Let’s talk about sex in the city

The BBC's editorial guidelines on sex are clear: "In all BBC output, the portrayal of sex, or the exploration of sexual issues, should be editorially justified with appropriate sensitivity."

With this in mind, I venture rather timidly into Amora - a new £7m visitor attraction in London dedicated to love, sex and relationships.

The tone is set from the very beginning.

As I walk down the steps and leave behind the hustle and bustle of Piccadilly, I am greeted by the omnipresent and sensual voice of a woman enticingly whispering sweet nothings.

Once downstairs, the pace and flow of street level has been completely replaced by something altogether different.

The reception area offers a taste of what is to come. Visitors walk to the sound of calm soothing music, psychedelic images and red-coloured walls.

Sex therapists

Beyond here lay the seven interactive zones, covering every aspect of sexual relationships from first flirtations and dating, to sexual health and wellbeing.

Wall graphics, video clips, interactive touch screens, life-sized interactive exhibits as well as a dedicated sex therapist are all on hand to give the visitor an array of information, tips and ideas.

Marketing director Lisa Seddon said: "There's a layering effect to our approach here.

"How much detail you go into is entirely up to you."

The Love & Desire zone introduces visitors to the powers of attraction and seduction.

The Sensorium zone encourages people to explore all the erogenous zones with multi-media models wired to respond to every touch.

It is here that I encounter a rather unique wall hanging which consists of the casts of dozens of genitalia offered by brave and willing volunteers.

"The aim of this really is to show the diversity of size and shapes that human genitalia comes in," said Ms Seddon.

Sex toys in one particular display ranged in appearance from mantle piece ornaments to more industrial looking devices.

Corporate responsibility

But beyond the fun there is a serious message.

Under 18s will be invited to the academy area of the exhibition in a bid to contribute some way to a better understanding of sex and sexual health among teenagers.

Also, the academy will soon host workshops on sexual health and sexual relationships, led by in-house therapists.

"There's a great need for information about sex and love," said Dr Sarah Brewer, director of exhibits.

"The British have been very reserved about sex but are now more open than they have ever been.

"We do it but are embarrassed about talking about it. Amora is about taking the embarrassment out and putting in the fun."

Public wants ’sex disease’ action

Most people would like measures to change people's behaviour to cut rates of sexually transmitted infections, a BBC poll suggests.

ICM conducted the nationwide phone poll of 1,010 adults in England, Wales and Scotland between 20 and 22 August.

Most thought the government should intervene to discourage sex among under-16s.

But more than a third thought their sex lives were their own business and would only want information on STIs.

'Target under-aged sex'

The number of people being diagnosed with a sexually transmitted infection is at record levels, official figures show.

The BBC's Healthy Britain poll shows people want action to tackle the problem.

Some 86% agreed the government should impose tougher restrictions on sexual images on children's TV and in magazines aimed at children in order to discourage under-aged sex.

Nine out of 10 people aged 18-24 thought it was right that the government tries to make people change their behaviour on STIs.

But, overall, a third of the adults questioned said they would not want the government to interfere in their own sex lives, apart from to provide information about the risks of casual sex and infections.

Nine out of 10 supported TV campaigns and publicity to promote safer sex and highlight the risks of unprotected sex.

The same proportion supported more information about sex and relationships in school to discourage under-aged sex.

But three out of 10 thought less of this type of information was key to discouraging sex among under-16s.

Eight out of 10 said the government should spend funds on providing free condoms.

But half did not believe these should be provided to people under the age of 16.

Most supported government making it easier for people to get screening and treatment for STIs by providing more money for sexual health screening services.

Just over 70% supported government spending funds on campaigns to discourage people from having casual sex, versus 26% against.

Women are more supportive of campaigns against casual sex ¿ 81% versus 62% of men.

About 64% of 18-24 year olds support campaigns against casual sex, while 79% of 55-64 year olds support campaigns against casual sex.

A spokeswoman from the Department of Health said the government was committed to improving the country's sexual health and tackling the rise of sexually transmitted infections and had already taken great steps to this end.

"Sexual health services suffered from under-investment over many decades. We've already ploughed in millions of pounds to support the sexual health strategy - the first ever such action plan in this country.

"The Government has committed £35m investment since 2002 to help fund modernisation of GUM clinics and reduce waiting times."

More money

But Dr Vivienne Nathanson from the British Medical Association said: "It is clear from the BBC poll that the public wants more government action to promote sexual health and reduce the soaring rates of sexually transmitted infections.

"More resources are needed to ensure that sexual health clinics can meet government targets and see patients within 48 hours.

"It's pathetic that some people are acting responsibly by trying to find out if they have contracted a sexually transmitted infection only to be told that have to wait six weeks for an appointment."

She said national awareness campaigns promoting safer sex were also needed.

"And not only campaigns that last a couple of months but long-term campaigns that will help alter people's behaviour and which understand that it is not only teenagers who are at risk," she said.

Anne Weyman, chief executive of the Family Planning Association, said: "There is enormous support from the public for an effective school-based education programme to prepare young people for their adult lives.

"The government really needs to address the serious issue of access to quality services and importantly, equipping people with the information they need to make responsible choices to protect their sexual health."

ICM conducted a nationwide phone poll of 1,010 adults between 20 and 22 August.

Funding for gay arts festival cut

Plans to cut funding for a popular gay and lesbian arts festival have been criticised by MPs.

Arts Council England is to end its funding of queerupnorth in March, meaning the end of the organisation and its annual festival in Manchester.

John Leech, Lib Dem MP for Manchester Withington, is calling for Arts Council England to rethink its decision.

A spokesman for the body said: "We believe that queerupnorth still does not represent best value for money."

'Unique' work

He added: "Arts Council England's commitment to gay and lesbian organisations in the North West remains as strong as ever.

"In recent years we have funded the Manchester Pride (including this year's parade), Homotopia, the Lesbian and Gay Foundation and a number of specific projects including new commissions and individuals such as David Hoyle (Divine David), Sphere (a South Asian lesbian artists collective), Sparkle (for the Manchester transvestite community) and Darren Suarez."

But Mr Leech praised queerupnorth's "excellent work" and said the ending of funding would also stop its "unique" work with schoolchildren to tackle homophobic bullying.

He has table a Commons motion calling for the decision to be overturned which has been signed by four other MPs.

Appeal submitted

Queerupnorth's artistic director, Jonathan Best, said the Arts Council England had made their decision on flawed figures.

He said: "They have calculated the value for money queerupnorth gives using outdated figures and incorrect information.

"We have submitted an appeal giving them the correct figures, and we are waiting to hear their response.

"I think the idea that pride and queerupnorth are interchangeable is laughable and displays a real lack of understanding of lesbian and gay diversity generally."

Arts Council England currently funds 990 organisations.

After March, 75% of those organisations will receive an increase, but 194 will receive cuts or ending of their funding.

The body says it will be providing funding to 80 new organisations.

BBC NEWS | The Editors

Sex and Radio 1

Andy is a bathroom fitter. He's young - a keen Radio 1 listener with a wife and two small children. I spent some time with him recently - not because he's doing my bathroom - but because I went to talk to him while he was doing a job near Basingstoke and I wanted to get his thoughts on what we do journalistically.

You see, we editors do occasionally come down from our ivory towers.

Broadly, he's a fan, but one thing does make him very angry.

Your editorial line - he said, accusingly - is promoting sex. "You are always going on about STI's, condoms and safe sex… and giving the impression everyone's doing it with multiple partners. But you don't talk about monogamy or abstinence!"

This got me thinking: sex is one of the Radio 1's audience key concerns; with the western world's highest rates of teen pregnancies, huge rises in STI's and spiralling depression - often caused by relationship or self image issues - it's hardly surprising we get more listener interaction on these issues than any other. The appetite for these stories is huge.

So am I some sort of latter-day Paul Raymond - presiding over a sleazy world of promiscuity and porn, surrounded by page 3 wannabes whilst signing up kiss-and-tell stories to shame the News of the World? No, clearly not. That never has been or will be, part of the brief (no pun intended).

But what we are providing is public service information in any area where many young people feel they are seriously uninformed. The reality is that for many of our audience, sex - often risky, sometimes disastrous - is a regular part of their lives.

It's not our job, I believe, to preach, to stand in judgement or to make moral judgements. It's not a role I seek or am qualified to do - nor would my staff want to. It is our job to make the best information available to our young listeners aged in their late teens and early twenties so they can make informed choices if they wish to. We even have a specialist youth health reporter, Helen Neill, to help us to address this editorial area with real focus.

I said this to Andy - he thought for a bit and said, smiling, "but you could tell them about abstinence and being faithful to one person couldn't you? There are some young people like that, you know".

