Home Videos Photos

GaGaLoo Magazine Cover BANNED In The USA!!

| Filed under: Lady GaGa

634021896713840072jpegjb.jpg

Well THIS seems a little ridiculous!!

Over the weekend we posted the FIERCE cover of Q Magazine featuring our beloved GaGaLoo grabbing her "enhanced" crotch and strategically covering her tittays.

Despite there being NO nip, much of the USA, including the store Borders and then all of New York State, is refusing to stock the magazine unless all that lower boob is covered up!!

In order to be displayed, many chains are requesting that Q seal the issue in a protective bag.

WTF?? We've seen MUCH worse on magazine covers openly displayed for everyone to see!!

What do U think?? Is the Lady's photo too offensive to the eye??

MTV Video Music Awards' Worst Dressed Of ALL Time!
The Highest-Paid Women In Music 2013!
On Stage Ouchies!
MTV Video Music Awards 2013: Worst Dressed
Guess The Bra: Celebrity Edition!
Hollywood's Highest Paid Stars Under 30!
Email this  »

168 comments to “GaGaLoo Magazine Cover BANNED In The USA!!”

More comments: « 1 [2]



  1. 101

    Re: Bö!!!SEMICOLON!!!rte Petrarchia – that is very funny and true!!



  2. 102

    They banned the tranny? good riddance Rat face!



  3. 103

    this is fucking stupid! UN-BAN!!!



  4. 104

    bullshit! i just saw a sports illustrated with her top over her shoulder and boobs everywhere? love gaga!



  5. 105

    This is BULLSHIT. America is so stupidly fucking conservative, yet so corrupt. FUCK the media. I am so angry because GaGa is so krunk. America………. grow the fuck up.



  6. 106

    I like gaga but I find it nasty the dildo she has ewww thats just disrespectuful and plain Nazztyyy Ewwwww

  7. Phaze says – reply to this


    107

    How stupid. It's a boob. So what?

    I think the cover is hot.



  8. 108

    it's tasteless like you Mario. Get over it. You think Wo(man) is classy.



  9. 109

    typical asswipe puritans. violence is ok, but a little underboob will drive the kids on the bus straight to hell. morons.



  10. 110

    SI GQ MAXIM etc are far worse and int he supermartket at the checkout where tons of kids babies etc can see it at eye level yet this gets banned?

    im sure its over crotch bulge but still ridiculous



  11. 111

    I Think Everyone Should Just Fucken Get Over It…! Its A Magazine…???



  12. 112

    i really like this picture. more than some of her others



  13. 113

    Her whole phoney trying to hard to be shocking and edgy persona is offensive.
    Madonna did this more then twenty years ago and while I'm not a fan of hers either at least she was original. Gaga is not remotely attractive, her music is terrible and her supposed "fashion" is laughable. You're so busy kissing her ass that you never have a bad or honest word to say about her. Funny how the celebs that you're friends with never get trashed but everyone else is fair game.

  14. adt says – reply to this


    114

    Of course it's offensive to the eye. It's Lady Gaga, she's offensive to all senses. They probably don't want to show the cover because her ugly fucking ass is on it. She should fuck off and go away because her music is as terrible as she is.

  15. MJoJo says – reply to this


    115

    Oh man, COME ON! They let it roam freely here in Ire — pretty much the most outrageable country in the world!



  16. 116

    I'd put it in a bag just to cover that face.



  17. 117

    Typical America. Ok with guns and violence - OK, but a natural thing like sex - banned. Ridiculous.



  18. 118

    Sports Illustrated shows more than this… and it's perfectly acceptable.



  19. 119

    This is STUPID



  20. 120

    This is too offensive for that store, but if you go into Borders there are tons of magazines at "eye level" that show much more sexually explicit photo spreads of women wearing a lot less, and revealing a lot more than she is here. Quite a double standard if you ask me.



  21. 121

    wow, i see absolutely nothing wrong with this cover.
    fuck censorship



  22. 122

    Re: Bö!!!SEMICOLON!!!rte Petrarchia – I couldn't agree with you more



  23. 123

    Oh No!!!! A BREAST!!!! What will we ever do????



  24. 124

    Yes, Gaga's photo is too offensive to the eye. Hell any photo of her is offensive to the eye. She's a fulgy tranny.

  25. R3LS says – reply to this


    125

    Thats fucking retarded. Its not like her nipple is hanging out.
    Anyways, LOOK! Gorillaz is apparently album of the year!



  26. 126

    Re: toyboy25

    Whatever she may have studied her music is PURE TRASH just like the girl. Though, if someone like Brittney can make it big then there's hope for anyone (bet you love her too huh??? Figures…)



  27. 127

    We get it, stop kissing her ass!



  28. 128

    LOWER BOOB!! MY VIRGIN CHRISTIAN EYES!!! AHHHHHHHHHHHHHH



  29. 129

    It's not censorship if it can be sold but just covered…like a playboy or something. I have no problem with regular nudity or sexuality with nudity, but I would rather my young boys don't see sexual nudity for a long time and they don't need to see it at a Borders bookstore. BTW, I am fine with National Geographic pictures…and I think we can mostly agree that that type of nudity is different.



  30. 130

    Oh, thank you dear God! And face it…the bitch is just too damn ugly…



  31. 131

    SERIOUSLY?!?! i saw kate moss' NASTY SNATCH in an issue of W magazine about 7 years back, what the hell is this nonsense?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?



