UKC

I, for one found Jude Calvert-Toulmin's article in High Mountain very funny and well written. I don't know if a thread has been started on this subject but if not, it starts here. Why should we object to abit of girly flesh being shown? Does it upset our male egos or is it "embarassing" to see a female form in all its glory? Some of the shapes of us guys leaves a lot to be desired yet we peal of our layers regardless. If we were surfing or doing other beach activities we wouldn't think twice about women getting their tits out. So why on a warm sunny day can't women do what men have been doing for years and go topless? !!

In reply to muckyboy:


No....not discussed on here yet !

In reply to muckyboy:

Really? Have you not looked at this site before posting this? On the contrary you sound like someone who wants to prolong JCTs moment in the spotlight.


Do we? Who, apart from JCT says so. Didn't realise there was a problem that needs addressing.


I'd imagine it can be a bit toe curling when some fat old bag falunts herself around imagining herself to be a glamour puss in St Trop, imune to the fact she actually looks ridiculous but I can't think of this ever happening


Some do some have a modicum of decorum, either way I've never heard of someone being asked to cover up. Is this a big problem for women, are there lots of oppressed women dying to get them out only to be stopped from doing so?


I didn't realise they couldn't. Is there a law against it or something?

In reply to muckyboy: Am looking forward to reading this article so that I can join in the debate with my own brand of poisonious vitroil

In reply to Rain: well dissected there Rain. I think you nailed that one good and proper

In reply to muckyboy:

Check out EW's fighting women thread.

In reply to muckyboy:

Can someone scan it in a post a link?

Host it on my site if you want, I can't be bothered to buy the mag.

Fex.

In reply to Fex Wazner: i stood in WHSmith and read it this luncthime - you could try that too

In reply to muckyboy:

As I said before, there is a time and place for everything. Just as its generally considered innapropriate to go flashing outside schools, its equally inapropriate for people to be flashing around family picnic grounds. Most people know where the line is drawn.

In reply to GrahamD: But why are women flashing showing their top bits, and men are'nt?

In reply to muckyboy: I thought it was good too, showed the girlfriend tonight and she thought some of the jokes quotes absolutely spot on, Ok it was a take the mick piece, but I thought it had a number of relevant posts. TBH if it had been written by an anonymous writer I bet it would be recieved differently by many.

In reply to Rain:
No, I've only just registered and am finding my way around it. Good response admittedly but i'm sticking up for Jude regardless. I don't know about prolonging her 'moment in the spotlight', considering I'd never even heard of her until last months High Mountain said she would be writing an article. Anyway, each to their own

In reply to Iain Ridgway:
Agree it was a piss take. As I've mentioned to Rain, I had never even heard of her until recently. Why are people so off about her? What is her history?

In reply to Al Evans:

There are also plenty of social situations where it is innapropriate for men to go topless. I don't profess to know why or how society sets behavioural norms ("common decency") but those norms are pretty self evident to most people.

In reply to GrahamD: Yeh, and outdoors in the natural world??? Where men are ok going topless????????????

In reply to muckyboy:

i too read it in smiths at lunchtime, i thought it was well-written, funny and thought provoking.

i'd also like to have seen more of kates(?) tits.

In reply to Al Evans: Forgot to say, bollox Graham, grow up and get off your nurserey horse.

In reply to muckyboy:

I juast have to ask, why on earth would seeing a woman naked upset male egos?

In reply to muckyboy: I dont know it all, but when she first came on RT she created a storm from what I have heard, anyway generated quite a following and quite a lot of people who disapproved of her.

In reply to Allan Thomson: Quite, or even our children?

Yeh, proably the only really problem with the article!

In reply to Allan Thomson: Only if they’re not interested….

Any chance someone could kindly email me a copy (WHSmiths is a bit far for me at lunchtime), so I can read what the fuss is about for myself?