Maybe he's got a point.

(PS: Click here to find out more about Radio 1's 'Bare All' campaign.)

Rod McKenzie is editor of Newsbeat and 1Xtra TX

Rod McKenzie is editor of Newsbeat and 1Xtra News

The clickable alternative ‘lad mag’

Crosby MP Claire Curtis-Thomas wants Zoo, Nuts and their ilk consigned to the top shelf so minors do not see them. But defenders say there is nothing wrong with pictures of topless women and blokey features.

But what would young men read if feminists took over the editorship? The Magazine asked lad mag critics to pitch a few alternatives.

NUDITY - WHY THE FUSS?
Claire Curtis-Thomas, Labour MP for Crosby

While there is nothing wrong with naked images viewed by adults, she says the context and tone of lad magazines are deeply unpleasant.

I find myself being quite a fan of Playboy and Penthouse, probably more Penthouse. Obviously it does contain nude women but incredibly well-presented. The world has always presented images of nudity.

I've got 100 nude men on the beach outside my front door - Anthony Gormley's Another Place - there isn't a hoo-ha about that.

We must accept the fact naked bodies have been a fact of all of our lives, both male and female have been celebrated, but it is the way that they are portrayed that makes them either sexual titillation or art.

The Sport or Zoo or Nuts are far harder, more sexually explicit. The women in these magazines are dehumanised. It is the context, the presentation. I cannot agree to anything that effectively gives carte blanche to things that are highly dangerous and obscene and treats women as a commodity which you can do anything to in order to improve your profits.

Zoo's Dictionary of Sex goes beyond anything we consider normal. You wouldn't think of defecating on a human being. Yet this is the type of 'education' made available in this literature.

Recently the Sport produced an article about a girl murdered by a necrophiliac. It wasn't put there with a view to getting people to feel deeply concerned that somebody's life ended tragically. It was about sexual titillation, surrounded by adverts for hardcore porn.

Even an appalling tragedy like that which has sexual overtones is used to encourage depraved acts.

Click here to return

HOW TO HAVE A 101-NIGHT STAND
Kate Smurthwaite, comedian

Behaving as laddishly as possible is hardly a good way to meet the girl of your dreams. Here are some tips that might apply to real women.

Stay sober. Forget about nipping out first for some "Dutch courage". The last thing women will be impressed with is you staggering in slumped over your mate's shoulder and singing lewd songs.

Find women-friendly places. Dance classes (with everything from salsa and hip-hop to ballroom on offer) are often 80% or more women, and they'll all be looking for a partner. And if you actually learn how to dance, you're going to be one up on the competition.

Make friends. Don't be put off if the object of your desires doesn't seem interested in leaping straight into bed. If things are going to work out with you you're going to be spending a lot of time together so you might as well be friends to start with.

Offer she can't refuse. Don't rack your brains trying to figure out mystically what women want - ask her. If she's starting a new job offer to pick her up on the first day. If she's moving house, offer to drive the van and carry boxes.

Remember women are human too. There's nothing to be scared of.

Swot up. Women don't want to hang out with mace-wielding Neanderthals. Read the newspaper, or at least watch the news. Have something to talk about. Also, knowing a bit about the history of women's rights will impress her and reassure her that you're not just looking for a full-time sock-darner. Check out our factbox to get you started.

Click here to return

ARE YOU A CALLOUS APE-LIKE SUBHUMAN BRUTE?
Dr Sasha Rakoff, Object

Object campaigns against a culture of exploiting women and using sexualised images in adverts. Dr Sasha Rakoff says men don't want to be stereotyped any more than women do.

It is not just women who are being harmed by lad mags, it's also the lads themselves. Lad mags, if they were to cater for men's real needs, should recognise men as thinking, feeling beings who need to directly bond with each other - not bond over the denigration of women.

Lad mags encourage men to view women as inferior, thus perpetuating a culture of contempt against women. Magazines for men and boys could instead focus on the experiences of men and boys. They are the ones that should be on the front cover - as once used to be the case.

Lad mags contribute to a culture of hyper-masculinity where all but a few men fall short. Boys' insecurities about what it means to grow up as a man are exploited. Lad mags speak to men and boys as if they were sexually voracious and callous ape-like subhuman brutes, and encourage them to live up to this stereotype.

The Teenage Magazine Arbitration Panel tightly regulates the sexual content of teen magazines for girls and recognises the importance of magazines in the sexual and emotional development of teenagers.

Lad mags could educate too…

Men should appreciate when they are looking at lad mags that the women's bodies are usually manipulated by airbrushing. Every bump and blemish is removed by the magic of Photoshop.

Instead of running competitions offering breast enlargement for readers, why not feature the men who respect their girlfriends and don't want them to have unnecessary surgery? Take a gruesome look at the realities of plastic surgery, show the actual procedures, and what happens when it goes wrong.

Or men could write about the real life experiences of their girlfriends in the glamour modelling business. They send their pictures into Nuts and Zoo thinking they will make lots of money. The reality is that often women are not even paid until their third or fourth photo shoot.

Click here to return

TOP-SHELF HUMOUR
Jacky Fleming, cartoonist

Click here to return

The New Lad Magazine was edited by Finlo Rohrer

Here are a selection of your comments.

Maybe I'm old before my time but as a 26 year old male, I've never seen the attraction. The articles are usually scripted by lazy, second-rates hacks from recycled press-releases, and are only of interest to little boys and soccer-loving boneheads that lack the cognitive capacity to pick up a broadsheet. Even the "sex" aspect is childish and hackneyed. If you're really that desperate for filth, pick up a porno instead - at least they're honest!
Ross Brown, London

I don't agree with the articles assessment that its only men that degrade women; but I do think that these lads mags should be put away on the top shelf or better yet done away with completely. After reading the absolute drivel that was stuffed down my throat from girls and women¿s mags; I decided never to buy or read or pay them any attention again. I couldn't get away from lads mags; they portray a seedy image of women to all teens. The nudity doesn't bother me, why should it? I see a woman's body every morning. What bothers me is the sub culture these magazines create and promote. The one that states if I wear an outfit that shows the remotest bit of flesh that¿s all there is to me.
Kathy, Stockton

Tom in London - it is all very well to say that parents have a duty to restrict children's access to unsuitable material. In practice that would mean blindfolding them before going into the shops. I hope that one day you find yourself having to explain what the two naked ladies on the front of the magazine are doing to each other to a 3 year old. Good luck when it happens.
Mhairi, Glasgow

I agree that lad mags should be regulated. But this article really isn't particularly constructive or helpful. If it was meant to be funny I'm sorry, in every imaginable way. As someone already commented, there are plenty of women's magazines that contain the same mind-numbing superficiality. Maybe run an article entitled 'What if… lads took over Heat magazine.' It would contain 6 articles in which a picture of a female celebrity without makeup is shown with the title 'yuck!' and each would have the writer simply saying 'I'd still have sex with her.'
Robert Jones, Hampshire

Who gives a damn? If you don't like it, don't read it! Why do people have to "analyse" and "intellectualise" everything. Most of the things in these mags are tongue-in-cheek, so why do people take them seriously?
Jeff Newman, Higham Ferrers

My girlfriend didn't believe me when I told her that FHM has a fashion and grooming section. I don't always want to read high brow publications.
Dave, Manchester

You all seem to be missing the point here. It is not whether the magazines should be sold, or should change their content, but whether the vendors should place them age-appropriately. Have all the T&A you want, but for the sake of future sanity please let's make sure the under 10s don't get the wrong message. as for "they're bought, so the market must exist" argument, which came first? the desire for legal porn, I'd say.
Pete, WGC

"Lads Mags" are trashy rags, nuff said. However how are they any worse than your average tabloid newspaper? Every day I see men, women and children reading copies of The Sun, a sexist newspaper whose political stance is somewhere to the right of Hitler, and yet no one seems to worry about its impact on society. Only the other day a 16-year-old female collegue of mine went on a rant about how "all immigrants and asylum seekers should be rounded up and deported" because The Sun said so… Surely this is infinely more alarming than a few "lads mags" on the middle shelf?
Rob, Bath

This is so right. And as a woman, I especially object to shops where these sort of magazines are placed with the film and music magazines in a 'mens' section, while the 'womens' section includes Heat, Thats Life and Chat - parodies of themselves. Its as if women are only interested in the mundane lives of twiglets like Posh, and never go to see a film or listen to music. This happens even in big chains such as Borders.
Lizzie, London UK

This whole thing has been blown remarkably out of proportion, men often enjoy looking at pictures of attractive women. There isn't any conspiracy to "dehumanise women" or turn men into "ape-like subhuman brutes" the only problem with these magazines is when they are taken to seriouisly. Some people here need to relax.
Arthur, London

