little lobby groups. They are all linked in beautifully and they deny their faith … and we know why that is – because it will explain their agenda. THEIR AGENDA not everybody elses.

Also 13-17 year old boys having fantasies about girls their age ! God forbid !

Thanks Nick for the heads-up, I had no idea that Collective Shout was a religious organisation, I honestly thought they were a feminist lesbian group. If that is the case why aren’t they jumping up and down about Gay Marriage/Rights and Abortion, surely that would take prominence over a lads mag.

When is ethical to disclose your religion? When your anti-porn anti-sex public campaign is motivated by Christian doctrine, when all the founders of your organisation are right wing Christians but you are hiding those facts from public view, when some people may be less inclined to support you, or donate money to you, or sign your petitions, if they knew you were fighting from inherited ideology not from a reasoned evidence-based position. Collective Shout do not think it is important to disclose their religion, neither does the co-founder Melinda Tankard Reist, especially in her anti-women’s reproductive rights and anti-abortion campaigns. Make up your own minds. http://www.abc.net.au/religion.....431296.htm

David , they are very careful with their campaigns, They scream out about DV which we all should but fail to call on the Govt for changes to laws or never petition for further funding for mental health or DV shelters. All their campaigns are revolved around how much skin women are showing and won’t someone think of the kids ( like kids really give a crapper about walking past a Bras and Things store) They compare the sex industry to sex trafficking. Lust is bad and admiring the female body is well just plain sinful.

I kind of feel sorry for Estelle George… I wonder what her take would be on this?

I’m not a Christian but it’s obvious some of the posters in this thread need to see the light of your Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

Matthew if you don’t mind me clarifying, having spoken to Collect Shout staff and followed them on social media, I think it is unfair to say not doing a damn thing for women affected by violence. I noticed when they supported the global campaign $50 not 50 shades, women who had been victims thanked them for the validation of their experience. And I would say that is the tip of the iceberg for what they have done publicly and behind the scenes for the issue.

And Matthew if you don’t mind me further clarifying, but I do believe in cause and effect. Continuing to allow the sale of material that condones, nay teaches, young men how to violate women as they please will continues to fill shelters.

And while we are conversing I am just going to be honest and ask why the hell you can’t see a link between their published text from Zoo below and domestic violence.

‘If the object of your affection is drinking, that’s already a point in your favour… you want to pick the “loosest/skankiest” one of the lot and fetch her a drink…separate her from the flock. You’re off alone, boozed-up and charming — these are three green lights!’

And if you have the time for one or two more questions, why are you so confident I don’t also violently oppose other crimes against the vulnerable as portrayed in 4 corners. Or that we didn’t pass one another on the way in/out of our local MPs office. Maybe we live in different electorate or different worlds.

It’s about time. I hate these magazine I do not want to see them in the supermarket and even more importantly I do not want my children to see them and believe this is acceptable behaviour. It is NOT we have just gotten used to it but its about time they go and as soon as possible please along with all the disgusting pornographic type t-shirts guys get around in these days. Keep it at home douchebags between you and your keyboard.

Felicity, seriously $50 not 50 shades? You’ve proved my point. Again it’s about pop culture, not reality. That doesn’t alter the fact that the federal government has reduced funding for shelters and Collective Shout haven’t even mentioned this fact, let alone run a campaign to reinstate the funding. It also doesn’t alter the fact that the Collective Shout website/Facebook/Twitter is almost wholly obsessed with pop culture and the portrayal of women’s’ sexuality. They treat displays of female sexuality as if they were some sort of existential threat to society and women if they were helpless babies unable to exert any control of their lives. It’s patronising. Who needs the patriarchy when Collective Shout can tell women what they can’t do with their bodies?

“And Matthew if you don’t mind me further clarifying, but I do believe in cause and effect. Continuing to allow the sale of material that condones, nay teaches, young men how to violate women as they please will continues to fill shelters.”

What a load of nonsense. First you can believe “cause and effect” all you like in terms of pop culture, but there isn’t evidence to say the Media Effects Model actually exists. None. You also seem to be suggesting that the removal of Zoo magazine will ease the burden on services that victims of domestic assault is patently absurd and insulting. You also seem to be suggesting that young men only get sex education and learn how to have relationships with women via Zoo. Again this is absurd. Can you not comprehend that young men live in the same society as you and I? Are all their interactions with women over their entire life, their mother, work colleagues, aunts, girlfriends etc somehow negated when they read an issue of Zoo? If so, where is the peer reviewed evidence which proves this?

“And while we are conversing I am just going to be honest and ask why the hell you can’t see a link between their published text from Zoo below and domestic violence. […]”

Because picking a line out of magazine or the Facebook page (conveniently you have not actually cited where the line is from, could be a complete fabrication for all I know) doesn’t link Zoo magazine with domestic violence. That’s not how science or evidence works Felicity.

“[…] why are you so confident I don’t also violently oppose other crimes against the vulnerable as portrayed in 4 corners”.

You can clearly see that Collective Shout find women in skimpy clothing more of a threat to society than exploitation of people on 457 visas. If sex isn’t involved, they can’t bother to act. Show me a single campaign Collective Shout has headed up that didn’t involve sex, banning something or having someone thrown out of the country.