Thanks =o)

In reply to Al Evans:

Taking personalities out of it, then, enlighten me with your elder wisdom. Are you saying that, in this country:

a)Society does NOT have a concept of "decent behaviour"
b)Society does have a concept of decent behaviour and that topless climbing by women IS considered "decent" or
c)Society does have a concept of decent behaviour and that topless climbing by women IS NOT considered "decent"

I'm saying I believe its (c) and anyone who bucks against it should expect all the bric bats they get. Is it right ? who can say but there is usually a good reason why social norms develop. You have to be pretty clear what you want to achieve when you choose to operate outside those norms.

In reply to GrahamD: What I'm saying is that if those are our norms they are pathetic, and its about time we grew up!

In reply to Fex Wazner:

Doesnt work.

Bad Request (Invalid Hostname)

In reply to Fex Wazner:

Your entire site seems to have gone down. For me anyway.

In reply to Al Evans:

Well put! This woman has struck a blow, not just for the rights of women, but for the rights of men. After all, it is a truth universally acknowledged that the principal preocupation of all men is getting young, attractive and above all gullible women into bed. Getting them to remove their clothes is an essential precursor to this process, so if this influences nubile beauties into climbing topless, well done Jude.

This sort of stand is particularly welcome to those of us blessed by nature with neither looks nor charm and possesing personalities that combine the aimiability of a charging rhinocerous with the sex-appeal of a fire-extinguisher - we need all the help we can get!

I think it entirely churlish to object to the sight of a couple of unattractive middle-aged breasts. If this increases the probability of us getting to see large numbers of young attractive ones - it seems a small price to pay, and you don't have to look anyway. Equally, there is no need to encourage the daft old bat's fond illusion that she is a nymph in her teens - her overpowering exhibitionism will suffice to provide any motivation necessary.

This is a trend that should only be encouraged.

In reply to Alex Purser:

Bandwidth is blown thanks to JCT's article!

Hopefully will have it up tomorrow.

Fex.

In reply to Al Evans:

No Al its about time you grew up eh?

In reply to Simon4:
You remind me of Charles Highway in The Rachel Papers, which I am currently reading. There's this bit where he tells his mate (Geoffrey) that he wants to bed an older woman. And G asks him why, seeing as he's always on about how ugly they are with their clothes off, and anyway, how does he know, asks G, because he's never seen one.

Oh, Charles is 19 btw.

In reply to muckyboy:


Oh really it's just that from your use of the familiar "jude" in the thread title and talking about her "new" article it seems you might know more than you are letting on. Very lucky that a newly registered person should pick on this article to start a thread on, considering how many more worthy articles are published every month. You must have a nose for controversy - you charlatan.

In reply to muckyboy:
And in reply to the thread, I don't think women cover up because men object to us being naked, I think we cover up because we'd get way too much attention (of various kinds) if we stripped off. Men tend to think the more we show our bodies, the more we are after a f*ck. See Mick's thread for more witterings on this subject.

But I think Jude's article was well-written and funny and I loved the bulldozer line

And her breasts look f*cking great

In reply to Rain:
Yeah, I have to agree with you: muckyboy ain't real.

In reply to gingerkate: if you like breasts with blue veins like a map of the M6

In reply to Liathac:
They haven't! They're lovely! I was really surprised... I'd only seen Jude with a bra on before, and I thought being so big she'd be bound to be saggy, but no, they are a great pair of tits.

Right, must go to bed and leave this thread.

The summary of my opinions is: I think anyone who lays into Jude for showing her boobs despite not being a 16 year old model is a tw*t.

Bye bye.

In reply to gingerkate: this is all so like the Judy Tzuke Kate Bush whos got the best tits letters page in NME years ago. Irrespective of the social niceties of tits in public if she could bloody well write she wouldnt have to get her tits out to cause a stir. Next it will be deep water soloists bearing their rusty bullet holes at the tops of climbs

In reply to Liathac:

Judes tits are ok, no blue viens but not a pert 17 year olds either. Actually small is beautiful if you want pert, if you want pendulous then large is best. Only problem with large is they head south in an alarming way in middle age. Wife was small and pert, her sisters large and pendulous. Wife said she was front of the queue when tits were given out.