You can create all the educational men's magazines you want, with uplifting articles and helpful advice - trouble is, no man is going to buy them - not when he can pay a couple of quid to see photos of naked female celebrities.
Rob, Warwick

How dare Claire Curtis-Thomas try and 'hide' men's magazines. If a male MP tried to get women's magazines banned, there would be outrage. A lot of the jokes and stereotyped comments in women's magazines are offensive. Do men ever complain? It's not like there's many men's magazines anyway.
John Link, Colchester

It is well known that when women are looking for a mate they look for aggressive males who are most likley to successfully rear children. Men whose faces show high levels of testosterone are seen as far more attractive, and such men are usually dominant and "laddish" individuals. The attitude of these magazines is of a similar tone as this is how men are told to act to seem attractive,(and we are generally told this by women.)So this behavior is maintained by most young men at almost all times in an attempt to seem virile and worthy. The culture of this country would have to change significantly for such magazines and ideals to dissappear. Although I doubt they would as they are biologically ingrained.
Gary, Bletchley

It is clear that the images portray what the editors believe to be an ideal woman. OK but they portray women of all different shapes and sizes the only thing they don't show is women who are overweight and with the current obesity problem we have in this country surely presenting such an ideal can only be a good thing.
James, Leeds

Tell you what BBC News website, why don't you publish a sanctimonious, self-righteous and intolerably smug article written by a bunch of sexist women who clearly think of men as unfortunate and inferior beings, unable to think for themselves and needing to be nannied through their pathetic lives. Yes, why don't you give them yet another opportunity to tell the world how they would make people think if they could.

I have never ever bought any lad mag of any description but reading this article makes me want to go out, buy myself a copy of the latest issue of Zoo and get in touch with my inner callous ape-like subhuman brute.
N. Underwood, London

Please, self regulation is the future. Quite simply if you don't like it, don't read it. Secondly, if the content isn't suitable for children, then this is the duty of parents to restrict access, not the duty of the magazines.
Tom Young, London

Kate Smurthwaite makes a good comment regarding tips that apply to 'real women'. I'd like to extend this 'real' definition to apply to men also. Her list of tips are obvious to say the least, and most men would follow these explicitly especially in a semi-formal courting encounter like a date. However, most one night stands (to my knowledge at least) occur in a club environment where women and men are equally as guilty of heavy drinking, in clubs it¿s very difficult to make friends and very rarely does this seem to be the aim of the game for inebriated women and men to make lasting friendships. Perhaps some advice for women would be to remember that (generally) there is nothing to be scared of men (as well) and we are generally not ¿mace wielding Neanderthals¿, just be more careful who you dance with, generally the man who's figuratively thrusting their groin in your face isn't going to be a 'real man' just look around.
Daniel Dryden, York, UK

You would think with all the problems in the world an MP would direct their efforts to a more worthwhile cause. This issue of degrading women in lads mags is a drop in the ocean when compared to what kids have access to on the internet.
Tony McCann, North Lanarkshire, Scotland

Pop put it best: The best things in life, the box of Milk Tray, the dirty magazines - they are all on the top shelf, you have to reach for them
Russell, Nottingham

I wonder how most men would feel if the roles were reversed and they were faced with pictures of hunky, toned men displaying their large penises every time they walked into the newsagent? The problem with these magazines is that they encourage men to see women as sexual objects and this manifests itself in society in all sorts of ugly attitudes to women - not only in statistics on rape and other sexual offences but also in a pervasive misogyny that the BBC itself perpetuates in its crass populism, its slanted coverage and its light-hearted attitude to this very serious issue.

I'm thoroughly fed up with the editors of FHM, Zoo and Nuts - as well as, tacitly, the BBC - claiming that we live in a liberal society and so these images should be allowed. They grossly misunderstand liberalism - it's not about the selfish disregard for and exploitation of others but an open-mindedness coupled with sensitivity and above all responsibility. The mainly aggressive and affronted responses on this issue indicate a lack of sensitivity, a lack of responsibility but most of all plain stupidity.
Daniel, Cambridge

Everyone involved in culpable. Without the women to pose in these magazines there would be no such magazines. Don't just criticise the males who buy these mags. Save some criticism for the women in them who are instrumental in degrading your own sex. The whole decline of British society is very depressing.
Pete, Bath

Just the usual prudish nonsense a la Mary Whitehouse. These women writers are way behind the times. Today's young women want to be seen in these magazines. The ladette culture is the natural progression from the women's liberation of the 60s and 70s. These magazines simply cater for the "lads" who're the male equivalent of the ladettes.

It's no coincidence that the likes of Zoo and Nuts have a constant stream of topless former Big Brother contestants. This is modern culture which reflects the liberation of women and is, as I said, a result of the women's liberation movement. I'm sure that flashing their boobs in these magazines is pretty profitable for them. Certainly beats working for a living. Would the women writers above seek to deprive them of their livelihoods?
Jim, London, UK

Can't you do the same for womens magazines! Womens magazines degrade women further by making them feel awful about their weight, clothes, cellulite and the fact they are not glamorous footballers/movie stars wifes. Nuts is childish I agree but Heat and closer are soul destroying bitchy publications. What's worse?
Adam Leah, London

The pictures on the front of lads mags dont harm kids any more than the big wonderbra adverts etc that you get on billboards. And they dont harm kids - at the end of the day, we were all born naked, and we're all going to see these things one day or another. As for the content of these magazines, a lot of it is tabloid nonsense, but if people want to read it, where's the problem?!
Andy, Solihull

There used to be an excellent lads mag called Jack, actually more suited to men in their late 20s and 30s. Jack as a magazine my wife and I enjoyed reading. It did have nudity, it did talk about many subjects including sex but it was "high-brow". It was killed off by cheap and horrible magazines such as Nuts and Zoo. Kill Nuts and Zoo and bring back Jack I say.
Pascal Jacquemain, Welwyn Garden City, UK

Presumably there must be a market for these magazine otherwise they would not exist, or persist. I struggle to believe that they have created the type of 'lad' who is the target audience, therefore they must have already existed. If they already existed then what harm can the magazines be causing? I suspect the true market lies amongst the immature, underdeveloped and shy who are either too timid to pick up what they perceive as full-on porn, or buy the mags as a symbol of their macho status. In both cases their future contribution to the gene pool must be in doubt.
Bradders, Bristol, UK

I personally would not buy any magazines aimed at women or men but I have read them and sometimes wonder if you gave an intelligent alien a pile of these to read, in order that they were able to assess the human race, what kind of assessment would they make? I should think that they would end up very puzzled!
Elaine, Purley

Just a comment to Christopher Wills, the fashion and beauty industries are run by men who make a lot of money out of making women feel inadequate with their appearance. How many top designers are female - only a handful. Yes, the models involved make money but only a few make serious amounts of it. Those getting rich from the whole process are male dominated corporations.
Liz, Norwich

Age old comment but, if women find these images offensive why do they collaborate in creating them?
Andrew Lavelle, London

All my female friends read lad mags, and all my male friends read Cosmo and Glamour - it is always interesting to see your gender as the other gender is supposed to see it. Are we subverting the whole process?
Jimbob, Manchester

I agree that young children shouldn't be exposed to the pictures on the front of 'Lad Mags', but I do think these mags have an important role in our society - they work as a selection tool. Most women I know, on discovering that a new boyfriend reads Lad Mags, would very quickly dump them, making the idiots that read this drivel much less likley to have the chance to procreate. Thus lad mags have a positive impact on the evolution of men.
Naomi, Somerset, England

Leave us and our mags alone and while you're at it stay away from football its for blokes, alright. Its about time that women sorted out the way they behave and my advice would be wear more and drink less. And to all those non-men and feminists who would call me sexist don't bother. This is about genuine equality and not not the surrender of the male species.
Bill, Blackpool

Most blokes with an ounce of intelligence don't bother with lad-mags. The images of women propagated therein are far from 'ideal', and are indeed intimidating…think of it like this…does a rose not have a more pleasant scent than concentrated rose-scented air freshener?
Pete, London

There are no real magazines for men any more. GQ and Men's Health were the last bastion of the grown up man, but even they have now slipped into the "Drive her wild with these best sex tips" abyss. Unfortunately I fear that even if there was a magazine aimed real men as opposed to the lager swilling, babe ogling, six-packed lad, it probably wouldn't sell.
Martin Neville, Bristol, UK

Kate Smurthwaite's article is interesting but based on wishful thinking. In my experience many women actually do want to hang out with mace-wielding Neanderthals. Time and again I watch female friends of mine ignore quiet, thoughtful and intelligent guys in favour of cavemen. If a guy doesn't make a move on them within a matter of hours of meeting, they think he has something wrong with him.

