Walmart Deserves Applause, Not Naive Shouts Of ‘Puritanism,’ For Yanking Cosmo

NightHawkeye · Mar 30, 2018

From the "Some call it the free market at work", files: Walmart Deserves Applause, Not Naive Shouts Of ‘Puritanism,’ For Yanking Cosmo

Cosmopolitan “places women’s value primarily on their ability to sexually satisfy a man and therefore plays into the same culture where men view and treat women as inanimate sex objects,” responded the National Center on Sexual Exploitation, an advocacy group that has pushed stores to stop selling the magazine. “Further, Cosmo targets young girls by placing former Disney stars on its covers, despite the enclosed sexually erotic articles which describe risky sexual acts ...

Hank77 · Mar 30, 2018

NightHawkeye said:
From the "Some call it the free market at work", files: Walmart Deserves Applause, Not Naive Shouts Of ‘Puritanism,’ For Yanking Cosmo

Cosmopolitan “places women’s value primarily on their ability to sexually satisfy a man and therefore plays into the same culture where men view and treat women as inanimate sex objects,” responded the National Center on Sexual Exploitation, an advocacy group that has pushed stores to stop selling the magazine. “Further, Cosmo targets young girls by placing former Disney stars on its covers, despite the enclosed sexually erotic articles which describe risky sexual acts ...

They didn't 'yank' Cosmo, they have decided not to display it prominently at the check out counters. It is still available to buy in the magazine section in the stores.
So one isn't standing in line waiting while their kid takes in the cover of Cosmo.

USincognito · Mar 30, 2018

Censorship is good? (In this case?)

Albion · Mar 30, 2018

It never fails to amaze how inconsistent the political Left is.

Dave-W · Mar 30, 2018

USincognito said:
Censorship is good? (In this case?)

Absolutely.

Smut should always be censored.

JCFantasy23 · Mar 30, 2018

I understand moving it from the checkout lines with some of the titles and subject matters when the kids are standing there. I'd object completely if they were to ban the selling of it in their stores, but that's not the case so this isn't an issue.

Albion · Mar 30, 2018

JCFantasy23 said:
I understand moving it from the checkout lines with some of the titles and subject matters when the kids are standing there. I'd object completely if they were to ban the selling of it in their stores, but that's not the case so this isn't an issue.

Why so? It's a private business, not the public library.

And there are plenty of magazines that are not sold in Walmart right now but which I can get at, say, Barnes and Noble.

JCFantasy23 · Mar 30, 2018

Albion said:
Why so? It's a private business, not the public library.

And there are plenty of magazines that are not sold in Walmart right now but which I can get at, say, Barnes and Noble.

Yes, it's a private business that has chosen to sell Cosmo for years already. I can understand moving it, but wouldn't understand the reason for banning it from the store entirely. They sell adult fiction and R-rated movies, so why should Cosmo be removed completely if it's still selling well?

USincognito · Mar 30, 2018

Dave-W said:
Absolutely.

Smut should always be censored.

How is "smut" to be defined and who defines it?

Albion · Mar 30, 2018

Well, we know that this (remove completely) is not what she did.

Still, the anti-free enterprise, anti-free speech movement, responds in the exact same way as if Walmart had done that.

durangodawood · Mar 30, 2018

Albion said:
Well, we know that this (remove completely) is not what she did.

Still, the anti-free enterprise, anti-free speech movement, responds in the exact same way as if Walmart had done that.

Why is it anti free-enterprise to object to a store's decision on matters like this?

BigDaddy4 · Mar 30, 2018

USincognito said:
Censorship is good? (In this case?)

It's not censorship for a business to relocate product placement within its stores.

USincognito · Mar 30, 2018

BigDaddy4 said:
It's not censorship for a business to relocate product placement within its stores.

Agreed, but with a quibble. It's not the traditional form of censorship we think of, and it certainly isn't government censorship, but it is a form of it.

BigDaddy4 · Mar 30, 2018

USincognito said:
Agreed, but with a quibble. It's not the traditional form of censorship we think of, and it certainly isn't government censorship, but it is a form of it.

I would use the term "discretion" not censorship. Censorship would imply that they had something to do with the content of the magazine, and that isn't the case. It is still available in the store. Even if they chose not to carry it, I wouldn't call it censorship. I can walk into my local grocery store and see 8-10 magazines by the checkout. But down aisle 3 is a section with dozens of more options. No censorship on those dozens more. If they don't carry the Reader's Digest I'm looking for, I wouldn't accuse them of censorship.

whatbogsends · Mar 30, 2018

I don't read Cosmopolitan, but have seen some articles in the past, so my sense of "what Cosmo is and is not" may be incorrect
1) It's not censorship. Even if Target stopped carrying Cosmo completely (rather than just removing from the rack), it wouldn't be censorship. A company (in this case, Target) is free to carry or not carry whatever products they want. Censorship is a public entity making decisions about what content is allowed for publication or dissemination.
2) I agree that it makes sense not to have it on display by the checkout aisles if the cover content is objectionable.
3) I wouldn't go as far as to call Cosmo "smut" as other posters in this thread have, but I would agree with the notion that Cosmo is a publication which pushes a gender narrative that I would think the left would (or at least should) discourage.

whatbogsends · Mar 30, 2018

durangodawood said:
Why is it anti free-enterprise to object to a store's decision on matters like this?

I know the question wasn't asked of me, but i'll answer it anyway.

It's not anti-free enterprise for people or groups to voice their objection to a stores decision to carry or not carry a product. That is exactly part of how the free market should work.

While I agree with the OP that it doesn't make sense for "the left" to be offended by Cosmo's decision (which I hadn't heard about - I hadn't heard that Target stopped displaying the magazine, nor that people were up in arms about it, other than from the claim of the OP), people or groups expressing their disagreement with the stores decision is how the free market works.

PeachyKeane · Mar 30, 2018

Is this really a thing?

Nithavela · Mar 30, 2018

How many of those files do you have, and how many have more than one entry?

Albion · Mar 30, 2018

durangodawood said:
Why is it anti free-enterprise to object to a store's decision on matters like this?

I said "anti-free enterprise movement."

Walmart Deserves Applause, Not Naive Shouts Of ‘Puritanism,’ For Yanking Cosmo

Work-in-progress

Well-Known Member

a post by Alan Smithee

Facilitator

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!

In a Kingdom by the Sea.

Facilitator

In a Kingdom by the Sea.

a post by Alan Smithee

Facilitator

re Member

It's a new season...

a post by Alan Smithee

It's a new season...

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

M.I.A.

you're in charge you can do it just get louis

Facilitator

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency