Look for New Models in the GRM Store!

That would be great if we hadn't gotten a TON of complaints about us running those pictures in GRM. Even though they weren't really racy at all, we had some very vocal objections to having pretty ladies not wearing all that much in GRM. Seriously, you would've thought we had shown full frontal nudity----- it was crazy!

My grandmother bought me subscriptions to Motor Trend and Hot Rod when i was about 10. When i became an adult i kept them going. However, as i became smarter and wiser i gradually got annoyed with Hot Rods occasional use of women models and i eventually stopped resubscribing to them because of it. And that was a 10+ yr subscriber who happened to be a male near the age of peak sexuality cancelling over seeing a use of women in car magazine maybe twice a year that annoyed him.

All the posts in here talking about the particulars of what a female model might have been wearing are missing the point that there are tons of people out there who are annoyed at the entire concept of having the objectification of women associated with their hobby/passion. The fact that there are as few female car enthusiasts as there are is in large part DUE to the objectification of women in car culture! To me, that's tragic.

I'm not going to claim that i never look at women in an objectifying way. Depending on context and whether or not that was the whole idea.. i sometimes dont even feel remotely conflicted about it. But i DO want that, and my car hobby, to be completely separate things with NO overlap and no bad associations between them. I dont want anyone to think that just because im a 'car guy' or a mechanic that im a sexist asshat, but when car mags are full of women being used as scenery, and half the shops ive ever worked at have calendars of scantily clad females handed out as promotional material by tool manufacturers, it's not hard to see where that idea would come from.

But the effect of all this is bad enough that, in my adult life as a mechanic, ive literally had substantially less contact with the opposite gender than most people, because the car world is so off-putting to women that i've RARELY had a female co-worker! That's just sad.

So im all for NOT using women as scenery in car mags, and im casting my vote as a GRM subscriber to keep all female clothing modeling classy.

In reply to Vigo:

That was very well put!

All the posts in here talking about the particulars of what a female model might have been wearing are missing the point that there are tons of people out there who are annoyed at the entire concept of having the objectification of women associated with their hobby/passion. The fact that there are as few female car enthusiasts as there are is in large part DUE to the objectification of women in car culture! To me, that's tragic.

I have yet to meet a woman who said "I would get into racing, but I dislike the objectification of women."

I have met tons of women who've gone to a race/seen one on TV and said "This is boring."

While I think the whole "Chick spread on a car" in magazines thing is silly, I don't think it's anything more than that. Those girls are making money. Good for them. Chicks in chicks' magazines are every bit as "objectified" as those in a car magazine.

Your assertion that women don't dig racing is because they saw an issue of Hot Rod and said "ZOMG OBJECTIFICATION!!!" is silly.

Lighten up. Get out. Talk to chicks (some LOVE being "objectified!") Live a little.

PS: I'm going to order a work shirt just to make up for how badly you guys have made this thread suck.

Vigo wrote:

That would be great if we hadn't gotten a TON of complaints about us running those pictures in GRM. Even though they weren't really racy at all, we had some very vocal objections to having pretty ladies not wearing all that much in GRM. Seriously, you would've thought we had shown full frontal nudity----- it was crazy!