Just read Judes article. Thought it was funny, witty and relevant. Cant see what all the fuss is about. Jude has got great bazookas for sure. But even if she had a set of spaniels ears I wouldnt be arsed. Havent we all got better things to be worrying about than a pair of lasses tits

I think your all jealous because Jude has f*cked you all off at some point in your sad lonley lives

Stop wanking into your disc drives and go and get yourselves laid you spotty little herberts.

Sheesh! some people......

In reply to muckyboy:


w.a.n.k.i.n.g.i.n.t.o.d.i.s.k.d.r.i.v.e.



*wraps broken specs with sellotape



i like it..

In reply to Snake Hips McTavish:


Two failing magazines get made into one new one as a hash job of the old two, first edition, one article and all the free advertising you could ever have asked for on UKC.

Quite canny of the editor really.

In reply to Al Evans:

Well, I think they are the norm for this society and many others. Do you think they might possibly have evolved to protect women ?

Where is a good place to draw the line ? Anyone (male or female) topless outside ? in pubs ? restaurants ? court ?

Like it or loathe it, you have to have a pretty good reason to want to rail against the system, don't you think ?

In reply to GrahamD:


Isn't that an arguement that's been used for many 'social norms' that are now considered outdated? E.g. Not allowing women to attend Universities, disapproving of married women working, not giving women the vote? All argued to be acceptable for many reasons, including as ways of protecting defenceless women from the evils of society at large?


Where do you draw the line for getting a tit out to breast feed?


Yes, and I don't doubt Jude & Kate expected a fair deal of flack?

In reply to Carolyn: Maybe Graham should remember the burkah was also developed to "protect" women?
Are women with bare breasts more vulnerable than those wearing a tight sport bra or bikini top?

I'm enjoying all this. No input from Jude and barely any from me, and lots of debate and argument going on. The plan is working perfectly! HAHAAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!

In reply to BrianT:

You keeping tally of the number of threads generated?

I've lost count.

In reply to BrianT:
I think that, based on your collected threads, intellectually you are on the other side of these... discussions. You support jct solely because you love her. Additionally, although you pretend to relish the fact, I don't think you like the fact that jct is "controversial", because you recognise that a significant engine for that "controversy" is down to peoples dislike of her (in a detached internet forum kind of way).

Hah! Bet that's stopped you dead in your tracks ain't it.

In reply to BrianT:

Now, that would make bouldering more challenging......

In reply to Carolyn and BrianT:

Please don't get me wrong - I'm not neccesarily defending the current status quo. All I'm saying is that that status quo has been established over time and, if its right to do so, will take a long time to alter.

Breast feeding, I believe, is now more generally acceptable. Displaying breasts in public areas for the sake of it generally isn't (yet) and maybe - just maybe - thats for the good of women.

In reply to GrahamD:

Maybe so. But if that's the case, isn't it up to women to decide if it's in their interests?

In reply to gingerkate:

If its you in the photo, your back looks damn fine, I must
say.

Fex.

In reply to Carolyn: Maybe its true that "its not what you do but the way that you do it" For myself the ex marine who walked naked from Lands end to John O'Groats made his point with quiet dignity, not so JCT. I wonder how far Emmeline Pankhurst would have got if she had just got her knockers out for Winston Churchill. With people like JCT promoting women its no wonder nobody takes the issue seriousley. This has more to do with her own publicity and the gaggle of lickspittle that support her on here. A poorly written piece with no research beyond her own limited experience. My son told me he had read better in FHM.

In reply to muckyboy:

Not had the pleasure or otherwise of seeing the article or picture, but wouldn't be rushing to do either based on the author's previous contributions on this forum.

Was the photo in the same class as the Edelrid girl in the 70's? -- the first 'Nude' piccie in a climbing mag I believe. The first issue of Crags also featured an unclothed female bosom, which was less photogenic than the aforementioned advert.

It didn't start a trend then, and neither I think will JCT.