Homo sapiens must be bored. So bored we keep cranking up every possible angle on sexuality and pushing every media avenue to stay stimulated and ‘connected’. So bored we can’t be bothered looking back and retrieving our inherent good natures and knowing the need to protect the vulnerable in our society and beyond. So bored we must be cynical rather than excited about daily life. So bored we can descend into exploitative, self-absorbed and vacuous behaviour to get monetary, prestigious and sexual gains over others. All this without caring how the people we are ‘connecting’ with, either directly or across a media channel, might think and feel. Thank goodness those who follow a specific path of improvement to our species are doing so. We certainly need improvement in many ways as the behaviour we follow in living life on this planet is a dead-end for all species on this planet. We are the key to long life for all species – let’s treat each other better at every turn and think up! Good on all do-gooders who want to keep homo sapiens and all species living together, both positively and diversely, to improve the quality of all life and cultures.

Matthew – oh agreed and agreed and agreed. When will this Collective Shout group fess up with their agenda. Words like “sacred” being used in their followers arguments. Teaching generation after generation that the female form must be avoided at all costs.

ban Laura Pinter from stepping foot outside her house. that should fix it.

Banning Zoo Weekly from supermarkets is totally missing the point. These are direct quotes from the magazine…

“You think your girl’s so dewy­eyed she’s never sucked dick before? She knows how it works…. Is your girlfriend a bunny rabbit? A fragile rice­paper arrangement? No? Then how about you let her know she’s being f**ked?… she’ll like you taking charge like a real man.”

And…

‘If the object of your affection is drinking, that’s already a point in your favour… you want to pick the “loosest/skankiest” one of the lot and fetch her a drink…separate her from the flock. You’re off alone, boozed-up and charming — these are three green lights!’

So, even if you’re not offended by these quotes, what part is actually funny or witty? It’s not humour or satire, There’s no punchline. It’s not creative. What is the purpose of them? I’m totally lost as to the merit and intent. Perhaps the writer or editor could let us know.

The fact that this is written, published and distributed in the first place is perhaps where the discussion should start – once the magazine has hit the retail shelves it’s all a bit too late.

Wow, there are some very creepy men commenting on this site. Out them and then we’ll all know what they look like.

Wow Henry, by ‘out them’ do you mean doxing, because that’s what it sounds like. I don’t think online bullying people you disagree with and invading their privacy is going to win any arguments, it certainly hasn’t anywhere else.

“Wow, there are some very creepy men commenting on this site”

Take a look in the mirror Henry. “Outing people” because you don’t have a coherent argument is pretty low. However it’s one of the standard tactics for Collective Shout; bully, play the man, pile on.

I am sick of everything being taken out of context. I am also sick of feminists double standards. First GTA, now a magazine. If they don’t petition to have all women’s magazines removed, I will have lost all consideration for the feminists.

1. All shops unless stated adults-only, are family shops.

2. All women’s gossip/health magazines have articles along the same lines. For some reason they aren’t promoting rape.

3. If any man were to consider raping a woman after reading that magazine, he was probably already a sick individual to begin with.

This is only because the women complaining are not attractive enough to make the covers!
Hangon, CLEO & Cosmo and half naked men are ok by these “ladies”!
They should just shut up!

The Women’s Electoral Lobby has a lot to answer for. Well done for the above sensible and reasoned comments you have made, and in particular: James, Ricky and Pete. Cleo and Cosmopolitan are of the same kind as Zoo. They all have centrefolds and discuss sex without restraint. The female mags have sealed sections, which clearly evidences their content is of the xxx kind. However, there will no doubt be a rebuttal explaining how the Cleo and Cosmo are in no way similar. I’m waiting for that. This, again, is typical. It’s about time the pendulum swung back to the middle ground. Prostate cancer kills as many men as breast cancer for women. Yet the funding for prostate cancer, so my doctor daughter tells me is approximately one thousand times less than what breast cancer attracts. Both are worthy candidates for funding, Where is the balance!

For the record…

Cleo and Cosmo do not have centerfolds.

Sealed sections do not contain XXX content. They would not be allowed on retail shelves if they did. Most of the time they are a marketing gimmick with only slightly salacious content. Not even Zoo magazine is allowed to show nipples (female that is, male nipples are fine for anyone to see) so the rules for print titles are pretty clear – the next step is an R classified mag along the lines of Penthouse and no supermarket would touch these.

Prostate cancer has far less funding because the lobby groups for breast cancer did a far better job, far earlier, in bringing attention to their cause. Until 10 years ago men couldn’t even talk about prostate cancer – mainly due to difficulty in discussing the method for testing. Even now, we can name quite a few well-known breast cancer survivors – can we name any prostate cancer survivors who share their story in order to help raise awareness and funding? Not sure the Women’s Electoral Lobby has to answer for this.

I absolutely agree with this, and not only is it inappropriate. But for the young girls who struggle with self image and feel they need to live to these expectations makes it harder for them to self love, cool if you desperately need one they should have to ask over the counter for them.

I