In my opinion the cards are in women's hands. Men will always want women. If women expect more of men, men will have to raise their game. But since many women actually prefer idiots and cavemen to thoughtful, caring men, the mace-wielding Neanderthals have no reason to change.
Jeremy, London

I have never purchased a 'lad mag'. I have no intention of ever purchasing a 'lad mag' either. My reason? Because they speak down to me, tell me what to say, read and wear. They even dictate what my girlfriend should look like. And if she doesn't look how they want her to, they run competitions where I can 'win' surgery for my loved one to go under the knife and look more like they want her to look. I have a mind of my own. My girlfriend has a mind of her own too; the writers and editors of 'lad mags' might be suprised to find out that this is at the top of my list of 'most attractive features'…
Russell, Reading, UK

I don't tend to buy lads mags as I find them a bit boring. But I wouldn't advocate women's mags either. What are you likely to find in a womans mag? Bitchy articles about fashon and who looks terrible this week; that and tips about make-up and sex. What is this doing to young women but reinforcing the stereotype that that's all they care about? You can't just take one part of the media and slam it- you must look at it as a whole.
Andy, Sheffield

These magazines are published just to make money.If guys are fed this kind of stuff they are going to have a different aatitude to women that is not good for a decent relationship.
Roger Hill, Beckenham UK

This sort of magazine already exists: Arena, GQ, etc., even Men's Health - all pitch themselves in this general, more mature direction. So do we need more? The 'lads mags' in question (Zoo, FHM etc.) are clearly more lowbrow…but if you change them they won't get bought by their target audience. So…it becomes a question of censorship or eductation. I would suggest education every time - censorship will only create an 'aura' around them.
Martin W, Coventry

I agree with Jon from Bucks. Should the site not be focusing on world affairs and not sexist nonsense. Plus if we all had to adhere to the sexist rules of society then man would disappear completely. The feminists would love that. what about the real women? the ones that need men?
Billy, Coatbridge, Scotland

If I worked for one of these magazines I'd be fuming! All my readership can't reach the magazine!
Jonathan, London

I noticed years ago that the Sport used court reports of rape as titillation so that's not new (or right) and I agree with the content of some the articles being of too adult a nature for minors but I recently saw a womans mag with dozens of photo's of male private parts and several of the mainstream womans mags have a male centrefold, is this any different?
Damo, Cumbria

Why the focus on "lads' mags" only? This month's issue of Cosmopolitan offers: 100 sex-on-legs summer dresses, Orgasms unlimited: 10 steam-it-up sex moves, Real life man magnets reveal their secrets, 8 sex lessons we wish men would learn. Surely this obsession with sex and appearances is just as degrading (to women and men) as the content of Nuts, Zoo and Loaded?
Rob Stanton, Cambs, UK

Im not a bigot, i have never discriminated against women and i am very much an advocate of fully equal rights, however i see the place of the man dissapearing from society. When will you do an article looking at the way men are so often portrayed? In the majority of adverts men are portrayed as stupid, consistently poor sex partners and the character of homer simpson has become the benchmark for men. Sometimes these magazines offer a way for lads to be lads without offending anyone (directly) as so often men are left with nowhere left to turn. As in your 101 night stand guide: I played rugby: too laddish, i have been a dancer for several years: not manly enough etc. the whole quest for the metrosexual male, first (apparently) women wanted a man to take care of his appearance, then Gavin Henson and co became to feminine, it seems so often women want it both ways, they can have their jokes at the males expense but anything else is sexism.
Andy, London, England

If the roles were reversed, if there women's magazines with articles on "bloke pulling" and drinking it would be regarded as "a bit of fun" wouldn't it?
Christopher Gotch, Oxford uk

Its strange when you look at magazines from the mid 90s such as FHM the women wear beautiful dresses and only the unknown would even consider wearing just their underwear. Although these magazines are often seen as degrading women the women taking part are often well paid. Go into most night clubs and you will find women with less than appropriate weather protection for the walk home. The question shouldn't be are we degrading women's rights. But are we degrading society?
Fraser , Glasgow

Well, all pretty much humourless contributions, which, given that one is a cartoon, is quite impressive. Does feminism have to come over as so preachy and depressing? I'm no fan of Nuts and Zoo (as a woman) but at least those publications have a lighthearted, witty turn of phrase. It would be much better if any of these comments provided the same level of entertainment for readers. The point about defecating mentioned in the first comment is all about laughing at sexual habits and if you laugh at things, they aren't so scary or weird. Your prudish Ms Thomas obviously hasn't heard that it actually does happen in plenty of bedrooms!

Yes, these magazines are offensive on occasion but armed with a little sense, I think even modern men can navigate their way through without being mentally scarred. Take them in the same lighthearted, stupid way that they are intended. Trying to intellectualise them like this only makes feminists look stupid, which is a really shame.
Kinstanton, London, England

Women degrade themselves. Who runs the fashion industry? Who runs the beauty industry? Who buys the women's magazines? Women create the images that they complain about having to live up to. I don't see many in those industries complaining about the money they get paid….
Christopher Wills, Fareham

I can see many of the points trying to be made here but lads mags aren't the only things on the shop shelves with negative impacts. It is many magazines aimed at women "hello etc" that constantly have headlines about new diets and pointless stories about what the latest celebs have been up to. I personally think these kinds of magazines are worse in many ways. If they want to cover up lads mags and put them on top shelves fine but they are not the only ones with questionable content.
Dave, Nottingham

Your article is the biggest pile of sexist twaddle posing as smart writing I've had the misfortune to read all year.
Jon, Chesham, Bucks

Don’t call them WAGs

Dick, Kerr's Ladies team were the unofficial England women's team

Luton Town manager Mike Newell may have apologised for his "sexist" remarks about a female football official, but his tirade is a reminder of the mountain women have struggled to climb to be accepted into the football fold.

Boxing Day, 1920 at Everton's Goodison Park ground. More than 53,000 fans are already inside and a further 12,000 are stuck beyond turnstile, desperate to get in.

Among the attractions is a chance to glimpse the visiting side's 6ft goal machine, who scored 43 the previous season - all at the tender age of just 14. One shot was so powerful it broke a goal keeper's arm.

The team generating such excitement that day was made up of 11 women from a factory in Preston and their teenage sensation was Lily Parr. They did not disappoint. The Dick, Kerr Ladies beat St Helens Ladies 4-0.

These days, the focus of women's involvement in the beautiful game tends to be little more than the perma-tanned, label-fixated WAGS (wives and girlfriends) who hang off the arms of their Premiership partners. But women have been involved in the game for over 100 years.

The first recorded ladies' football match took place at Crouch End Athletic Ground in north London in March 1895. But it was during World War I that the game really blossomed in England, when women not only took on men's jobs but their places on the football field.

More than 150 teams played regular matches in front of decent crowds. The response of professional football's governing body, the FA? It banned women from FA-affiliated pitches and forbade its male referees and linesmen from officiating at their games.

Struggle

Despite the ban, women continued playing and some of the biggest names in the game officiated at women's matches, including Bill Shankly and Tom Finney. The Dick, Kerr Ladies were a team until 1965 and won 758 of the 828 games they played - a record any male counterparts would be proud of.

But with little support the women's game slipped into obscurity. The FA's ban was eventually repealed in 1971 when it recognised the Women's Football Association (WFA) two years after its formation.

By the mid-80s the WFA had become an affiliate of the body and elbowed its way to a seat on the FA's council. But in the early 90s it handed over day-to-day running of the game to the organisation.

But the battle for acceptance was still far from won.

While an estimated £1m is spent annually on developing the game - said to be the most popular female sport in England - the recent unguarded comments of Luton Town FC manager Mike Newell, about a female assistant referee, reveal ingrained prejudice still exists at the top level.

"It is bad enough with the incapable referees and linesmen we have, but if you start bringing in women, you have big problems," said Newell. " I know that sounds sexist, but I am sexist." He later apologised for the remarks.

Tony Leighton, who writes the only weekly national newspaper column on female football in The Guardian, says Newell's outburst is revealing.

"It takes a strong-willed woman to exist in football. There is still a lot of aggression against women in the game," says Leighton. "I think it is part of the national psyche. It's not the same in the US because historically no one sex has played the game."

Newell's comments come after Sepp Blatter, the president of the world governing body Fifa, suggested a few years ago that female players wear tighter shorts. Just last year the Uefa president, Lennart Johansson, said women's football should be sold on sex appeal with "sweaty and lovely looking" players.