In reply to JessClmbr:

No, but it's a decent enough haul.

In reply to BrianT:

I sincerely hope as JCT's manager Brian you brokered a deal with the publishers of High so that the publicity generated (number of threads, replies, hits etc) and copies sold are tied to JCT's payment.

If not you've been burned.

In reply to Liathac:

I don't think Pankhurst's protests were considered quietly dignified in their time.

Personally, I've no desire to boulder without my top on. But given the number of photographs you find on the walls of climbers' pubs of blokes climbing starkers, I'm surprised one article and its photograph causes such a stir.

In reply to Carolyn: I will concede some ground there to your point. However! I myself cannot think off hand of seeing any naked climbing pics on pub walls, though Im only thinking of the likes of The Heights, Clachaig and say The Wasdale Inn (miserable bastard landlord, must be said) Ive not been in any pubs in Sheffield, who knows what happens in them big cities. My point really is I want High magazine or I want Razzle, most of the time I want something well written, what I dont want is some mishmash homegrown nonsense from a 45 year old with her breasts out when I spend £2.99 on a mag. I often read it in the bath with a glass of Laphroaig and if my missus walks in and catches me with that open on the inside back page having slipped into a daydream of gingerkate and JCT delving into each others delights up Widdop I will be in hot water (quite literaly)

In reply to Carolyn:


Women or Woman ? I'll ask my wife whether she feels represented by the bare breasted campaigners or not, or just embaressed.

Either way, I don't agree. Men's attitudes to have to change as well as women's before this sort of thing does not cause more harm (in the form of unwarrented attention and nipple rash) than good (you tell me what the good is).

In reply to BHB delete th667711t BHBa:

No its based on the fact that porn websites get millions of hits per day, that sexlines have caused the collapse of local telephone networks, that whilst many lifestyle mags are declining in circulation the lads mags are growing.

In other words, its all about sex, not equality.

In reply to muckyboy: Hardly a startling observation - but women's and men's bodies are different.
Within our culture, women's breasts are sexualised. Within our culture, many men enjoy looking at, and are aroused by seeing women's breasts. Some men climb stripped to the waist. Some women enjoy looking at men stripped to the waist. However, within our culture, a 'topless' man is not regarded as being as sexual as a 'topless' woman. (We can have a long debate about why the geography of male and female bodies is differentially evaluated.)

IMO Both men and women should have the right - within certain contexts - to climb 'topless'.
Depending upon the context, such 'displays' may be seen as more or less provocative, shocking, daring or sexual. Within the context of a group of friends enjoying a pleasant day's bouldering in the sunshine, then a 'topless' female would hardly register on the Titillationometer or Shockwavemeter (when Judde and I stripped off at Brimham, I treated it like a bit of harmless play - though I was also aware of the different codings of our bodies - JCT can go topless - shock! - Marc C can go topless - no big deal - Marc C can go bottomless 'naughty naughty' but fun - JCT keeps her undies on - showing her genitalia is 'no go'.) By contrast, being naked and semi-naked when 'strangers' are in the vicinity raises issues about respecting the rights and aesthetic sensibilities and sexual/moral codes of others.

However, the deliberate creation and circulation of images of nudity or semi-nudity to a wider public will unavoidably attract sexual and/or pornographic 'readings' - human beings (particularly men) often like to objectify bodies before 'consuming' them. One can have no control over such readings.

