Borders, Barnes & Noble, censor shirtless man.

[canetoad]

A magazine cover featuring groundbreaking Melbourne model Andrej Pejic has been deemed too racy for magazine stands in the US because the gender-bending "Broady boy" is bare-chested and looks too feminine.

The 19-year-old from working-class Broadmeadows has taken the fashion world by storm with his androgynous look, modelling womenswear for Paris couture shows and even wearing a wedding dress for Jean Paul Gaultier.

But his latest magazine cover for the New York-based magazine Dossier Journal - in which he is pictured taking off his shirt with his long blond locks in curlers - has been ruled too risque by US bookstores Barnes & Noble and Borders, which are covering the image with an opaque sleeve.

Dossier creative director Skye Parrott told the Huffington Post that the magazine had informed both stores that Pejic was male, and that they were essentially censoring the image of a shirtless man.
Edit to add link: http://www.theage.com.au/lifestyle/fashion/book-giants-censor-aussie-male-models-breasts-20110517-1eqas.html

[GKirk]

1. I'd cover it up too...

...yuck!

[Countdown_3_2_1]

9. Its their store. They can do whatever they want in it.

Don't like censorship? shop elsewhere.

[Enrique]

2. he looks like Mariel Hemingway

not that there's anything wrong with that...

[Drale]

3. That cover is pretty creepy, but

I don't think it should be censored.

[Bucky]

4. Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we censor girls' titties

I apologize for the use of near-rhyme.

[marmar]

15. Some perfectly good imported Italian roast coffee is now on my keyboard.

:spray:

[Shagbark Hickory]

5. Whats with those hips and those boobish looking breasts? Had some assistance to get that look IMO.

[Enrique]

7. nah,he's just skinny

and young.

[WinkyDink]

10. He's flexing and bending forward.

[blondeatlast]

6. The decision to block should cover all genders or none.

It really is as simple as that.

[WinkyDink]

12. Well, no. That's why "Men's Health" covers can be shown at the supermarket, and "Playboy's" cannot.

[blondeatlast]

14. I said "should". I'd like to go shirtless on the beach and

I find it unfair that I can't. The law is for everyone or it isn't; same with the business practice here.

[GKirk]

37. I support your right

to go without support. :)

[REP]

8. He models women's clothes? What does that tell you about women's fashion?

It'll look great on a breastless, hipless 19 year-old boy with wide shoulders ... on an average woman with breasts, hips and narrow shoulders, well, time for some work ladies!

[Rowdyboy]

11. I really don't feel its censorship when you refuse to highlight something that is nauseating....

And that image is certainly nauseating. NO-ONE appreciates the male form more than I but that image is better forgotten.

[yawnmaster]

23. what is causing the nausea? eom

[Rowdyboy]

28. The "starving orphan" look isn't appealing to much of anyone....

In my store I'd keep it hidden-but I don't have a store.

[jp11]

25. To you it is, to others it might be and still others it isn't.

I find it interesting, wondering if photoshop was used/surgery but it doesn't nauseate me.

[Rowdyboy]

30. To each their own. I begrudge no-one thie taste but I find it unpleasant in the extreme

Just me.

[originalpckelly]

27. Why because the person isn't following our definitions of gender?

Who made you the gender police?

[Rowdyboy]

31. I don't have a store to display magazines in but if I did I wouldn't show this one...

I'm not the "gender police"- I just have an opinion. You don't share it. I thought thats what DU was about. So fucking what?

[Modern_Matthew]

13. If shirtless women are censored, then so be it...no tears from me. nt

[edbermac]

16. IT'S A MAN, BABY!!

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_tPZzR7EpIjg/TTcct74RutI/AAAAAAAAAc0/SzJhSu0ieK8/s1600/austin+powers.jpg

[PsychGrad]

17. Nauseating? Wtf?

I don't find it offensive at all, it's artistic, edgy. As for censoring it, it seems a little silly to me as it's just a shirtless man, something we ALL see enough of on a daily basis. Seems to me that the censorship is coming from a place of discomfort with a male looking effeminate. That makes me nauseous, not the picture.

[JoeyTrib]

42. I think you hit the nail on the head.

Disclaimer: the pic makes me vomit. If I want a blond in curlers, she'll have all the right body parts. (Not a fan of curlers, though. Like her hair long and straight and silky, but I digress. :evilgrin:)

However, all that said, I think it got censored because the guy looks like a chick, and it's fucking weird. I wouldn't censor it, but I wouldn't be drinking my coffee anywhere near it.

[polly7]

45. I agree. It is artistic and edgy, and provokes some thought.

The fact that he's got a really gorgeous face doesn't hurt either.

[Cid_B]

18. Ugh... eat a freaking sandwich...

[Canuckistanian]

19. And they wonder why they're going bankrupt

If I were them, I'd showcase the magazine in a special display. Gay people and gay-tolerant people have $$. Homophobes usually don't.

But Homophobes somehow get to rule the marketplace.

[Warren Stupidity]

20. the responses here are full of bigotry.

NICE JOB DU!

[canetoad]

29. The revulsion surprises me too

As PsychGrad said above, I find the photo an interesting and confrontational one but certainly not disgusting. :shrug:

[eridani]

32. People should be held responsible only for rational ethical choices

Gut reactions to visual imagery don't fall into that category.

[canetoad]

33. Thanks for the laugh!

[wickerwoman]

34. +1

What's "yuck" or "creepy" or "nauseating" about a man who looks slightly feminine? I think he's got a really interesting face- like Natalie Portman.

It's a picture with a lot of interesting things to say about gender expectations and desire (but, as others have pointed out, hardly *new* things to say). It's pretty disappointing that in 2011 so many people on a supposedly left-wing/progressive website have a problem with a picture of a shirtless guy with curled hair and feminine facial features.

[Rowdyboy]

35. It has nothing to do with feminity....I find feminine men attractive-just not starving

feminine men. He looks ill.

[yawnmaster]

21. Couple of things...its not really censored as its not banned or cut...secondly...

I think the real issue here is that the female form is often hidden from easy view.
Why do we "hide" shirtless pictures of women? We do, and that is the issue.

Just seeing this cover, without knowing the context, it appears to be a woman and that is the issue the book sellers are dealing with.

[underpants]

22. LEAVE BRITNEY ALONE!!

:hide:

[GKirk]

36. Just so you know...

...that was funny!

[msanthrope]

44. Thread win! n/t

[marmar]

24. Only in America.......

But yet this magazine cover is perfectly acceptable......

[saras]

26. I just don't get the fuss

I've seen so much worse, in so many ways, every time I go to the store. The tabloids by the checkout much worse than this. He at least looks like a moderately healthy human, unlike most Hollywood personalities post-botox. This picture would have been arty and edgy in 1984. Now it's kind of boring and mainstream, but the corporate media isn't.

[GKirk]

38. Is it really censorship?

They didn't remove the picture, they only covered it up because some
people would think it's a topless woman.

[Bonobo]

39. Because he looks like a prepubescent girl.

Would you be in favor of showing (in broad view) topless girls as long as their breasts aren't developed?

How about cartoons or drawings of pre-pubescent girls?

Or I could take the counter argument and say that everything should be shown, big tits, small tits, penises, everything.

[JoeyT]

41. And he isn't a prepubescent girl.

To turn your slippery slope in the other direction: Would you be comfortable with charging everyone that viewed this image with child pornography because he looks like a prepubescent girl? Of course you wouldn't, that would be stupid because he isn't one.

[JoeyTrib]

43. No way does that look pre-pubescent

A pubescent boy maybe.

[sarcasmo]

40. This wouldn't even raise an eyebrow in Europe.