It's not just Page 3 - Guardian article.

(4 Posts)
Sunnywithshowers Fri 15-Feb-13 02:47:25

Page 3 is certainly not the only sign of sexism in the press, but for me it's a hugely visible symbol.

It should be gone.

Darkesteyes Wed 13-Feb-13 00:48:53

The way the media views women also feeds the madonna/whore complex that is rife in society. This causes problems in relationships and is also done effectively to silence women and keep them in their place.
I wrote this post in another thread today and it does cover similar lines.

DarkesteyesTue 12-Feb-13 15:44:13

My marriage has been celibate for 17 yrs. I have a lot of posts about my situ on the "Why do people have affairs" thread.
It makes me angry that men can get away with dismissing womens needs like this.
And the reason that they think they can is because there is still this deep ingrained stereotypical belief in society that "women dont really like sex anyway" and only do it to have kids"
Reverse the genders in this situation though and the attitude completely changes. "oh you cant refuse a man because he needs his oats"
whenever womens needs are discussed it seems to cause nasty mysogynistic reactions too. Louise van der Veldes recent appearance on This Morning is a good example of this.
Also its about more than just the sex act. Its about the tenderness and intimacy that surrounds it. That goes too.
But hey we are women and we are either whores or frigid right???!!!
Sorry but for him to dismiss your needs as "not that important" he is basically saying that you are not important.
And i know what you mean about feeling charged. Im 40 this year and for the past couple of months ive been having very vivid dreams (not every night but intermittently) Its a soul destroying life to live

kim147 Tue 12-Feb-13 23:33:17

Ironically - the same journalist who complained about sexism in the media also commented on the BAFTA costumes

www.guardian.co.uk/fashion/gallery/2013/feb/10/baftas-2013-red-carpet-best-worst?INTCMP=SRCH

kim147 Tue 12-Feb-13 23:02:53

Nothing I'm sure most people on here don't already know. But at least it's out there.

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/feb/12/murdoch-page-3-sexism-media

"Any unmarried, unmothered woman over 30 is generally described as "brave" for which read: pitiable, for which read: tragic ("Taking her mind off her newly single status, Kelly Brook, 33, was seen laughing and smiling … She appeared to be coping well.") This is because women in the media (and I am not exempting the broadsheets from this criticism) exist only in relation to men and children. Once a female celebrity has children, she is always, in the eyes of the media, a mother first and foremost, no matter what else she accomplishes, but a man is always a man. Women are either shaggable or saintly (maternal, married to a male celebrity, silent), or desiccated harridans and shameless slappers."

Interesting reading.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now