Dear Tom Etherington,
Wow, so tough day? I bet you never expected this! As Editor of Zoo Magazine you are supposed to spend your day rating insecure teenage girls fuckableness. It’s just tits, tits, tits! All day. Every day. And you probably get invited to all the best parties. And drive a sweet ride. You’re living the dream buddy.
But then you went and published an ‘advice’ column suggesting that a guy who can’t get over his ex-girlfriend should cut her face ‘so then no one will want her’.
And I can imagine, despite your hastily issued apology and promises of a donation to Women’s Aid, that you are actually a bit pissed off by all these ranty-pants feminists spoiling the fun. Because, I imagine you believe that a woman who rejects lad culture is just a frigid cow with no sense of adventure.
I mean you were just having a bit of a laugh right? Laddish humour. Well this should make you ROFL! Did you have any idea that 48% of female victims are killed by their partner, ex-partner or lover? How about that 54% of rapes in the UK are committed by a woman’s current or former partner? Hilarious. And especially funny because one of these women could be your sister, mother, lover, friend. I am guessing you have very little insight into the causes of these statistics. Why would you? You’re just paid to print pics of big tits! And of course, there is no correlation with your magazine, cos thats just a bit of fun.
Well, imagine how you would feel if the correspondent took the advice literally. Would you say he just didn’t get the joke? Or would that advice then, retrospectively, have morphed into an incitement to violence?
Its not all bad for us feminists though Tom; the stats I read today state that the circulation of lads’ mags has been in a complete nosedive, including your beloved Zoo. According to the Guardian, from your weekly circulation of 102,043 in the second half of 2009, you’ve had a 29.9% year-on-year fall.
Your actions today, will hopefully push the lot off the cliff.
Sas
~
Thanks to naomimc of Vagina Dentata there are some fabulous options should anyone wish to voice their opinion directly:
Zoo twitter: @ZOO_UK
Zoo email: info@zootoday.com
Tom Etherington, Editor: Tom.Etherington@zootoday.com
Claire Hodgson, Editorial Asst: claire.hodgson@zootoday.com
Bauer Media, who own Zoo:
Jane Windsor, Corporate Communications: jane.windsor@bauermedia.co.uk
Sarah Ewing, Consumer Magazines – Trade: sarah.ewing@bauermedia.co.uk
Jess Blake, Consumer Magazines – PR: jess.blake@bauermedia.co.uk
Genevieve Potter, Specialist Magazines: genevieve.potter@bauermedia.co.uk
Catherine Gort, Big City Network Radio: catherine.gort@bauermedia.co.uk
Hermione Clulow, Magic & KISS: hermione@braben.co.uk
Sarah Ewing, National Radio: sarah.ewing@bauermedia.co.uk
Zoo Advertisers:
Kellogg’s: pressoffice@kellogg.com
Aloud.com: feedback@aloud.com
Virgin Media: lucy.atabey@virginmedia.co.uk
~
UPDATE: an email from Tom Etherington
RE: my open letter to tom etherington, editor of Zoo Magazine
From: Etherington, Tom (tom.etherington@zootoday.com)
Sent: 06 May 2010 14:24:27
Thank you for your email regarding this week’s issue.
Firstly, let me unreservedly apologise for the inappropriate and indefensibile response to a letter which appeared. I am very sorry for any offence it has caused.
Danny Dyer, and everyone else that works on Zoo condemn any violence against women, and by way of a sincere apology we are making a donation to Women’s Aid.
An internal enquiry is underway to find out how this extremely regrettable production error occurred and I will be tighening up any procedures necessary to ensure it cannot happen again.
We have already posted an apology on our website and will also be printing a fuller apology in next week’s issue.
Regards,
Tom Etherington
Editor, Zoo Magazine
~
This ‘apology’ refers to a ‘production error’. This is clearly bullshit as in a previous column Dyer suggested setting fire to a woman.
Comments
trackbacks
I am not only shocked that he wrote that, but I am shocked that none of the people who must have read it before it went to print allowed it to do so.
sas Replied:
yes the ‘apology’ refers to a ‘production error’. which is clearly bullshit as in a previous column Dyer suggested setting fire to a woman.
Thanks for sharing, I’ve reposted this and will be contacting them directly as well.
Wanker.
I may have to forward this to a dear, young, female friend who told me the other day that she thought the work of feminism was done. I almost fell off my seat.
Thanks for posting about it Sas. I’m a little taken aback at all the women’s names in that contact list, but I guess I shouldn’t be really.
sas Replied:
Yes it is so heart-breakingly disappointing to see those womens names.
Thank you for the re-tweets :)
What an irresponsible wanker!
Brilliantly stated, sas!
Dear Tom,
You CAN fix this. Admitting you’re an asshole is the first step.
Best Wishes,
TP
sas Replied:
you will like this TP: a parody of Mr Etherington
Wow, simply wow. Surely this guy’s career must now be over?
Holy effing mother of God. There are about eleventy squillion things seriously wrong with this picture. I am so livid I can barely type.
Danny Dyer and anyone else responsible for this bullshit should be sacked immediately. Then again, it is Zoo magazine. I’m not holding my breath. Nevertheless, they’ll be hearing from me.
sas Replied:
It’s horrid. And I guess my sarcastic tone is meant to hide the fact that there is just no getting through to people like this.
The worst part for me is the spirit deadening behaviour of those young women; the lad’s mag models, who like virtually all female representations in the media, conform to a high and largely unattainable standard of female beauty. And this creates an environment that ensures many women will find it flattering to be considered attractive in this way. If those pouting, vacant, silicone-enhanced models are lauded as the sexiest women on the planet, it’s natural that some women will aspire to be like them, even if it means doing things with which they may be uncomfortable. These women who send topless photos of themselves to lads’ mags are seeking reassurance that they are fuckable!
Its no wonder a lot of men now genuinely believe that women want to be treated as sex objects. Who could blame them when so many of us have internalised an exhibitionistic ideal of our own objectification? You could argue, I suppose, that women who put headless photos of their naked torsos on to the internet are still suffering the legacy of millennia of male sexual oppression. But there must come a point where it is simply implausible to keep blaming men.
If male approval is important to women, and if the most effective way of gaining approval is to get one’s tits out, then a lot of women are going to get their tits out.
*dramatic sigh*
Lad mags exist because growing up has become unfashionable. People live in a state of permanent adolescence, which is very useful for the manufacturers of the products that people use for instant gratification.
Tellingly, the adolescent state is not confined to the readers. Like so many of our managers and leaders, the Editor cannot take responsibility for his actions, blaming a production error.
On the other hand, the magazine is produced by wankers, which in itself is an error.