Girl on Girl

There is a lot of scary shit that sees print these days and I have to say that a good deal of it is to be found between the covers of what I like to refer to as ‘Girl on Girl’ magazines.

Unlike the name might suggest, there’s none of the ‘good stuff’ to be found in these types of magazines. Oh sure, there might be a bit of nipple or some ‘real bodies’ to see, but these will be limited to a few pages in the sealed section. These images are so ‘token’ in there placement that you can’t help but think that the magazine is touting the girls with normal bodies as being abnormal, when it’s really the other way round.

The worst thing you can hand an adolescent girl is a magazine aimed at adolescent girls. It is the loaded gun of the print industry. In all my years as a boy on the look out for anything vaguely soft porn, I have seen many a girl on girl publication and believe there is nothing more harmful to an impressionable young woman than a Dolly, Cleo or Cosmopolitan magazine.

And it’s funny because traditional sexploitation of women was something we men are always blamed for portraying. Admittedly, we did portray women like this back when men ruled the world. We still do, but we’re up front about it and always have been. We make ads selling hamburgers that feature well endowed girls in bikinis, bouncing along the beach on horses. Did you miss the connection between the two? You're not alone, I did too. But men are no longer the enemy here.

The Editors at the Girl on Girl magazines – all of whom are women – have taken it to a whole new level. They put Parasite Hilton, or celebrities who look a lot like Parasite Hilton on their covers. Inside they fill you in on how to dress, eat, talk, walk, be sexually promiscuous and even orgasm like Parasite. They’re not even subtle about it. Any wonder then so many young girls are bottle blonde? Does the carpet now not match the curtains? They can talk you through fixing that too.

And why do they have a disproportionate number of blondes over brunettes or redheads on their covers anyway?

Anyhoo - I have long held the belief that exploitation of young girls – or their sexual marketability – is something that is perpetrated equally by both sexes. Only we do it in different ways. Men are predictable, we’ll put the girl in a blatant sexually suggestive ad that has nothing to do with hamburgers. Women on the other hand, will teach their daughters how to shave their legs and dress provocatively. Whether they do it for the notice of men or to impress other women is irrelevant, the goal is the same – to be noticed, to be attractive, to sell. What’s worse then; selling minced meat with meat, or selling your self as a piece of meat?

A big stake holder in the girl on girl mags is the fashion industry, which has to be the biggest in-joke that no one ever gets. It really is some sort of Freemasonry where only those close to centre of the scam know it’s a scam. Once you’re in, they let you in on the joke which is something along the lines of “we’re really taking the piss – and no one has realised!” It’s all a bit like The Emperors New Clothes really, you make a big deal out of nothing and enough people will buy it.

Women’s magazines have taken the place of today’s Mothers who are too busy to teach their daughters the finer things in life, like how to develop a personality that is all you and not Parasite. Now it’s all about looking like celebrity so that you can share in their lifestyle, which of course the majority of their readers never will. They are decidedly hard core in peddling the unattainable.

The real crime is that millions of beautiful, talented, balanced girls buy these mags and are sucked in by the rubbish that their pages hold.

But hey, take heart ladies - when you find yourself in your bikini, astride your horse with a hamburger in your hand, you’ll always know where you stand with a guy.