Opinions on Corrupt.org

[Blowtus]

Edit: I should state I found a trend in the Corrupt articles: stating the obvious 'problems' without analysing how these problems came about. Yes, a lot of people live their lives in front of the tv abusing the environment, while self-serving governments tend to popular whims but what's the use of pointing out the obvious? The pieces on the site always seem little more than undergrad attempts at classification, putting behaviour and things into groups and categories. Having a different worldview is fine, but don't simply apply it to what you see without looking at how it came about - that's like waking up from a coma after a car crash and complaining that you have a broken leg.

I can agree with this. I find they have many of the 'problems' understood reasonably, but have no scope for the 'potential'.

 

[hibernal_dream]

- hibernal_dream

Would you say that criticism applies to this?
http://www.corrupt.org/transcendence/women/articles/magazines/

Conclusion:

It's not the conclusion I disagree with but the fact that the article was pre-constructed with it in mind. So instead of methodically looking at the facts, the history, the psychology and economics of a type of literature centuries old and drawing a conclusion, it becomes an mere argumentative piece not to be taken too seriously. It's a well argued and researched piece for its length, but it's cheapened by throwing all the described behaviour in a box

All this artifice, unsustainable consumerism and introspective neuroticism is destroying society. What is needed is a rejection of all this falseness and a return to reality.

Why do girls buy these magazines? Could it be because they're insecure, lack an identity and defined goals? How did this happen? What effect has the psychology of advertising on readers? Could women's magazines play a constructive role like they may have done in the past (we'll never know - the article doesn't even consider it). How did the magazines even come about in the first place and why? What useful social and cultural role could they play? (Yes, intelligent articles for a start, but would they sell?)

It's not as simple as 'rejecting falseness' and returning to 'reality'. I'm not an expert on the matter but i'm sure that any 18th century women's magazine would contain detailed descriptions of latest Parisian fashions. The cause of the content wasn't consumerism but a logical reaction to the social position of a woman of the time - to survive they had to find a husband who would support her and fend off social rejection; they needed to dress fashionably - they had no choice. The suggestion that they reject the falseness of materialistic fashion and wear whatever they wanted would be absurd. Not much has changed - women have to dress a certain way to find work and attract men, and the corporate advertisers take advantage of this. Materialism is the product, and a logical one, and not the cause.

 

[Norsemaiden]

It's not the conclusion I disagree with but the fact that the article was pre-constructed with it in mind. So instead of methodically looking at the facts, the history, the psychology and economics of a type of literature centuries old and drawing a conclusion, it becomes an mere argumentative piece not to be taken too seriously. It's a well argued and researched piece for its length, but it's cheapened by throwing all the described behaviour in a box



Why do girls buy these magazines? Could it be because they're insecure, lack an identity and defined goals? How did this happen? What effect has the psychology of advertising on readers? Could women's magazines play a constructive role like they may have done in the past (we'll never know - the article doesn't even consider it). How did the magazines even come about in the first place and why? What useful social and cultural role could they play? (Yes, intelligent articles for a start, but would they sell?)

It's not as simple as 'rejecting falseness' and returning to 'reality'. I'm not an expert on the matter but i'm sure that any 18th century women's magazine would contain detailed descriptions of latest Parisian fashions. The cause of the content wasn't consumerism but a logical reaction to the social position of a woman of the time - to survive they had to find a husband who would support her and fend off social rejection; they needed to dress fashionably - they had no choice. The suggestion that they reject the falseness of materialistic fashion and wear whatever they wanted would be absurd. Not much has changed - women have to dress a certain way to find work and attract men, and the corporate advertisers take advantage of this. Materialism is the product, and a logical one, and not the cause.

Essentially, the magazine exists for the purpose of making money and encouraging spending on products. I am not so sure that the men of the Victorian age were any more concerned with how fashionably dressed women were than they are today. I really don't think such things matter to men. Simply being well turned out was enough. The whole fashion industry is an exploitation. It creates a false sense of necessity where there is none. Common sense is enough to tell a woman what form of dress is appropriate. Modern magazines are far more extreme, and they have directly molded society rather than being merely simple aids to help women dress correctly. In fact they have often encouraged women to dress, and to behave, very inappropriately. This is an example of the falseness and materialism. These magazines help to indoctrinate women with a manufactured view of life which is geared around selling products and not around the realities of life. They tell women to behave in a particular way to be successful, and yet this advice is more likely to lead to ruin than to success.

 

[speed]

Essentially, the magazine exists for the purpose of making money and encouraging spending on products. I am not so sure that the men of the Victorian age were any more concerned with how fashionably dressed women were than they are today. I really don't think such things matter to men. Simply being well turned out was enough.

According to many a Victorian-age novel, ladies fashions were perhaps even more important for the higher classes, than they are today.

However, I do concur with the rest of your post. i do like a well-turned out woman though. Nice to look at. I must say, as a younger buck, I would follow my belle of the moment around malls, judging outfits. Now, I can think of no more painful thing.

 

[Έρεβος]

According to many a Victorian-age novel, ladies fashions were perhaps even more important for the higher classes, than they are today.

Hmm, Victorian novels are overly "Victorianized." The qualities born of the Victorian era are basically the values that we have based our modern society on and taken to an extreme, all shallow & meaningless. It may have been to an extreme, that is even greater than today, in very small circles of that era, but I don't think it was a generalization of an entire class; that is evident in the romanticist revitalization of the Victorian era.

 

[infoterror]

I should state I found a trend in the Corrupt articles: stating the obvious 'problems' without analysing how these problems came about. Yes, a lot of people live their lives in front of the tv abusing the environment, while self-serving governments tend to popular whims but what's the use of pointing out the obvious?

I think they have diagnosed the problem by pointing out that it originates in lack of human self-esteem. See the Corrupt Vision Statement.