"The really sad thing is that women in football only make the headlines when some man has made a sexist comment," says Marianne Spacey, former England international and now women's development officer at Worcester FA.

"We have our own premiership which plays every Sunday, how often do you read about that? It's still a huge step for some women to get into football, comments like this make them shy away."

A major step forward has been the development of a system that can take a promising school girl from the playground to the national team. But there are still no professional women's teams. Fulham tried but the team folded two years ago, after it was directed to become financially self-sufficient.

Most female players have to work. Germany's Birgit Prinz - last year's Fifa Women's World Player of the Year - holds down a part-time physiotherapist job. Her male counterpart, Ronaldinho, earns a reported £13.3m a year from the football.

Trouser ban

Some players for the bigger teams, such as Arsenal Ladies, have jobs with the club. As well as earning a wage, it allows them all the time they need to train and play.

"No-one is saving enough money so they can retire in a few years and will never have to earn again," says Mr Leighton.

When it comes to promoting women in football, possibly the biggest PR opportunity in the game will come next year. For the first time in 12 years, England have qualified for the women's World Cup finals in China.

It will face teams like Germany, current women's World and European champions. The FA in Germany took responsibility for women's football back in the mid 70s and has been developing it over a long period of time.

"That only happened in 1993 in England," says an FA spokeswoman. "But we now have a pathway for those with talent to work their way up."

But while England may be lagging behind other countries in so many ways, times are changing and it is the younger generation of female footballers who are benefiting.

"At my school girls play as much football as boys," says Katherine Cuthermore, 11.

"Playing at lunchtime doesn't depend on you being a boy or a girl, it depends how good you are. I would love to play for England when I grow up. It's a dream for girls as well as boys now."

It's a far cry from the Dick, Kerr Ladies' Boxing Day match, when they were banned from wearing trousers travelling to and from the game.

Come on, then, BBC. Although your own sports website does have a women's football section, it's the 24th item on the main football menu, some way below "Gossip and Transfers". Perhaps there should be two main menus - men's and women's football, right alongside each other. That would sure help.
Sarah, Dartmouth, Nova Scotia

Mike Newell was correct to say that women should not officiate in professional men's matches. Firstly, women cannot be expected to keep up with the pace of the men's game, especially when running the line, which requires very good acceleration and top speed to keep up with the last defender. Secondly, genuine football fans reading this will remember the appalling performances of Wendy Toms who ran the line in the Premiership a few years ago, clear evidence that positive discrimination had been employed in her promotion.
Neil Talbott, York, England

After just finishing a course myself(that was very demanding)i know just what it is like to sit and pass a course. So who cares wheather the official was a woman/man/boy/girl, if she has done the course and met the grade requierd to do the job then she has the right to do it .If we got on an airplane to go on holiday and the pilot was a woman would all you moaners get off the plane, so lets give this lady a break , like i say if you meet the grade then you have the right .
Richard Wright , Birmingham

After just finishing a course myself(that was very demanding)i know just what it is like to sit and pass a course. So who cares wheather the official was a woman/man/boy/girl, if she has done the course and met the grade requierd to do the job then she has the right to do it .If we got on an airplane to go on holiday and the pilot was a woman would all you moaners get off the plane, so lets give this lady a break , like i say if you meet the grade then you have the right .
Richard Wright , Birmingham

As long as a person can do the job then they should be given the chance to do it, regardless of gender. And the same applies in reverse: if any official, male or female, isn't up to it physically they shouldn't be doing it. But let's kill off this idea that women can't do the job because they are physically weaker. I've trained against top female players overseas who were as quick as most men. And let's face it, how many MALE officials are as quick as top Premiership defenders? It's as much about judgement and positioning as it is about pure pace after all.
Gareth, Leeds, England

I remember watching a women's FA cup final match a few years ago and it was really quite exciting stuff. The final score was 4-0. Perhaps because the game is not as mature and there isn't so much money in it, the play is more open and less constrained by tactical dogma. As for the BBC, why don't they use the same commentary team for women's matches (when they are rarely televised) as they do for men's? I think if Gary Lineker et al were there offering punditry it would actually lend a fair bit of credibility and interest to the whole thing.
Peter Saffrey, Glasgow, Scotland

What rubbish written by Neil Talbott… are you seriously saying that women can't run/accelerate as fast as men, when you have female athletes who can clock 10-11 seconds over 100 metres? Are you also saying that all the men who run the line in the Premiership always put in a spotless performance? I think not. Even if positive discrmination had been employed to promote a female official, which I seriously doubt, it doesn't mean women can't do the job.
Dean, Rochester, England

"Uefa president, Lennart Johansson, said women's football should be sold on sex appeal". This is indeed sexist, but isn't this how David Beckham was sold to the public and, specifically, to women?
John Rogers, Bristol, England

What twaddle from Neil Talbott ! I am a rugby referee in Somerset, where we have a lady referee, Clare Daniels, who recently officiated in the Women's World Cup. Ask any man who has played in a match refereed by Clare and they will tell you that she is top notch. Keeping up with play is 90% about alertness, not speed, hence the success of Bobby Moore…
Graham Turner, Bath

Neil Talbott's comment is exactly the point of this piece. How many 'bad' decisions are made every week by male officials? I don't remember anyone suggesting that their mistakes mean that no men should be on the pitch. Referees make errors - male or female. And as for women's fitness, that's just a non-starter - clearly they can keep up, or they wouldn't be judged match fit. As long as people like this are still Neanderthal about women playing football, nothing will ever change.
Chryseis, Greenwich, UK

From my observations, many male fourth officials cannot keep up with play, hence the numerous dodgy offside and penalty decisions…
Emma, Liverpool

Come on Neil, you know as well as anyone that professional referees are fitness tested regularly. If any official, male or female, failed to pass the bleep test for a certain level, they wouldn't be able to play at that level. That's a poor excuse to disguise what you really mean - that you think women don't have a place in football. And what positive discrimination was employed in the promotion of Graham Poll to World Cup standard?! Amy Rayner on the other hand is regarded as one of the best Conference refs, and lads like Poll need all the competition they can get!
Catherine , Exeter

Very few people in this country pay attention to women's football. The Women's FA website states that in December 2001, 4000 people watched one Southhampton ladies game (and appears to be the record for attendance at a ladies game). Imagine if a male Premiership club had got an audience of 4,000 for a game around Christmas; they would never live it down. We should not pretend that women's football is anywhere near as popular or as skilled as the men's version. As to having female referees, I have no problem so long as they meet the same standards as men do.
Michael Slater, Devizes, Wiltshire, UK

The stupid and offensive comments made by Mike Newell should not be tolerated. Personally I think he should be sacked but at the very least his comments should be roundly condemned and disciplinary action taken against him. Given the existence of something called the Sex Discrimination Act, what Newell was proposing was totally illegal anyway. The FA should deliver a clear message that there is no place for such blatant sexism in football.
Lauren Thompson, London

Come out of the dark ages Neil Talbott. If linesmen were expected to have very good acceleration and top speed to keep up with the last defender 90% of the fat middle aged blokes running the line every weekend in this country would have to give up! Just like male officials, there are good and bad female officials. The more women officials you see in the game, the more you'll realise this. Come on FA more competent officials whether they're male of female.
Gill O'Brien, Liverpool

Mike Newell had it about right although he could have said it better. Women aren't interested in football until it gives them something to rant on about to do with equality and all that rubbish. Women's football does not belong in the spotlight as there is not enough interest to sustain it. Lets try to keep some perspective and let women have their fun on their own time and away from the public glare.
Tim, Paignton, Devon

Since I began watching football 40 years ago almost all officials have been male and most have been awful. Can women be any worse? At least they may do less ego tripping than some of the men officiating these days.
Roy Smith, Birmingham

As a female, I suppose I should be expected to object strongly to Mike Newell's comments…but having seen Ms Amy Rayner 'officiate' at 2 games for Kidderminster Harriers I would like to say that she is simply not good enough. This is yet another example of positive discrimination gone wrong. At Conference level, she has proven again and again that she is not up the grade yet she is rewarded by running the line at Luton. Maybe the point here isn't so much she can't adequately do the job because she is the female…the point is she cannot do the job adequately full stop. Personally, I think her appearance at a Kiddy Harriers game, officiating in any way would spark a mini-riot. She's just not good enough…
Chris Williams, Kidderminster

I'm sure Neil Talbott could outsprint Kelly Holmes. No need to ask him to run the line with such a dinosaur attitude.
Mark Batty, Keighley, W Yorks

I'd rather see women officials than some of the myopic and subjective specimens on display at the moment. As for running the line, I doubt Paula Radcliffe's running abilities are unique among women. The male players are probably scared of being told off and not knowing how to answer back.
Jeremy Broadribb, Horsham UK

I always find this argument interesting, do men want to watch women play football? Women do if they like football, but men proclaim that women are no good at the game, so therefore they are not fun to watch. I feel that if any of the women's football teams of Britain were given the same amount of pay and the same devotion to training, they could be equally as good as any man. If Beckham or any other top male player had to work parttime etc, he would certainly not be the man he is today.
Heather, Wolverhampton

Add your comments on this story, using the form below.