The tricky questions are whether bodies SHOULD and even CAN be desexualised or sexualised dependent upon contexts? Bodies ARE sexualised - and the female body is particularly (and no doubt gratuitously) sexualised. As part of this process, the female breast is imbued with multiple meanings (one of which is sexual) . (Again, there is a long debate to be had about the social construction of the breast - drawing upon anthropology, evolutionary biology, history, politics etc). To change this 'valuation' and symbolic coding would require a wholesale process of resocialisation (which would probably run aground on the rocks of human nature). Jude sees in the sexual metaphors (that some men use to describe climbing activities) a repressed homo-eroticism and/or aevidence of sexual inadequacy. IMO, it's just one of the ways heterosexual men express and fantasise about sex (we sing love songs, write love poems, buy flowers - and we also visit pornsites and telll dirty jokes). Even fully-clothed female climbers are seen by many men - at some level - as sexual beings. Very difficult to imagine topless female climbers being viewed dispassionately and asexually (a RT topless picnic where we all climb naked apart from our rockshoes, and everyone is as blase as a group of naturists - 'pass the cucumber sandwiches please'... 'Be careful, there's some hair on that one' '?!)
I'm sure many women (not just those buying pretty bras from figleaves.com) view their breasts in sexual terms - is it possible to regard them as 'sexual' in the bedroom, but not at the crag?

Another question is whether women breaking the 'topless taboo' (within the same range of permissible contexts as men) are empowering themselves or engaging in a pointless, needless and potentially risky Equality War - that, if won, would diminish the power of the sacred feminine - by undermining their mystique? Should the sexes seek to act - or have the right to act - in exactly the same way? As our cultural attitudes stand at present, women climbers 'going topless' outside a private setting are likely to be caught on the horns of the Madonna-Whore dichotomy (Breasts are for babies vs breasts are sexual playthings; Nice girls cover up, naughty girls flash) and receive abuse, harassment, unwanted attention and kneejerk moral judgements. Maybe as more women go 'topless', then it will become more normalised - and, in time, our social attitudes may change - become more 'grown-up'. Or maybe such an eventuality, would devalue the differences that make our social and sexual worlds so fascinating? I have no answers or predictions - though, my general feeling is that Jude's article - fun and provocative as it is - is already 20 years out of date. No woman can speak for 'Women' anymore (or man for 'Men' for that matter). Society is much more diverse - and it's impossible to make any universal statements about 'how things are'.

In reply to Marc C:

At last.

Cheers Marc.

I wonder if Al has the patience to read your words.

M

In reply to Marc C: Now that would have been much more relevant inside the mag, certainly more thought provoking

In reply to Marc C:

Caught on the horns of a dichotomy??

In reply to Marc C:



Hence the hot spring code where I used to live. Total nakedness is OK amongst a mixed-crowd of friends. But if there are families around or large groups of "strange" males around it is recommended that you keep partially clothed.

In reply to Marc C:

I find some mens chests sexual: I can however control my lust: just

and btw I don't feel I have the right to be insulting to a guy if his bare chest does not excite me for any reason

In reply to Liathac:

Its not a great bouldering photo though.

Now the Bowden photo of some bloke with his top off is a homo-erotic contender, I would imagine, and has a much more of an atmosphere of narcissistic sexuality than Judes.

ln reply to UKC:

LOL

In reply to bhb ooh bhb:

JCT is not the only one stripping off for a living. Interesting and related news item on yahoo.

"Speaker Touts Stripping to 8th Graders

SAN FRANCISCO - The principal of a Palo Alto middle school may not invite a popular speaker back to an annual career day after he told girls they could earn a good living as strippers.

Management consultant William Fried told eighth-graders at Jane Lathrop Stanford Middle School on Tuesday that stripping and exotic dancing can pay $250,000 or more per year, depending on their bust size.

"It's sick, but it's true," Fried said in an interview later. "The truth of the matter is you can earn a tremendous amount of money as an exotic dancer, if that's your desire."

Fried has given a popular 55-minute presentation, "The Secret of a Happy Life," at the school's career day the past three years. He counsels students to experiment with a variety of interests until they discover something they love and excel in.

But school principal Joseph Di Salvo said Fried may not be back next year.

The principal said Fried's comments to the class came after some of them asked him to expand on why he included "exotic dancing" on his list of 140 potential careers.

Fried spent about a minute answering questions, defining strippers and exotic dancers synonymously. According to Jason Garcia, 14, he told students: "For every 2 inches up there, you should get another $50,000 on your salary."

"A couple of students egged him and he took it hook, line and sinker," said Di Salvo, who also said the students took advantage of a substitute teacher overseeing the session.