My grandmother bought me subscriptions to Motor Trend and Hot Rod when i was about 10. When i became an adult i kept them going. However, as i became smarter and wiser i gradually got annoyed with Hot Rods occasional use of women models and i eventually stopped resubscribing to them because of it. And that was a 10+ yr subscriber who happened to be a male near the age of peak sexuality cancelling over seeing a use of women in car magazine maybe twice a year that annoyed him. All the posts in here talking about the particulars of what a female model might have been wearing are missing the point that there are tons of people out there who are annoyed at the entire concept of having the objectification of women associated with their hobby/passion. The fact that there are as few female car enthusiasts as there are is in large part DUE to the objectification of women in car culture! To me, that's tragic. I'm not going to claim that i never look at women in an objectifying way. Depending on context and whether or not that was the whole idea.. i sometimes dont even feel remotely conflicted about it. But i DO want that, and my car hobby, to be completely separate things with NO overlap and no bad associations between them. I dont want anyone to think that just because im a 'car guy' or a mechanic that im a sexist asshat, but when car mags are full of women being used as scenery, and half the shops ive ever worked at have calendars of scantily clad females handed out as promotional material by tool manufacturers, it's not hard to see where that idea would come from. But the effect of all this is bad enough that, in my adult life as a mechanic, ive literally had substantially less contact with the opposite gender than most people, because the car world is so off-putting to women that i've RARELY had a female co-worker! That's just sad. So im all for NOT using women as scenery in car mags, and im casting my vote as a GRM subscriber to keep all female clothing modeling classy.

I'm not a fan of the Drift Nirvana yo girls in bikinis sticking their asses out leaning over the hood of a stanced IS300. That's not cars. If I want porn I have a computer, I don't need to see it at the track. But an attractive woman wearing normal clothing (shorts and a t-shirt, for instance) working on a car isn't "scenery" to me. Yeah in that pic above maybe her shorts could be longer, or her pose a little less skanky, but whatever. I know girls who BUILD cars, RACE cars, and know more about cars than I do. And some of them are very attractive and do work on their cars in a tank top and shorts. For that matter (and I am straight, so this sounds otherwise), if there is a picture of a guy working on a car, I'd rather he not being a fat slobbery troll with a mullet and asscrack hanging out (no offense to those here who may apply ;) It's human nature to be attracted to attractive people and want to see them. That's not objectification inherently. It's why we all wear nice clothes when we go to a nice restaurant on a date instead of wearing jeans shorts and wife-beaters. It's why we get haircuts or shave. If it "didn't matter" what people looked like, we could all just wear burquas and be the Taliban and going to a bar would be really, really boring. Then nobody gets "objectified."

If the mag just shows old fat guys working on cars, then women who see the mag will perhaps assume "well, car stuff is just for fat, dirty guys and not for girls." Show attractive women working on cars in the mag, maybe women will want to work on cars. Women may see that and say "hey, I'm beautiful too but that doesn't mean I can't get oil on my hands and wear safety glasses." Isn't that how advertising works in the real world (rather than the "political correct gender-neutral world)?

There is a line between exploitation/objectification and just having real humans in a picture. IDK who the girl in the first picture is, but I assume she's a GRM family member or reader or something, not a paid model. She's attractive. Does that mean she's being objectified to sell shirts? And (Tom?).....he's mad sexy. I want to buy 10 shirts just so I can look just like him ;)

poopshovel wrote:

DrBoost wrote:

Joe Gearin wrote: Seriously, you would've thought we had shown full frontal nudity----- it was crazy!

You can't make that statement without doing an actual study. If you were to run some full-frontal next month, for instance, you would have a comparison to draw from

Careful what you wish for. I like JG and all, but I'm not sure I want to see him naked. Ok, maybe just a little.

Shaved or natural?

jg

bear and bare?

In for more short shorts.
Given my own propensity for wearing short shorts (of the rugby variety) I don't feel bad appreciating ladies who do likewise.

nicksta43 wrote:

that does it, cancel my subscription!!!

poopshovel wrote: She is berkeleying h4wt, and if the typical GRM demographic disagrees, you're all gay, and I don't want to know what other magazines you subscribe to. Well done. EDIT: Assuming she's not 14. If so EWWWWW GROOOOOSSSS.

Thanks!

(Also I'm not a minor)

NicoleTropea wrote:

poopshovel wrote: She is berkeleying h4wt, and if the typical GRM demographic disagrees, you're all gay, and I don't want to know what other magazines you subscribe to. Well done. EDIT: Assuming she's not 14. If so EWWWWW GROOOOOSSSS.

Thanks! (Also I'm not a minor)

Of course you know that he's objectifying you now that you told him that....