Name
Your e-mail address
Town/city and country
Your comment

The BBC may edit your comments and not all emails will be published. Your comments may be published on any BBC media worldwide.
Terms & Conditions

Slippery treasure of the undergrowth

The Herpetological Conservation Trust is urging members of the public to take part in a project that will identify and enumerate one of Britain's most exotic native wildlife species - the adder.

The "Add an Adder" interactive map will allow people to record their sightings online - which will be used to help conservationists decide on their strategy to protect these increasingly rare creatures.

I have been out spotting the adders with one of the trust's members, Nick Milton.

"Look over there! Yes, just there! Can you see it?"

"Oh, yes" I say, uncertainly. I point my binoculars to a piece of scrubby ground. I see - a piece of scrubby ground.

"See, it's moving!"

No, I don't see, actually. I don't see anything other than the bits of old log and brambles that are carefully managed to ensure the tiny community of adders - one of only two left in London - stay viable.

I was beginning to wonder whether anybody is likely to see an adder at all to record on the interactive map.

Well hidden

They certainly don't go out of their way to be noticed.

I thought that those zigzag stripes would make them stick out like a Christmas tree. But it seems that it really is the best way to stay hidden.

It takes a good half hour of stopping and looking before I finally begin to see what Nick has seen from the start - snakes.

Basking, curling up, slithering through the undergrowth.

And then, after a few grass snake false starts - the real thing.

A beautiful, female adder, basking on a log, flattened out so she could get the greatest benefit from the sun.

And yes, those zigzag stripes do allow her to blend seamlessly into the grass that is, by now, dappled with sunlight.

Native poisoner

For nature lovers, it's one of the best sights Britain has to offer.

For everyone else, it's an unwelcome encounter with one of our country's few poisonous animals.

"There are only 10 adults here, and only recently I found that one had been killed by someone.

"They are not aggressive animals," says Nick. "Of course if they're molested, or poked, or sat on, they'll react. But wouldn't you?"

But surely it's understandable - it is, after all, a poisonous animal.

"Snakes are, statistically speaking, far less dangerous than stinging insects like wasps or bees. And while they are still widespread, their habitat is beginning to disappear. We need as many sightings as possible on the map so we can work out how to conserve the habitats we have."

Nick has been very lucky. He has seen, this year, male adders wrestling with each other for supremacy - known traditionally as "the dance of the adders" - a very rare sight.

"Around here, the adders could move up to a mile as they move from their hibernation sites."

Says Nick: "So the males have been encountering one another - and I have been lucky enough to see it."

It's not yet 9am, and already the sun is high and hot.

The female adder shows herself one more time, and silently slips away.

Conservationists hope that the species will not end up doing the same.

Same-sex couples embrace equality

A new law allowing same-sex couples to enter civil partnerships has come into force in Scotland.

Gay and lesbian couples now have the same legal rights as married couples and can register for ceremonies to be held in 15 days' time.

The Civil Partnership Act ensures equality on matters including pension provision and inheritance.

Socialists and Greens welcomed "gay weddings" but the Catholic Church in Scotland underlined its opposition.

So far, an estimated 140 couples have registered their interest in a civil ceremony in Scotland.

John Stewart and his partner Neil Fletcher have campaigned for years for the radical legal and social reform.

Mr Stewart said: "I think it's very much that our relationships are of equal value with heterosexual relationships and that the state recognises the value of a relationship.

"I think that's a very important message."

Under the new rules, same-sex couples can register their partnership with the council and claim the same rights as a married couple.

Scottish Green MSP, Patrick Harvie, welcomed the change in the law but added that the fight to end bigotry against gay, lesbian and transgender people would continue.

He said: "Same-sex couples in Scotland have been waiting for decades for this legislation.

"At last our society will celebrate and recognise relationships on equal terms, proudly asserting that love is love, commitment is commitment, and family is family.

'Phased transition'

"Much has been achieved for social justice and for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people's rights. But the social conservatism which is still present in society won't go away."

Scottish Socialist Party leader, Colin Fox, said he hoped gay and lesbian couples would not lose out under the law change.

He said: "The recognition of same-sex couples will have wide-reaching implications and while most of them are welcome, we support a phased transition of the new rules for benefit claimants in same-sex relationships.

"It would avoid the sudden loss of benefits and recognise the problems that exist for some couples in being 'out'."

But Scotland's most senior Roman Catholic, Cardinal Keith O'Brien, said: "The Scottish people must be aware that by the end of the year we will see the reality of marriage changed to the point that it is unrecognizable.

"We are indulging in an experiment which will always have huge social consequences.

"The Catholic Church teaches clearly that we, as individuals and a society, harm ourselves when we do not protect and promote the female-male lifelong relationship that we know as marriage."

What are your views on the new measures? Are you for or against the change? Perhaps you are in a same-sex relationship and plan to take advantage of the new law. We asked for your views.

The following represents the balance of opinions received.

I know Neil and John (in the article above) and how long they have been together, and I'm delighted that they now have the opportunity to have their relationship recognised in a similar way to me and my wife. Good luck to you both!
Keith Legg, Dalgety Bay, Fife

I feel a great sense of joy whussing through my veins. I am so glad that I can finally walk down the street hand in hand with my beloved without getting stared at like some sort of freak. Three times in the past month my windows have been smashed and I have had threatening letters sent to me through the post. What's wrong with being gay? I love him….
John B, Newton Stewart<p

Welcome though civil partnership is, it is not equality. Mixed sex couples have the choice of creating their legal status as a couple as a manifestation of their faith by having it conducted by a minister of religion. Similarly, they can choose not to if they have no faith. Same sex couples are denied this choice. For some same sex couples their faith is important to them and it is unjust and contrary to the European Convention for this opportunity to be excluded on the grounds of gender alone.
Stephen Harte, Edinburgh, Scotland

As a Scot now living abroad in a country wrongly seen as a sleaze country, even here they have the morals of a civilized place. Some comments are saying we are coming out of the dark ages. Correction, the UK is going head first back to the dark ages and quickly. I shudder to think what signal this sends to children, God help us.
Bob Young, Phattaya, Thailand

Sorry Darren Bradshaw, the UK is not the first, we were beaten to civil partnerships by the Netherlands, Belgium, Canada, and Vermont. And the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Canada, and South Africa are ahead of us in allowing full same-sex marriage. Civil partnerships are not equality, they are at best equivalence.
Anna Langley, Cambridge

As a gay woman in a very long term relationship, 28 years and counting, I feel touched by so much support - thank you! I'm not surprised by the few negative comments, it's only to be expected. I don't feel "immoral", "sick" or in need of "moral guidance". I feel strong, proud and am looking forward to our ceremony in March. Our close family and friends will be there to celebrate with us, they know we're not freaks and just want us to be safe, secure and happy!
Elaine, West Yorkshire

I have no problem with the new legislation. However, having lived in a heterosexual relationship for 20 years my general feeling is that same sex couples have more rights than myself and my partner. In my pension scheme if I died tomorrow my partner would not receive anything for me. Surely this cannot be right.
Andrew Harvie, Wishaw, Scotland

Scotland, you do us proud. I am a Kiwi but I am thankful for my Shetland grandmother, who taught all her grandchildren from an early age to value difference and equality. These values made it safe for me to be a valued person in my family and be gay. They also help shape the makings of a great society.
Doug, Tuscany, Italy

This law gives people who previously didn't have a choice, the chance to commit and better sustain a relationship. Gay couples being provided the same rights and opportunities as heterosexuals can surely only be a good thing. For too long the notion of promiscuousness has clouded the view of such relationships, now it's our turn to show the world serious commitment and love can exist between same sex couples. To those people who disagree with these changes due to homophobia, well all I can say is that your ignorance is a mixed blessing, one day you may come to terms with the reality you live in. As for religious intolerance, well first of all I have to agree that the term "Marriage" not be used in social ceremony context. People's religious beliefs should be respected, however, I think those individuals speaking out against homosexuals should ask themselves if they really have the right to cast judgement on others. Someone who sees themself as a true patron to God would not go against some of the most fundamental principles regarding bigotry and prejudice.
Ross, Bournemouth