"It's totally inappropriate," Di Salvo said. "It's not OK by me. I would want my presenters to kind of understand that they are coming into a career day for eighth-graders."

That stripping advice wasn't the only thing that riled parents. Di Salvo said one mother said she was outraged when her son announced that he was forgoing college for a field he loves: fishing.

"He really focused on finding what you really love to do," said Mariah Cannon, 13.

Fried, 64, said he does not think he offended any of the students: "Eighth-grade kids are not dumb," he said. "They are pretty worldly."

In reply to Mick Ryan:

However, doesn't dancing require some talent other than having breasts

In reply to Mick Ryan:

Did anyone else read this as 'Fiend, 64, ..'?

In reply to bhb ooh bhb read me quick:

Nope. It just requires breasts and men.

James

In reply to Rothermere: I cant find a copy anywhere, can someone post a pic link on here so I can see the woman in all her glory !

In reply to Anonymous:

I'd love to, but I'm afraid I don't have any links of Judes boobs.

Brian probably does though, because I know they're on the net somewhere.

James

In reply to muckyboy:

>So why on a warm sunny day can't women do what men have been doing for years and go topless

They can, and do. It is just a windup by Birtles and Jude as has been said a few times on some threads.

Years ago there was a picture in one of the mags of a naked person doing some route in the Gunks, apparently it was a regular thing.

How many of you have gone skinny dipping with your mates? Is that any different when someone passes by? Me and GF did it one hot summers day in nearly every pool between Langdale and Grasmere, and the paths there are not exactly unfrequented.

All this fuss is, as someone said, a storm in a D cup.

In reply to sutty:


Dick Williams of the Vulgarians....classic shot...on Shockley's Overhang.

In reply to sutty: Didn't some jock climber (Dave Cuthbertson?) solo Eliot's Downfall bollock naked? I'm sure I've seen the pics.

In reply to BrianT:

I think you will find it was a visiting American climber, the pictures are (or used to be) on the wall in Clachaig.

In reply to Horse:

I remember that, back in 84. There was a pic in Mountain I seem to recall. It was seen as laddish exhibitionism at the time. Thankfully he didn't keep harping on about it.

In reply to GrahamD:
But cant you see that thats the whole point, in certain situations dress code is applicable, but it should be the same for women and men!

In reply to Al Evans:


Al, if this is about you wanting to wear a dress I don't think anyone will really mind.

In reply to Tyler:

Only if he's bouldering, shirley?

James

In reply to Al Evans:

If men and women were the same physical and emotional beast, maybe - but they aren't. Whilst breasts are still deemed 'sexual' there is going to be an inevitable disparity in mens and womens dress codes. Dress codes do work both ways, though. There are plenty of situations where women can and do dress to use their sexuality to influence men in a way that men can't.

In reply to muckyboy:

the article is crap and we laughed at the photo

end of story really

In reply to JonC:

For those who have not read it, her article is available to download here;

http://www.fexw.co.uk/Default.aspx?tabId=601&ModId=1846&itemId=263

Courtesy of Jude and High magazine.

Fex.

In reply to JonC:
hardly end of story. Thats your opinion and I gave mine. Takes different sorts to make the world go around. I think she rocks - very confident girl which I find sexy. Mock me if you will cos I don't give a four X!!

In reply to muckyboy:


yep that's right, wasn't referring to you at all

In reply to JonC:
fair enough

In reply to Fex Wazner:

Kate's got a cracking back.

James

In reply to Rothermere:

That's what I said earlier, but no one seemed to agree.

Fex.

In reply to Fex Wazner: fab thanks for posting the link guys i would never have got round to reading it otherwise!
To the offended: Havent you got anything better to winge about!
I dont agree with some of it but but made me smile! and lets face it do we really want much more from life? Than a giggle now and again, i bet jude had one writing it!

