Supermarkets to hide tabloid front pages because of sexual content concerns.

Two of the UK's leading supermarkets are to change the way they display newspapers because of fears about children being exposed to sexual content.

Tesco said its in-store "news cubes" would be redesigned so that only the newspaper mastheads could be seen.

Waitrose has announced it will change its displays so some front pages can be moved from children's lines of vision.

It follows months of campaigning by the groups Child Eyes and No More Page 3.

Tesco said it had listened to campaigners and customers and the changes would "strike the right balance for everyone".

Jeez with every kid owning a computer, many in their bedrooms I suspect they have seen more porn than me. What planet are these oafs living on. Shield the kids from soft porn, but mega violence, rape used as a weapon of war and mutilation on the news every night. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30157742

Beam me up Scottie

Yeah, priorities wrong as usual.

Kids need protecting from paedophiles, the internet, traffic, bad diets, lack of exercise, dogs that bite........etc.....Newspapers? ridiculous

They think newspapers need censoring for the kiddies sake? well it looks like it ain't just the sugar and carb content in these Chocolate Santa's from Aldi that is shocking!!    

At least I know what to get my Mrs for Xmas now Paul thanks !
Seriously though, this is just poncy PR. Dealing with a problem that doesn't actually exist ! They'll be asking me to stop posing for Page 7 fella soon lol :-)

So that's what you get when you unwrap a Santa?

zand wrote:So that's what you get when you unwrap a Santa?

Do you eat it?
Oops

RANDBURG wrote:

zand wrote:So that's what you get when you unwrap a Santa?

Do you eat it?
Oops

No, too many carbs!

"Do you eat it?"

- no, just lick it!
Sally

l just had a rather large argument of dog behaviour with an idiot breeder on facebook whose idea of sorting 2 bitches fighting (a question from a group member on a Rhodesian forum) was get a male and breed them so they are to busy to fight and just want sex, I ripped him to shreds and said he was a pratt for thinking he could F.... the females into line. (l used l letter from the word not the word)
He counted that l was vicious enough to cut the p.... off a violent rapist instead of treating them properly... this from a pitbull breeder in south africa and l can guarantee the dogs wont be sweet house dogs as pit bulls are able to be they will be trained as guard dogs and nasty at that.
I agreed and said that as my best friends father had been abused by him (she was 10 he brother about 7 and sister about 6) l had contempt for all abusers.
He said that l should have sorted it if l cared about her (this when l was a 10yr old in the early 70s)

I came in for tons of flack and abuse from loads of people for saying F.... (although just a letter NOT the word) not a word was said about his comments on rapists and paedophiles ... l blocked the thread quite frankly this world is to often a nasty little pit of hypocrites.
Also made mental note in future l wont help folks with advice.

And your last sentence is the crux of the matter MID. Some people just don't like being told they are wrong, or being given advice, so they start slinging mud (sorry, maybe a bad expression!) - anything so they don't have to change their way of thinking and admit they were wrong. I have seen this twice today 'somewhere else' and it doesn't matter how many people give good advice these two just won't accept it. As my Mum used to say "They are to be pitied"

zand wrote:And your last sentence is the crux of the matter MID.  Some people just don't like being told they are wrong, or being given advice, so they start slinging mud (sorry, maybe a bad expression!) - anything so they don't have to change their way of thinking and admit they were wrong.  I have seen this twice today 'somewhere else' and it doesn't matter how many people give good advice these two just won't accept it.  As my Mum used to say "They are to be pitied"  

From Sid Bonkers aka the enforcer.

"WellI I would take that "study" with a huge pinch of salt and I would like to ask those who think that dietary fat does not increase the fat in your blood (cholesterol) to answer me why is it that we are asked to fast for a lipid profile?"

"At this point I would happily admit that I havent read and have no interest in reading the linked study but the way the thread title is worded is surely incorrect, as as far as I am aware any dietary fat will increase the fat/cholesterol in your blood stream."

This from a man who has spent years playing the roll of chief heavy for the low carb antis. A man who has rubbished Gary Taubes on many occasions but has admitted he has never read his books. The latest study re fat and carbs is exactly what Taubes has been saying for years. This from a man who is classed on the DCUK forum as a senior. The fact is the more Bonkers posts the more ridiculous the low carb antis appear. Keep posting Sid, few have done as much for the low carb cause than you.

Sid in the year 3000...

This thread has gone way off topic, any more thread derailing I will have to ask for the thread to be locked and ban warnings issued.

Paul wrote:They think newspapers need censoring for the kiddies sake? well it looks like it ain't just the sugar and carb content in these Chocolate Santa's from Aldi that is shocking!!    

is that for real? lmao!

eddie1 wrote:This thread has gone way off topic, any more thread derailing I will have to ask for the thread to be locked and ban warnings issued.

"For setting up an US and THEM mentality..." perhaps?

Andy12345 wrote:

Paul wrote:They think newspapers need censoring for the kiddies sake? well it looks like it ain't just the sugar and carb content in these Chocolate Santa's from Aldi that is shocking!!    

is that for real? lmao!

I hope so mate! FAR cheaper than those chocolate willy's you can get in Ann Summers shops!

ill save a fortune! they melt so fast