Why is it wrong to disagree with anyone these days? I am a Christian who believes the Bible when it says that same sex relationships are wrong. However, I am not bigoted and have had gay friends even though I disagree with their lifestyle. It is possible to disagree and not be bigoted or hateful.
Steve, Edinburgh

I think this is a huge step forward for the gay community. As a gay man myself I am of the belief that civil partnerships should be offered to all irrespective of sexuality, so opposite sex couples should be able to benefit. At the same time I also believe gay couples should be legally allowed to marry in church. That is a fair society. But it's a step in the right direction over time I am sure everything will work out slowly.
John McGough, Manchester, UK

If you love someone, and you want to be with them, then what does it matter? This new law is wonderful in that at least now in the eyes of the law such partnerships can be recognised. Let's just hope all those poor people out there who find it so 'wrong' can also find someone they love enough to want to be with forever.
Claire, Oxford

Inheritance laws between spouses are largely a recognition of the expense of rearing children. I have no objection to gays and lesbians being offered recognition in law of their relationships, but we must not forget that marriage has only recently become a romantic notion. It used to be exclusively for the purpose of procreation, not the cementing of the very modern idea of a transcendent romantic ideal. Marriages driven by romance, whether between homosexuals or heterosexuals, are a radical departure from what marriage was originally about. Romance is a really very recent concept in human history. Recent, not invalid, of course. I agree that it is quite abhorrent that property rights are an issue if one partner in a homosexual marriage dies but we should think very carefully about what message an absolute equality of status send to children about the their own parents' marriage.
Matt, London

Although I am straight, I have a LOT of sympathy and respect for gay couples. This new law is long overdue and I wish the gay community all the very best for the future.
Carole Young, Glasgow

I am not a bigot and have nothing against gay people, however this is equality going too far - what is wrong with traditional marriage being put on a pedestal and being given higher recognition over other domestic arrangements. Marriage (despite all its problems) is there to provide a stable background for youngsters and this is just a further dilution of its status in society.
Chris, Scotland

Joanne Fox writes: "I think that this is totally sick. First, they want to adopt kids and now they want to get married." Thanks, Joanne: this made me laugh out loud, and has made my day! What exactly is sick about this? Wanting to share financial and social responsibility with your partner? Wanting the comfort of knowing that you won't be booted out of your house when inheritance tax means you have to sell it when your partner dies? Or wanting to ensure that your partner is recognized as your next of kin if you should end up in hospital and unable to make decisions for yourself? I'm glad to see that views like Joanne's are being ignored when it comes to making legislation these days!
Dave Donaghy, Bath

What about two brothers who live together all their life? Or two sisters? What about flatmates? Are they to be allowed to 'marry' as well. At what point do we stop? You may laugh at this idea, but are two friends who love each other very much and may have lived together for 30 years but do not have sexual relations any different from homosexuals? I think that if you let homosexuals 'marry' in a civil service, then everyone should be allowed to do so, no matter the relationship. I just worry now this legislation has been passed, where does society go next?
Craig Scoular, Glasgow

If people wish to commit to each other it should not matter what sex they are. We should all be equal in the eyes of the law.
Sacha, Glasgow

Please, please do not equate these "relationships" to marriage. To promote these immoral, unnatural and unhealthy unions is extremely irresponsible and dangerous.
R Scott, Aberdeen

Finally the government's having the maturity to treat us as real human beings who are fully aware of the significance of what we do. As to those who say it's not natural, there are proven instances of homosexual relationships throughout history - including in the animal kingdom. So if it isn't natural why does it keep happening? Hopefully this kind of blind egotistical view can now be put behind us.
Tom, Oxford

May I address any comments that are not in favour for this historic change. As a gay man in a serious relationship for the past six years, with full support from both sides of the family, I think this is great news. The creation of the civil ceremony is only to redress the legal inequalities that the gay community have endured for years. It is not uncommon to hear of gay couples that have been together for years to pay 40% inheritance tax when their partner dies making the other effectively homeless. The "civil ceremony" is not a religious affair but is a point of law. This in turn affords an opportunity for committed couples to celebrate their love for each other and to their family and friends. Being gay is not a "conscious choice" or a "life style", as much as heterosexual people do not chose to be "straight".
Gareth, Manchester

As a man in my early 30's in a long-term relationship it is an exciting time. I remember my teenage years when, along with all of the other problems I was facing admitting I was gay, the fact that I would never be in a recognised relationship loomed large on the horizon. People will still sneer at it, you only have to look at a couple of the comments on this page, but over time this will become the norm. I am not religious and can't for the life of me imagine why anybody who has been systematically ostracised by a religion would want a church ceremony. Lets face it… it's going to be called marriage from the start so who the hell cares?
Glenn Masterton, Edinburgh

This is great news and it is heartwarming to see so many long-term partnerships finally being able to make this commitment to each other. Hopefully it will also do something to reduce the amount of people believing the unfortunate notion that all homosexual people are promiscuous and only capable of having casual relationships.
Hannah, Bournemouth

Is there a real difference between 'marriage' and 'civil partnership' (in essence)? If there is a difference, then it is not equality yet. If there isn't a difference, then I think the homosexual community is going after the wrong target. Because after all, 'marriage' is going to be a thing of the past, and 'civil partnership' will soon be, too. I like Donna's idea of civil partnership for co-habiting heterosexuals though.
Yam, Edinburgh

We have been campaigning for this kind of equality for years! It's about time that people in gay relationships were given the recognition they deserve! It's a great step forward for civil liberties, and it's a slap in the face for the right-wing bigots!
James Mills, Westminster

What's worse? The hatred behind statements like 'moral degeneration' and 'sick' or a loving couple who are of the same sex being able to publicly demonstrate their love and commitment to each other and family. I know which I'd rather my children saw more of… my only worry is it's going to cost me a fortune in new hats!
Kate, London

This is a tremendous move. As sensible as it is progressive, and I say this as a heterosexual young male. Naturally, organised religion will decry this as "immoral". Of course, organised religion also thought women's suffrage was immoral and they also thought that giving the black community equal rights would lead to moral disintegration. In every socially progressive move that humanity has ever undertaken, organised religion has stood opposed to it. Perhaps now, it is the time for them to stand on the right side of history. Simon.
Simon Johnson, United Kingdom

To Joanne of Glasgow, I ask you…why not? Open your mind just a little bit and move with the times.
J.Smith, Glasgow

Becha, I think your homophobia is a dangerous example to set to my children. Your belief that people should not be free to live their lives as they wish is not an opinion that I enjoy seeing expressed in their presence. Same sex couples don't wish to affect you directly, yet you seem to be happy to tell them what they should do. I am neither gay nor currently interested in marriage. I do feel that my decision not to get married should be one that everyone is free to make. I believe that even Becha should have the same rights as all of us and I feel that any restriction on freedom must be based upon causing actual harm to others. Setting a bad example doesn't cut it as 'causing harm', I'm afraid.
Curry, Edinburgh/Glasgow

Reading some of the straight people's comments on this just leaves me in despair at their ignorance and their arrogance is breathtaking. When will they realise that by giving these rights to gay people that it is just and right?
Alex Macadam, Inverness

It is encouraging that gay people are being put on the same footing as everyone else. A little bit more tolerance of others is still required in our society but this is a step in the right direction.
BMK, Dumfries

My partner and I plan a civil a partnership next May and think that this legislation was long overdue. Religious conservatives should realise that this law was never going to force church weddings and should not portray legal recognition of gay couples' rights as the end of the world. Theirs is not the only way, and there are religions that do accept homosexuality as a normal, and welcome, part of life.
Chris Quinn, Cumbernauld

I think it is time for religious people and churches alike to shut up and stop the ongoing bigotry against gay people, firstly because churches themselves have long been a cradle for all sorts of sex and secondly because, in speaking against gay people, churches are actually speaking against God's creation (assuming there is a God obviously). As for the news about the Archbishop of Cardiff, I don't thing he can speak with authority about relationships. Being a Roman Catholic he's celibate, so his knowledge about love, sex and relationships is nil.
Luis Guerreiro, Scotland

A positive step in the eternal fight for equality and acceptance that gay people have to go through their entire lives. This is the 21st century and two loving individuals should be able to announce their love to the world.
Nick Ward, Dundee

As a gay Scot who left Scotland in 1976 for the Netherlands it is a joy to see that Scotland at last has joined most of the rest of Europe in giving full rights to gay couples. At the same time while reading the comments of other 'straight' Brits I shudder at the amount of bigotry and underlying hate for gay people that still exists. There is still a long hard road to travel.
John Adamson, Hoofddorp

I think this is fantastic news. I do not think it is second class to marriage as marriage is a much more religious thing. Civil partnership allows same sex couples the rights they deserve. It's about time there was acceptance - not simply tolerance.
Linda, East Kilbride

