Tuesday, 30 July 2013

Harlots Given Modesty Deadline By The Co-Op

From Media Week:

Sharons, Traceys and Chardonnays have until 9 September to dress in a potato sack, or The Co-operative will cease to serve them, the supermarket chain has announced.

The request for decent attire, which would cover scantily clad women at the checkout, is aimed at protecting children from seeing sexy girls out to grab a bag of Doritos or a can of Smirnoff Ice.

The Co-operative has already introduced linen sheets to conceal most of the prominent attributes of their young female customers, in accordance with guidelines drawn up by the Mary Whitehouse Legacy Foundation, in association with the National Federation of Retail Newsagents and endorsed by Porno Perry.

It is now asking lascivious flesh-exposers, including clubbers and those just out on a hot afternoon, to provide their own coverings, saying that it is responding to concerns by its customers about the over-exposure of children to the carefully-crafted sexual image of many females who visit Co-op stores.

Steve Murrells, chief executive of retail for The Co-operative Group, said: "Whilst we have tried to mitigate the likelihood of young children seeing strumpets in hot pants with a number of measures in-store, the most effective way of doing this is for these slappers to be concealed with their own money.

"Tarts in bikini tops now have until 9 September to start covering up their alluring bits, after which any lads' dream date who does not look like a haggard old prude will not be served in our stores."

The company's retail arm, The Co-operative Food, claims to be one of the biggest teen and twenty-something suppliers in the country, with more than 4,000 stores.

A spokeswoman for young women everywhere did not confirm whether they would cover up for the Co-Op, but said: "We are sensitive to the mood of the public and to that end we have responded accordingly, and have changed from a string and a smile to skater skirts and a crop top.

"We already have agreements in place with all major retailers, including the Co-op, to ensure our nation's finest totty is displayed appropriately and we work closely with all retailers to ensure they are adhered to."

A spokesman for the PPA said: "The average age of a drooling lech is 30, according to the National Geezer Survey, and these scantily-clad girls are not created for, or marketed to, children."

In the style of Mark W


Jay said...

About time too! Personally, I believe that only magazines which feature on their cover our beautiful future Queen should be displayed, as it were, exposed. But then, I've always been rather dazzled by darling Camilla...
FFS - when did the ladsmags lobby arrange this? How come we careered from hiding fags behind doors to hiding 'Nuts'? How come nobody said that they've always been not in the sights of The Children anyway and that The Children have not developed ET expandable necks?
Wouldn't be surprised if some fabricated Study Has Shown that Jimmy Savile once caught a glimpse of a 'Playboy' cover.
Fags yesterday, lads mags today, chocolate biscuits, tomorrow.
I sometimes wish I were 90 and on the Liverpool pathway.
(BTW I'm female and have never had the least interest in looking at a lads' mag but I think - along with other readers of this blog - that this country should be f**king certified: no-one seems to be able to, actually, think, any more or exercise common-sense.)

Dick_Puddlecote said...

Thanks Jay, I'm glad someone got my point.

I see more flesh in my local Co-op when the sun is out than anything a Nuts front cover can provide. I can't say I've even noticed that they sell those mags, but will check next time I pop down for tonic for my gin. ;)

Jay said...

Yes, I thought your post was a neat spoof (tying in with supermarkets complaining of shoppers being half-dressed or shoppng in PJs (and yes, it still counts if they've been bought from 'Land's End')).
There is such absurdity and sadness in this. The Children know how to access hard porn and, quite possibly, violence, online, they have TVs in their rooms and the sight of a pair of tits on the top shelf is quite probably mocked by them (even if they could actually see them).
The sadness? The last government took away both the rights and responsibilities of parents and the silly sods lapped it up: the working class, because it was a Labour government (until the Gillian Duffy incident opened their eyes) and the middle class, because it was all couched in touchy-feely terms. The present government is no different.
The damage is done. I wish I could feel optimistic but I see no reason.

Junican said...

Media Week.
No doubt another Tobacco Control Front, dedicated to softening up the public in preparation for the cover-up of tobacco products in small shops - especially co-ops.

JonathanBagley said...

I saw a photograph of one of these lads' mags newsagents' displays yesterday and was surprised to find there were no nipples visible - to me, and probably my parents and most other peoples, the watershed of indecency. In fact, all the girls had bikini tops on. I had assumed we were in a page 3 situation on the front cover. What next? M&S banned from advertising its bikinis and Jessica Ennis-Hill performing in a khaki bolier suit?

JonathanBagley said...

I've just seen a photo of one of these lad mag displays. Expecting a page 3 situation on the front covers. Surprised to see no nipples, so what's the fuss about? For the last 50 years, visible nipples have been the bench mark for mild porn. We seem to be hysterically regressing to the Victorian era. It won't be long before M&S is banned from advertsing its bikinis and Jessica Ennis-Hill is forced to perform in a khaki boiler suit.