Zoo models express disappointment at the magazine’s closure

Zoo models express disappointment at the magazine’s closure

ON THURSDAY, Bauer Media announced that Zoo Weekly would be closing “due to tough retail conditions”. It has been declared that its October edition will be its last.While there has been speculation for some time that Zoo Weekly has suffered low sales, it is a victory that Collective Shout, Australia’s most vocal anti-porn campaigners, is claiming as its own.

In August 2015, Zoo Weekly was removed from Coles’ shelves after a “successful online campaign” was waged by Collective Shout. The basis for this campaign was that Zoo Weekly was, in effect, a “misogynistic, all-ages porn mag”.

It was argued “sexual objectification of women [was] Zoo Weekly’s core business.” It was stated that Zoo Weekly “promotes rape culture.”

While Collective Shout will have you believe that the reason for their campaign was because of a poorly worded article that was published by the UK’s Zoo Weekly, history has shown that Collective Shout’s real problem lies with the idea of women displaying their bodies in men’s magazines.

Firstly, the problem with claiming that women have been sexually objectified by this magazine is the fact that women, who have appeared in this, and other “lad’s mags”, have done so consensually.

The women who appear in these magazines, often dressed in string bikinis, have done so consensually and have been paid for their work.

As far as I am aware, there have been no instances where Zoo Weekly has placed a woman on their cover without that woman’s approval.