About time too! In modern times who are we to say who can and can't have the right to a formal partnership?
Stacey Crawford, Aberdeen

I think this is fantastic news! It opens many doors for the gay community. To Y. Becha and J Fox, where is it your place to tell people when things are wrong and immoral? Even if you like it or not, homosexuality exists and it is something that young children growing up will realise. With regards to adoption, why shouldn't a loving family be allowed to offer a home to children? Everyone is capable of loving,
Mark, Glasgow

An excellent step forward for equal rights, its been a long road and a hard fight. Hopefully now that there is a recognised law in place an understanding can begin that we are no different from any other member of society living a productive life.
E. Ferguson, Belfast

It's fantastic news. We are lucky to live in the age now where society is more tolerant. Previous generations have fought for what is equal and we are able to reap the benefits of their hard work. The only people I've heard of that are against the new laws are people who haven't seen what a positive difference it makes to so many people. If they personally knew someone in this situation 90% of them would change their minds. I know my friends have and I can't wait to have my ceremony next year. It's just a pity Guernsey are so far behind that they haven't heard of the law and I have to go to England to do it!
Liz Kerr, Guernsey

Hopefully, we have travelled about as far as we can down the road of moral degeneration. How much further can we go? Or will the government next be subsidising homosexual 'marriages'?
Stefan, Reading

The legislation is a great step forward. Some of the negative comments posted show the distance still to be travelled before Scotland can haul itself from the Dark Ages however - remember 'Keep the Clause' etc.
Gavin Smith, Edinburgh

Can we have the same "Civil Partnership" for heterosexual couples who "co-habit" too, i.e pensions etc? Marriage is outdated now, something you do to keep your parents happy. Do heterosexual couples have no "human rights" just because they don't want to get married? Just wonder.
Donna, Aberdeen

The new law truly signifies the fact that we are heading towards a brighter future where we all can break the barrier and live peacefully. But as I am in the Armed Forces, having a same-sex relationship(s) still seems as a "disease", and an "untouchable" subject for any matter. There is still a very long way to go in all the three services to see this law to become more "neutral". I have been with my partner for a long time whilst being in the armed forces, and know the fact that should I wish to be "married" to him it will only create a lot of harassment and bullying as I have, in the past, received such unequal treatment. I guess, the attitude of the armed forces needs to change but who know how long that will take. I wish to express my sincere gratitude for those behind this law of same-sex marriage. Well done and all the best for the near future!
Maievon, Colchester

What an exciting announcement! I am glad to finally see these kinds of changes occurring.
B. Blocki, Chicago

As a gay man in a serious relationship, this means the world to me. Having the opportunity to formalise a relationship (like any other "straight" couple) is a choice that's been denied for too long. Thanks everyone for the great support that this new law has been given.
Anon, Glasgow

I think it is immoral and is sending the wrong message to a younger generation that is badly in need of spiritual guidance. It is not a natural relationship and should not be seen as such.
Y. Becha, Dartford

About time too. I think most of the problem this law has encountered stems for the use of the term "marriage". Marriage is a religious sacrament and should be considered as such. The Germans have for a long time separated out the civil and religious aspects of marriage. This would be a sensible route to take here too. All couples undertake the same "civil partnership" that defines their legal and civil rights/responsibilities, etc. The couple can add whatever religious aspects congruent with their beliefs as appropriate.
Donald Stewart, Edinburgh

I think that this is totally sick. First, they want to adopt kids and now they want to get married.
Joanne Fox, Glasgow

How sad that the BBC is now under the impression that second-class marriage is "equality". Hopefully in short order we'll look back on this and wonder how we could have been so cowardly and bigoted.
Pooka, Edinburgh

I fully support the new civil partnership law. It's not marriage - it's a civil partnership! It's modern and legal. It's a massive step forward for equality and human rights. The UK is first again. Thank you Mr Blair !
Darren Bradshaw, Oldham

Fantastic news
M. McCormack, Scotland

Teen mags ‘to help sex teaching’

Schools are to be encouraged to use teenage magazines and TV programmes to teach sex education.

London University's Institute of Education (IoE) is developing "teenager-friendly" material for use by 12 to 15 year olds in England.

Magazines such as Mizz and Bliss have been criticised for "unsuitable" material, with some teachers calling for them to have an age rating.

But IoE research leader David Buckingham said a "fresh approach" was needed.

Changing attitudes

His MediaRelate project found pupils thought informal sex education "less embarrassing" than that offered in the classroom.

Professor Buckingham said: "We believe that using media offers teachers a fresh approach to tackling sex and relationships education."

A survey of nearly 800 young people aged 10, 12 and 14 found that more than two-thirds thought television and teenage magazines a useful or very useful "way to find out about love, sex and relationships".

But researchers said teachers were "unconfident" about how to use such resources.

Prof Buckingham said pupils would be encouraged to analyse stories about sex in magazines and on TV programmes.

He said: "We are encouraging kids to be more critical of media coverage.

"The reality is that they are confronted by all this stuff outside school. This is a burden for kids, who are getting a mixed message.

"On the one hand, some media glamorise sex. On the other, they are warned against it because of the risks of pregnancy or diseases."

An Ofsted study of 140 primary, secondary and special schools in England two years ago suggested teaching about sexual health and the law in relation to sex was "poor" in one lesson in five.

Teenage pregnancy rates remain among the highest in Europe.

'Problematic area'

Meanwhile, sexual diseases such as chlamydia and syphilis are also reportedly on the increase.

Prof Buckingham told the BBC News website: "Sex education is quite a problematic area for lots of teachers. It's a highly personal area.

"Looking at how the media deal with it makes it less personal and encourages students to debate the issues."

Age ratings

Children often found magazines and programmes such as the BBC1 children's drama Grange Hill more accessible.

The MediaRelate project is compiling a booklet on the subject for schools to use.

Earlier this year, primary school teacher Ralph Surman claimed magazines purportedly for 14 to 19 year olds - which he said glamorised promiscuity - were being marketed to pupils aged nine to 12.

Mr Surman, from Nottingham, called for these to receive age ratings in the same way as films, citing articles such as "Position of the Fortnight".

However, the Periodical Publishers' Association said: "We feel these ideas are very misinformed. This area of the magazine industry is already very tightly controlled."

The MediaRelate teaching materials are expected to be available from next April.

BBC - Newsbeat - Entertainment - Is Sex and the City important for men?

While Sex and the City has a huge female following, it is not just women who watch and love it. Newsbeat asked Radio 1 DJ and Sex and the City super fan Trevor Nelson what men can learn from the show.

Why do girls go mad for Sex and the City?

I thing Sex and the City undoubtedly is an aspirational show for most girls.

Britain's always had ladette culture and, to see it coming from America, seeing how grown women behave in a sexually uninhibited way, is something they really enjoy.

They're basically having a great time. It started off with four girls being single, on the prowl for men and I think that's what they like about it.

And it's incredibly fashionable with Jimmy Choo shoe and designer dresses - it's fabulous.

A recent newspaper article said Sex and the City was loved by women and metrosexuals. Do you consider yourself a metrosexual?

I'm 100% metro - I don't really hide that.

I love Sex and the City. I think 10 years ago a man couldn't say that at all but, hey, I exfoliate.

I watch Sex and the City more because, I know it's not real, but I like to see it coming from a woman's standpoint.

For men, it's easy to get your mates down the pub and talk about girls all day but you never get an insight into how women feel about men.

Why is the show important for men?

If you've got no game, it gives you an in on how to get some game because it gives you an in on what women truly are like.

Alright, fair enough, some women will say, 'I like a man for his personality'. But each one of the women have got different things that appeal to them about men.

Charlotte, for example, likes a certain kind of guy - he's got to be a real person, that kind of thing.

Carrie? You can't please that women - no man's good enough.

Samantha? Well, hey, if you've got sexual prowess about you, you've got a chance with her.

As for Miranda, well, I don't know - law degree?

Has Sex and the City taught you anything about relationships?

I'm not very good with relationships, to be honest.

Not really. I don't think Sex and the City's a good show for someone planning a serious relationship.

But it shows how to pick women up kinda sharpish, doesn't it?

How important is the film version of Sex and the City?

Personally, I don't know if I'm just being a bit of a stickler, but I'm not really thinking the film's going to be as good as the series.

Most series like this never have great movies.

The movie I wouldn't say is as important.

I just think it's a nice icing on the cake for a series that we thought was long gone.

Do you have a message for guys who refuse to watch Sex and the City?

All you guys out there who try and say you don't watch Sex and the City, it's just for your girlfriend - that's really stupid.

You should take a night off the pub and get a real insight into what women really want.