GQ Glee photos

desertsun

A friend just sent me this article.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130719727&sc=fb&cc=fp&ref=nf

Thoughts?

calindi

The girls are 24 years old and the guy's 28 years old.  It's not the first time someone wore a school girl uniform and acted slutty (Britney Spears anyone?) and there's nothing remotely illegal about it.  I don't even think it's in bad taste - the show itself has a lot of underage hooking up and talk of sex, and slutty dancing (speaking of Britney Spears, the episode recently that had Glee's Brittany wearing a skin colored body suit).

ETA:  After reading the article more thoroughly (and not just assuming it mirrored other articles about this GQ spread), I still don't think they have a point.  Sure, it doesn't represent their Glee characters accurately.  Sure, it's not a push forward for the feminist movement.  I can dislike the photos for that reason, but it's still nothing new and not even all that shocking.  It's not pornography, and if you don't like women looking like dumb sluts, then don't buy the magazine.  If they didn't want to be portrayed that way, they shouldn't have agreed to the shoot.

bethsmiles

I don't see how this photo is different from anything else on the cover of other magazines. I just don't like Glee in general. I don't see the appeal.

SeaTea02

"They're wrong about that part. As Time's James Poniewozik has pointed out, Lea Michele is not her character, and neither is Dianna Agron. Provocative sexy photos of adult women don't become photos of children just because those same women play high-school students on television."

That exactly. They are actors. Men and women with lives, personalities, and aspirations outside of Glee. I think it is horrible when actors get type cast and are seen as their characters. That new show with the chick from Sabrina is STILL playing that same role. Different name, different situation... same personality. It isn't fair to forget that people like Miley Cirus and the cast of Glee have other identities.

HeartOverMind

I thought those pictures were disturbing mainly because in the pics with the guy in them, he is fully clothed and that bothered me. Why do the girls have to be running around half-naked but the guy can keep all his clothes on?? Kinda sexist. I didn't even think about the girls looking childish until I read that article, but that is also quite disturbing.

And the masculine message the cover is showing? That just makes me sick. Women are a lot more aggressive in real life anyway so I don't know who they are trying to fool or what the purpose of that is anyway. 

I don't know much about GQ, but is it a men's magazine?  I'm guessing it is.

I don't even pay much attention to all these scandals anymore...It really makes me sad for some people. People who are willing to reveal all of themselves to the world...it's not like these people are poor so what the heck??? No shame, that's the only thing I can think of, but what do I know? I'm a little too much on the traditional/conservative side for my age anyway.

calindi

GQ is a men's magazine, and known to be popular with "powerful men".  Guys who are white collar but total "old boys club".  It is quite similar to Playboy except the articles are actually decent and guys can buy it without the stigma of buying "porn".

desertsun

My perspective is that I don't like pictures that portray grown women as little girls in general. I do think that's what the GQ photos are doing.

GreenPepperBurger

I didn't appreciate seeing Lea's panties, but that's the only issue I have (that and the fact that Cory Montheith kept his clothes on - grrr).

But why single out Lea and Dianna? Yes, they're hot and slim, but I feel like by choosing them it's a slap in the face to Amber and Jenna (who play Mercedes and Tina.) Both are "thicker" girls, who, according to GQ, can't be considered sexy.

Edited for spelling*

HeartOverMind

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_not-engaged-yet_gq-glee-photos?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special Topic Wedding BoardsForum:136Discussion:62fc6c18-c209-464a-9414-7a9aff7fdc33Post:fb1d0fae-4d55-4e11-ba0f-0917e1b2857b">Re: GQ Glee photos</a>:
[QUOTE]GQ is a men's magazine, and known to be popular with "powerful men".  Guys who are white collar but total "old boys club".  It is quite similar to Playboy except the articles are actually decent and guys can buy it without the stigma of buying "porn".
Posted by calindi[/QUOTE]

OK! Well that makes perfect sense now.

I posted that the pics were disturbing, but I think that's too powerful a word...I think that the pics are bothersome, I guess (for lack of a better term).  I mean, we see pics like this all the time and they all kinda make me uncomfortable but like PPs have said, it's nothing we haven't seen before. I just think it's disrespectful to one's self. But they can do what they want. It doesn't make an impact on my life one way or the other.

SeaTea02

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_not-engaged-yet_gq-glee-photos?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special%20Topic%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:136Discussion:62fc6c18-c209-464a-9414-7a9aff7fdc33Post:95c24fef-9893-4703-9b3c-260033a6e257">Re: GQ Glee photos</a>:
[QUOTE]I thought those pictures were disturbing mainly because in the pics with the guy in them, he is fully clothed and that bothered me. Why do the girls have to be running around half-naked but the guy can keep all his clothes on?? Kinda sexist. I didn't even think about the girls looking childish until I read that article, but that is also quite disturbing. And the masculine message the cover is showing? That just makes me sick. Women are a lot more aggressive in real life anyway so I don't know who they are trying to fool or what the purpose of that is anyway.  I don't know much about GQ, but is it a men's magazine?  I'm guessing it is. I don't even pay much attention to all these scandals anymore...It really makes me sad for some people. People who are willing to reveal all of themselves to the world...it's not like these people are poor so what the heck??? No shame, that's the only thing I can think of, but what do I know? <strong>I'm a little too much on the traditional/conservative side for my age anyway.</strong>
Posted by HeartOverMind[/QUOTE]


I know you might not have meant this politically, but I am like a super big republican (card carrying), yet I am also a BIG liberal (with a little l)

I think that generally people should have the right to publish, display their bodies, speak, write, etc. however they want and feel is suitable. These girls obviously were okay with these photographs. Yes, I see the sexism and as a women's studies minor I find it disgusting and that is why I don't buy GQ. It is their right to publish these photos and the girl's right to partake. It is my right to disapprove with my dollars and not purchase their product. However, if I was their lawyer, I would fight for their right (or anyones) to publish just about anything (I do have a few limits).

