Why can't we just ban page three?(327 Posts)
Brilliant points raised by Clare Short in The Independent. To summarise:
You would think that the relentless sexism in the media would come up against 'media ethics'. However, Lord Leveson says that this topic goes beyond his remit. It is not ok to have lewd pictures of women on the office wall or before the watershed, why then are these images allowed in a widely circulated, national newspaper?
Having just had a daughter, I am anxious about what messages she will receive from this type of constant negative bombardment about women's bodies.
When Short has attempted to challenge this she has been bombarded by the snide remarks about her own body and criticised as being 'jealous'.
So, could this be a new campaign for mumsnet? Let me know your thoughts...
It is one of the most unjustifiable horrors that seems to carry on decade after decade. Surely there are no men left who have never seen a pair of breasts, so what is the attraction? The readership of that rag is getting older and there are fewer of them(still lots I know) and it is that age group it is aimed at. Hopefully it'll be banned once and for all.
I totally agree with Basilrathbone above: it is porn in the Sun, and it is a form of abuse to expose children to it. It is not always within one's control to prevent a minor from viewing porn eg as garlic frother states-on public transport.This material should not be available in a daily "news"paper, although calling the sun a newspaper is laughable anyway.
What are the politicians doing? How can a protest be launched that is influential enough to make them act?
SLUG, that argument only works if you can secure 100% of the 52% that you refer too, as I said in my post I really doubt you can deliver that so your argument is not sustainable.
I would also add that just saying that we are the majority does not deliver it, in order to force the issue a campaign that demonstrates the demand for change has to take place. How uncomfortable will it be if on the one hand as you say women make up the largest number of the population, but still cannot deliver the numbers needed to push change forward.
It will only be banned if men and women stand up and be counted. I have often spoken against it in public places when someone has opened it up in my face. I can honestly say, not 1 woman has every joined in or agreed with me. It makes me puke.
Agree. Its hideous that men just get to oggle a pair of tits for pleasure of a morning in their paper. Sat next to me on the train. Without a shadow of embarrassment. I dont know how anyone can say it is not objectification of women.
News corp is in it up to their necks in the Leveson inquiry, so I wouldnt be surprised if the sun goes down the tubes pretty soon.
As far as public transport is concerned, in the past I have turned to the person next to me and asked them to put their soft porn away as I dont want to see it. Most people have gone red but put it away. I really dont give a damn, it is my choice not to have to look at it. The more people do that the easier it will get to open our mouths. They are just too used to us putting up with it, well not this woman. Men dont have to so why should I.
I have started a thread here about a debate that is raging on a popular cycling forum regarding whether it should be permitted that there are several threads of pictures of women in increasingly sexualised images, on a site that purports to be aimed at both men and women who are interested in cycling.
There are a lot of ignorant sexist attitudes displayed, but also some men speaking out in favour of the threads being removed.
Oh my goodness, I loathe page3 so much it makes my blood boil, there is a time and a place for many varied publications/behaviours but not in a newspaper that can be purchased by anyone for just a few pence !!
Breasts are not offensive, breasts are beautiful. I don't give a monkeys if a man eyes up my breasts. They've been out in public on the beach and to feed DD2 far too often for me to be in the least bothered.
Banging on about Pg. 3 is pointless it just antagonises the sort of blokes who just might be sympathetic to the feminist cause.
Flexible working, fair pay, equal paternity leave for both sexes, decent child care, these are the things that matter.
No normal bloke is going to see anything wrong in pg.3 any more than I want the Olympic male sprinters to stop wearing very tight shorts or the divers to start wearing wet suits.
Page 3 breasts are probably silicon anyway.
kris I don't think you've quite got the hang of skirting up to the delete line yet.
Subtlety is everything
They are adult women making their own choice in life, and a very good income too. I do wish people would stop telling others how to live their lives!
Page 3 is the daily morning reminder of a woman's place in society.
It is needed to maintain the patriarchy.
It is not just titilation. And therefore is vehemently defended to the death.
If it were just about titilation, the man would get out his smartphone and get some porn privately <another debate>
Hmm delete my post
But leave up a sexist objectifying post.
That particular poster is trolling elsewhere too and probably from F4J. But in saying that, a woman would have to have had sex with him to be a member there so no, probably not from F4J.
Hmm delete my post
But leave up a sexist objectifying post.
Apologies - that one's gone too now. Our inboxes are a little bit on fire at the moment but we are working our way through the backlog.
Interesting thread, my DH saw a picture of a seriously obese woman on the virgin media homepage and recoiled saying he doesn't want to see that and how dare they show it and I said well I don't want to see naked girls on page 3, they should ban that too. He said he does want to see that so no they shouldn't
I loathe page 3.
You're reading a newspaper (for everyone, you would think) and suddenly bam here's a reminder for every woman that the default reader/audience is straight men, you are reading "over their shoulder" as it were, and this is what you should be doing - getting your tits out for the lads.
I hate it. I ripped the page out of a copy I found on the train the other day, in case a young girl picked it up after me and got those messages firing at her. I just don't want that to happen.
I think witch is right about how images on Page 3 have just become so normalised. It was close to 25 years ago that I wrote to Clare Short to support her campaign. Every word of the book she published of letters received rings true today as it did then. But sadly, sexualisation and pornification of society has escalated since that time and even more explicit, degrading images of women are seen as more or less "ordinary." I think it was Basil who mentioned evidence of the harm done to young children through exposure to such images (let alone what passes for mainstream porn today - stuff that was niche, extreme and tightly controlled when Clare Short was first campaigning on this.)
It feels like fighting a forest fire with a toy water pistol when you see how these images and messages undermine the confidence, safety and aspiration of young women and girls now - and press young men and boys into being something they may not want to be, but feel required to be in order to conform. None of this is about freedom. All of it is about conformity.
I hate page 3 and really find it hard to believe that it still exists but at least it let's you know which guys to avoid, not just for looking at page 3 but for buying The Sun in the first place. It's a bit worrying when page 3 actually seems almost quaint, wholesome and tame these days compared to all the other highly sexualised images out there on telly, and videos, mags etc. Most kids don't see page 3 but they watch all these horrendous sexual music videos which are probably a lot more damaging. Obviously It's all connected though so would love to see page 3 go but more worried about the pop stars and their images.
I am fairly sure that NI would love for the government to ban page 3. It would give them the chance to attract female readers that might otherwise not read the paper, but would allow them to avoid any accusations that they had bowed to political correctness in doing so.
Page 3 really doesn't bother me at all. As far as pictures of topless women go, they are about as sexually unprovocative as possible. The girls seem to be healthy at least, and I believe breast implants are banned (in the Sun at least).
Honestly, I think you get far more sexually provocative pictures in the other newspapers, they're just disguised as celebrity "news" and you don't generally see nipples.
And for the poster that was going on about people from other countries thinking it weird, in Germany, and I think some other countries, they have topless women on the front page of newspapers, below the fold so they can't be seen by children on the newstand, but on the front nonetheless. Germans do tend to be less prudish about sex and nudity than we are though.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.