  32. 132

    That's because the country is filled with fat, unfuckable shills who think this harmless photo will somehow damage their retarded children. We're a nation of idiots.



  33. 133

    This is pretty gross. Not just the boob and the peen but it just looks trashy. Even though ppl are often on covers wearing pretty much nuthin, when I look at stuff like this it makes me think censorship is a good thing.



  34. 134

    Ridiculous!
    This is absolutely Beautiful.



  35. 135

    Re: MadonnaLive
    "and she even made sex book and sexy sexy videos and they all were banned from usa."
    I would think a psychotic Madonna fan would know more about their idol. Madonna's SEX book wasn't banned in the USA; it came in a mylar shrink wrapper and sold out quickly. Not ALL of Madonna's videos were banned either (actually a very VERY small handful of them were). If you lived through the 80s, you couldn't turn on MTV and not see her videos being played 500x a day.



  36. 136

    i love her. and this cover is hot. only in america would they ban this. so fucking stupid.



  37. 137

    their actually over reacting to this ..

  38. Jaxy says – reply to this


    138

    This is the best news I've heard in a while!



  39. 139

    OKAY that is actually pissing me OFFF shes not showing anything so that magazine should be able to get out !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    PS love you perez



  40. 140

    ive seen worse shit in America than this cover, and to those saying lady gaga cant sing you obviously need to clean your ears. She is one of of the few that actually has a beautiful voice out there



  41. 141

    This is tame compared to other magazines covers.
    What the shit?



  42. 142

    hm..just put a bag over her hideous face and it will be fine. except those gloves creep me the fuck out..



  43. 143

    Even though I don't like Lady Gaga, but this is ridiculous…banning this is stupid. There is nothing wrong with this damn cover.



  44. 144

    Congrat =]



  45. 145


  46. 146

    Re: toyboy25 – stfu RETARD..NO1S EVEN TALKING TO YOU..I KNOW THE TRANNY IS BEING SARCASTIC DUMBAZZ.



  47. 147

    Is that a dick in her pants?



  48. 148

    Too bad they couldn't have banned the song "Speechless" God, what a fucking horrible song . . .



  49. 149

    Whahaha!!! So typical American! The Americans faint at the sight of a boob (nipplegate!) and now this. Guys, it's tits! That's it! Everyone has 'em! And they're not just for sex you know, they actually have a function! Grow up over there!

  50. china says – reply to this


    150

    sure it`s offending. everything from the neck up looks just gross.



  51. 151

    I LOVE GAGA



  52. 152

    She looks great,as always i am gone get me an Q magazin.I hope thate we have theme here in the nederlands……Gaga gogo i love ya



  53. 153

    Why does she have to be everywhere with her clothes half off all the effin time? I wish she'd go sit down somewhere.



  54. 154

    Re: toyboy25 – Listen child, you had better get back to doing your homework before Daddy gets mad and makes you blow him again (and swallow).



  55. 155

    Get over yourself, America. They're breasts. Priorities?



  56. 156

    I don't see anything wrong with it .. did they make GQ cover the mag with a bag when Jen Aniston only had like an effin tie on .????? like wtf is they did then w.e but if they didn't then they need to shut the eff up its not like there's nipple showing.



  57. 157

    Re: pusspuss – Britney's alright but she's no Gaga. So you think dance/pop/electronic music is trash? Thats your own opinion, music snobs like you ruin everyone else's enjoyment. You must be the Debbie Downer in your group of friends. That is if you have any friends.



  58. 158

    Re: blubabiecutie – If you post a comment in the comments section for everyone to read you are talking to me and everyone else.



  59. 159

    Re: DM-Lollipop
    You strike me as pompous….oddly enough….



  60. 160

    Ummm what happened to her saying that girls didn't need another female writhing in sand and touching herself? Yet she is constantly naked and grabbing herself. Hypocritical bitch. And shame on u Perez for not calling her out on this.



  61. 161

    I would mind if a little more of her boob was covered, but there's nothing wrong with the way it is now.



  62. 162

    There have been worse covers out there…I just love Lady!!



  63. 163

    haha such puritans. in britain you go to the magazine section and a humungous pair of tits if the first thing you see…..



  64. 164

    Re: Brainbug – The only dick I'll be sucking is my own. Fuck off and die.



  65. 165

    Re: Starlit – This is a little different then writhing around in the sand posing sexy and such. She has on monster gloves and a giant dildo in her pants… that's not something you see on a magazine cover everyday.

  66. Genn says – reply to this


    166

    REALLY? I've seen way worse.



  67. 167

    I Bought That Mag And If They Want To Ban It For Anything It Certainly Shouldn't Be For Its Cover, Some Of The Things Inside This Magazine Are Disturbing. Its Stupid To Ban It Just For Her Quirky Ways To Be Honest. There's Nothing Offensive About The Cover.



  68. 168

    Re: toyboy25 – Oh please. It's the same thing. Sand, leather. What difference does it make. She's naked all the time and in most videos she is writhing around and touching herself and others. She's a hypocrite. Get used to that fact. I don't give a rat's ass if it's gloves or sand touching her damn body-she's doing the exact same thing she said she didn't want to do. She even used to be a stripper. Hear that GaGa? You're a hypocrite!

More comments: « 1 [2]