calindi

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_not-engaged-yet_gq-glee-photos?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special%20Topic%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:136Discussion:62fc6c18-c209-464a-9414-7a9aff7fdc33Post:bab8c985-870f-4e8f-ac93-523e25ff2185">Re: GQ Glee photos</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: GQ Glee photos : <strong>Yes, I see the sexism and as a women's studies minor I find it disgusting and that is why I don't buy GQ. It is their right to publish these photos and the girl's right to partake. It is my right to disapprove with my dollars and not purchase their product.</strong>
Posted by SeaTea02[/QUOTE]


This!!!  Exactly.  What about all the smut in Cosmopolitan magazine? Come now, ladies!  I know that I for one have admired the Man of the Month more than once, and that's far less clothing than these ladies are wearing.

Elle1036

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_not-engaged-yet_gq-glee-photos?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special%20Topic%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:136Discussion:62fc6c18-c209-464a-9414-7a9aff7fdc33Post:bab8c985-870f-4e8f-ac93-523e25ff2185">Re: GQ Glee photos</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: GQ Glee photos : I know you might not have meant this politically, but I am like a super big republican (card carrying), yet I am also a BIG liberal (with a little l) I think that generally people should have the right to publish, display their bodies, speak, write, etc. however they want and feel is suitable. These girls obviously were okay with these photographs. Yes, I see the sexism and as a women's studies minor I find it disgusting and that is why I don't buy GQ. It is their right to publish these photos and the girl's right to partake. It is my right to disapprove with my dollars and not purchase their product. However, if I was their lawyer, I would fight for their right (or anyones) to publish just about anything (I do have a few limits).
Posted by SeaTea02[/QUOTE]

Ditto!   (Except the card-carrying republican part)  :)

[Deleted User]

I actually think it is funny that this is getting so much press. The show itself covers topics like teen pregnancy, divorce, sexual preferences and even faked pregnancy for the sake of keeping your spouse from leaving you. If you feel your kids are old enough to watch shows that include these subject matters, I don't see why they wouldn't be mature enough to know the difference between TV characters and real people. If you do not allow your kids to watch the show, they will not relate the photos to the characters anyway. I don't necessarily think it was the best career decision for any of them, but they are adults and it was their decition to make.

AND, if your worried about kids seeing "naughty school girl"-type photos - i suppose you shouldn't allow them to look in any halloween costume stores or online costume shops either!

SeaTea02

Good point Allusive. Why are little kids looking at GQ anyway? They are going to end up SEEING these pictures because they are on the news. All this publicity is only making GQ sales go up. I would be very surprised if they suffered.

heyimbren

SeaTea, I agree with your liberalism, but I also agree with Heart's sentiment that being more traditional/conservative I don't appreciate stuff like that and I wish that people wouldn't... but that doesn't mean that I think people should be forbidden from doing that. I do think it's their right.

But I think Desert summed up my feelings well. I think it's distasteful, but it isn't my business.

[Deleted User]

I'll have to check this out when I get home.  From the sounds of it, it's probably not something I should be looking at, at work.  LOL

HeartOverMind

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_not-engaged-yet_gq-glee-photos?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special Topic Wedding BoardsForum:136Discussion:62fc6c18-c209-464a-9414-7a9aff7fdc33Post:7f258c4e-a93d-44e8-8e16-0a1379280151">Re: GQ Glee photos</a>:
[QUOTE]SeaTea, I agree with your liberalism, but I also agree with Heart's sentiment that being more traditional/conservative I don't appreciate stuff like that and I wish that people wouldn't... <strong>but that doesn't mean that I think people should be forbidden from doing that. I do think it's their right.</strong> But I think Desert summed up my feelings well. I think it's distasteful, but it isn't my business.
Posted by heyimbren[/QUOTE]

This! Sure, they have the right to take the pics and GQ has the right to sell the pics but I just don't agree with it at all!

SassyBrass

Meh, I don't see the huge deal, honestly, They are all adults. Sure, it's not TV 14 friendly (I'm guessing that's what the show's rated? I've actually never seen it).
It's one of those things that'll come to pass, like when you saw Marissa's nipple on the OC, apparently. Didn't catch that one either.
All in all, anyone who a person would be concerned about seeing these photos shouldn't have their hands on it anyhow. And like I said, they are grown ups, it's their perogative (and their publicist's too, probably) if they want to be in those photo shoots.
I think the issue is they are still "portraying" their characters.

And I totally agree about the halloween costume comment. More expensive every year and less costume every year! I don't know if they know this, but by the time the end of October rolls around, it's kinda cold in most places. Don't feel like running around in a midriff baring top and a skirt showing off my caboose. Um, it's COLD MAN!!!!

Narwhal

The problem isn't that they're being portrayed as their glee characters, the problem is that they're being portrayed as lolitas. The pictures have child pornography undertones and shouldn't be promoted for anyone, regardless of age.

desertsun

Once again Bren -- EYE TO EYE

leia1979

I always think this sort of semi-exploitative photography is unnecessary. I have no interest in the half-naked guy on the cover of (or anything to do with) Cosmopolitan, either. However, I believe this magazine has every right to do this.

I am a little concerned that Dianna Agron wasn't too happy with the type of photos. I think she should have had the right to say, "I'm not comfortable with this." But maybe this kind of stuff is written into their contracts.

I knot the show has dealt with some adult themes, but I did think last week's Santana/Brittany make-out scene was a little much--or at least not something you start an epsidoe with.

And lastly, the Parent's Television Council hates everything! They're just annoying at this point.