He already was, to some extent. But hey, I agreed to be in the pictures with an idea of the type of objectification that could come with them. In the shoot we made a conscious effort to make the poses about displaying the merchandise and nothing else. I'm tired, so I'm not going to get too deep and political about the objectification of women and its greater effects on society right now.

poopshovel wrote:

Curious what our current models look like?

Well since you asked.... He is a fantastic bartender...and probably represents the typical GRM demographic. She is berkeleying h4wt, and if the typical GRM demographic disagrees, you're all gay, and I don't want to know what other magazines you subscribe to. Well done. EDIT: Assuming she's not 14. If so EWWWWW GROOOOOSSSS.

That was my first thought. Little young?

How many bonus Challenge points would i get if i bought all the skimpiest ladies GRM clothing i could get and posed in provocative fashion on my car during the Concours?

NicoleTropea wrote: He already was, to some extent. But hey, I agreed to be in the pictures with an idea of the type of objectification that could come with them. In the shoot we made a conscious effort to make the poses about displaying the merchandise and nothing else. I'm tired, so I'm not going to get too deep and political about the objectification of women and its greater effects on society right now.

please don't.....I was saying that tongue-in-cheek anyhow.

irish44j wrote:

NicoleTropea wrote:

poopshovel wrote: She is berkeleying h4wt, and if the typical GRM demographic disagrees, you're all gay, and I don't want to know what other magazines you subscribe to. Well done. EDIT: Assuming she's not 14. If so EWWWWW GROOOOOSSSS.

Thanks! (Also I'm not a minor)

Of course you know that he's objectifying you now that you told him that....

Objectifying is only OK if you don't know or actually interact with the person. Because then they aren't really a person.

I won't; rants are exhausting. Sorry I didn't catch the joke at first. :)

Swank Force One wrote:

irish44j wrote:

NicoleTropea wrote:

poopshovel wrote: She is berkeleying h4wt, and if the typical GRM demographic disagrees, you're all gay, and I don't want to know what other magazines you subscribe to. Well done. EDIT: Assuming she's not 14. If so EWWWWW GROOOOOSSSS.

Thanks! (Also I'm not a minor)

Of course you know that he's objectifying you now that you told him that....

Objectifying is only OK if you don't know or actually interact with the person. Because then they aren't really a person.

yeah, it's like when me and my buddies went out to get some drinks today, everyone was constantly objectifying us. Seems to happen all the time. But I don't complain....

and yes, we all shop at the same store.

Joe Gearin wrote:

Jerry wrote:

JoeyM wrote: Remember the cute girls at the pick-and-pull article where they wore GRM clothing? You could do that again for action shots.

+1!

That would be great if we hadn't gotten a TON of complaints about us running those pictures in GRM. Even though they weren't really racy at all, we had some very vocal objections to having pretty ladies not wearing all that much in GRM. Seriously, you would've thought we had shown full frontal nudity----- it was crazy!

not sure that I would have much in common with someone that would complain about this photo

I didnt know I was a pig until I read this thread. Im going to cut out pictures of frumpy sweaters from an old JC Penney catalog and paste the over posters hanging in the shop.

NicoleTropea wrote:

poopshovel wrote: She is berkeleying h4wt, and if the typical GRM demographic disagrees, you're all gay, and I don't want to know what other magazines you subscribe to. Well done. EDIT: Assuming she's not 14. If so EWWWWW GROOOOOSSSS.

Thanks! (Also I'm not a minor)

Simple: This:

and this:

are greater than this:

HTFU guys, sssshhheeeesssshhh

irish44j wrote: For that matter (and I am straight, so this sounds otherwise), if there is a picture of a guy working on a car, I'd rather he not being a fat slobbery troll with a mullet and asscrack hanging out (no offense to those here who may apply ;) It's human nature to be attracted to attractive people and want to see them.

Don't talk about J.G. that way, you'll hurt his self esteem.