In reply to muckyboy:

I don't understand what all the fuss is about; it looks like a perfectly normal valid article to me. Light hearted articles in outdoor mags often don't work, but that one was OK I thought. Also I'm fussy about language, and badly written articles hit me in the face and that one didn't. I assume a lot of it is because people have strong views about the author because she used to post on here, which is a bit scary really.
I also thought it was rather odd when people started commenting on it before they'd even read it, and some of those comments made their originators came across as creeps, but maybe that was their attempt at humour.
As far as the issue of topless climbing goes, I agree with those who think it's cultural. I've been to other countries where attitudes are different, and it's nice being able to undress without thinking some creepy letch is imagining all sorts of connotations. Over here I wouldn't do it because I'd feel vulnerable. Basically, women can't climb topless here because some men, and some women, won't allow it.
Anyway, I think it's awful if Jude has been made to feel upset over this. It's just an article, and it's fine.

In reply to Tyler: Very Funny!

In reply to GrahamD: I'm sure theres a 'vice' versa comment to be made there somehow!

In reply to Fex Wazner:

Thanks for the link.

I only know Jude by her online reputation which is kind of mixed, you either love her or hate her but you can't ignore her it seems.

Quite amusing article I thought. I'm not convinced by the practicalities of bouldering topless, but if somebody wants to do it then good luck to them, they'll probably need it what with our climate being as it is.

I'm not so sure about Kate's spotting though, looks a bit dodgy if you ask me

In reply to MeMeMe: If she's spotting, she needs a gynaecologist!

In reply to muckyboy:

I've been lurking around not commenting as I hadn't read the article - and having never met Jude, have no opinion on what she's like.

Now I've read it - and I have one question.

Exactly how serious is it supposed to be?

In reply to Chris L:

not very at all, I think. The back page of these magazines tends to be the 'lighthearted banter' page and I don't see why this is any different.

Jude's very nice, btw.

In reply to muckyboy:

Any one else noticed that the offending photo has been carefully cropped at ankle-level? Seemingly to disguise the fact that the great self-publicist's "bouldering" requires that both feet stay on the ground .....

In reply to tobyfk:

Just read it.

Fun little article from the most authentic non-climbing member of the UK climbing scene. Made me laugh.

But if you do take it a tad serious its seriously flawed.

I see no law that bans anyone from climbing topless. The "outrage" she speaks of when she went topless was more to do with posting the pics for all to see, not the toplessness in itself. Manufactured controversy by a self-publicist, rather like one of the cheap tabloids.

The subtext, if indeed it is a subtext, is just a chance for Jude to slag off, as she did on here.....lonely blokes who aren't getting enough and young bouldering lads (sexually repressed girlies she calls them.....) who want to show off their emerging physique. Not sure why she is slagging these girlfriendless climbers.....they shirley aren't running some campaign to ban lactating mothers from unveiling their breasts in public. Maybe in her growing years she just wants to feel superior.

Well edited, very well edited, terse and too the point. Whose mind and pen crafted it into shape?

She did get the "tits out for the lads" though. Applause for that.

You need to work on those abs Jude.....crunches, leg kicks, and some aerobic excercise will not only hone the body but the mind so that your next piece hopefully about Jack Osbourne (got to keep the tabloid theme) will be as much fun as this one.

M

In reply to UKC News: ah - the "St Jude" joke - that takes me back

was it Rothermere or Ryan i find myself trying to remember . . .

In reply to Mick Ryan: To be honest Mick, I think the biggest row was over the lack of warning.
I think the link was something like Climbing Picnic shots, and the first one is THAT one.
Jude can show what she likes, machts nicht, but I can see some would be offended, or possibly, hauled off by their boss if at work.

As to whtever she may have written, I don't know, I don't read the mags, sorry!

In reply to O Mighty Tim:


No need to be sorry Tim. The full scoop, article and pics, plus a great essay by Marc C are but one click away.

http://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/page.php?id=92

In reply to muckyboy:
Well, courtesy of Fex, I've finally seen the article.
What's all the fuss about????? In fact what's the article about? Didn't think it raised anything new or even remotely controversial. Just my opinion.