We rely on advertising to keep the lights on.

Please consider adding us to your whitelist.



Advanced search

How can any woman NOT support the No More Page 3 campaign?!

(190 Posts)
DoctorRobert Thu 23-May-13 15:42:21

This is inspired by a thread about the No More Page 3 campaign on another forum I'm a member of. Some of the attitudes over there (all by female posters) are just depressing.

So many women who don't see a problem with Page 3 & describe it as harmless fun...the old chestnut that "there are worse things in the world to worry about" (maybe, maybe not, but I can think about more than one issue at once)...Page 3 being defended as tradition...and a complete inability to see Page 3 as part of a bigger picture of objectification and inequality. Posters denying that there even is inequality. Posters saying they would support their daughters if they wanted to topless model.

So my question is, how can any woman in 2013 think that way?

Is it normalisation? A lot of the posters also recount their parents buying the Sun and seeing Page 3 from a young age. Has objectification been so deeply ingrained into them that they just can't see why it's a problem?

Or is that it's too uncomfortable for some women to acknowledge that we don't yet have equality? Perhaps on some level they do realise there's a problem with Page 3, but facing up to that isn't an easy thing to do?

CoalDustWoman Sun 26-May-13 22:13:16

Heh, libertarians make me chuckle.

No-ones calling for a ban, are they? As in legally. Just appealing to better natures.

It's the taglines that enrage me, particularly. Mocking women by putting them in their tits out place is one thing that annoys intensely. Mocking the women posing is another thing altogether. How dare they? And, yes, put anyone else in that scenario and there would be outrage. That there isn't is massively depressing.

libertarianj Sun 26-May-13 22:15:56

it's all very well saying it's weak but how about trying to argue the points i have raised? and it's not a strawman it's my observation and impression.

libertarianj Sun 26-May-13 22:20:34

CoalDust in my defence i did mention earlier in this thread that i would be happy for the campaign to be against the 'news in brief bit', just not about the nudity.

CoalDustWoman Sun 26-May-13 22:28:48

Do you want a race to the, erm, bottom?

What about men's packages? I accept that breasts don't equal penii, but what about page 5 being obvious erections encased in boxers? Or a sturdy 9 incher next to the button down fly of a jean? The Page 7 stuff wasn't really equivalent, was it?

Bizarrely (and I never get this - maybe I'm a lesbian and I don't know it), most of the time when men pose for seemingly equivalent pictures, I don't get it's for me. It's for gay men. I (honestly) wonder why that is. I'm pretty visual, too. I have eyes.

Sausageeggbacon Mon 27-May-13 09:24:39

CoalDust ok money counts for everything, 7m readers is enough to get any advertiser thinking of using the rag. What we have though is very loud voices for very small numbers expecting to be listened to. The look we made 100k signatures like it is the whole of the country makes me giggle. Be interesting to see the reaction of those who claim we don't buy sex on Thursday after the program coming up on the explosion of the male stripper industry. If men are buying sex with strippers then we must be doing the same. It highlights that in fact the numbers against page 3 and against strippers are relatively small but awfully loud.

I agree about how long it took the whole rape in marriage issue to get sorted. Had me very surprised as I was about to get married to XH at the time the law was passed.

emcwill74 Mon 27-May-13 09:32:17

sausage I think there is a groundswell of support for it actually. As I stated earlier, a YouGov poll suggests 49% of the population want rid and 16% are undecided, meaning a minority actually want it kept. I don't think it matters whether they are Sun readers or not, we are all entitled to an opinion on what affects wider society. One doesn't have to be a BNP member to believe that they shouldn't distribute racist literature.

libertarianj I have never said I think everyone who reads the Sun is a moron and neither has anyone who has anything to do with the NMP3 campaign. I have also pointed out before that 7m readers simply does not equate to 7m people who actively support page 3. But yes I think I do know better (on this issue) than those Sun readers who do want it. But so what? Why does that make this an elitist/class thing? UKIP supporters no doubt think they know better than Green Party supporters. You no doubt think you know better than a bunch of silly feminists on MN.

Saying you don't believe in objectification is like eating a piece of cheese between 2 slices of bread and saying you don't believe in a cheese sandwich. Objectification is what page 3 is no matter how much you want to close your eyes, stick your fingers in your ears and say, la la laaa no objectification here. It doesn't matter what is going on in your head when you look at the model's body, the Sun has objectified her by presenting a picture of a woman showing sexual body parts that society deems we cover up. If it isn't doing it for men's arousal/pleasure then why is it doing it? That doesn't make me a prude or scared of nudity, I have no problem with women BFing in public, but funnily enough the p3 girl is never BFing.

I totally agree with coal dust's point about naked male models being targeted at gay men. Why is appealing to men's sexuality so important it has to be in a newspaper?

HullMum Mon 27-May-13 18:52:26

a petition is never meant to be taken as a comprehensive list of every person who thinks a certain way, obviously. It's a list of people who (in this case) firstly know there is a petition, are politicaly motivated enough to bother signing it, have internet in the first place. It's a quite healthy number really. if a company gets a hundred complaints about something they know that actually quite a lot more than a hundred were dissatisfied.

Sausageeggbacon Wed 26-Jun-13 10:54:02

There is probably a better thread to bring this up but this was the first one I found. Sun Editor saying they are keeping page 3 as two thirds of readers support it. Radio 5 live interview here

Not sure if this was picked up on another thread as I am not reading mumsnet much at the moment.

edukation1 Wed 26-Jun-13 14:40:45

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

edukation1 Wed 26-Jun-13 14:42:52

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

ThirdTimesABrokenFanjo Thu 27-Jun-13 13:46:06

It's not what we wanted, but it certainly helps


gedhession Sun 18-Aug-13 15:04:06

I recall well the time Samantha Fox was immensely popular. In fact I do recall many Page 3 girls, Linda Lusardi, Maria Whittaker, Jo Guest, Katie Price, Melinda Messenger and Keeley Hazell being very popular as Page 3 girls and go on to become popular media personalities. I find it interesting that Clare Short tried to ban Page 3 at the time Samantha Fox was at the height of her popularity. Of course, just because something is popular is not a defense to some...

SigmundFraude Sun 18-Aug-13 22:33:39

' i don't buy into this whole objectifcation argument.'

It's a bit like 'Down With Biology. No more Sexual Attraction. We want None of That'

'As I stated earlier, a YouGov poll suggests 49% of the population want rid and 16% are undecided, meaning a minority actually want it kept.'

How many folks took took part in that poll? Do you know?

SolidGoldBrass Mon 19-Aug-13 00:23:00

Well I certainly don't support the campaign. This is predominantly because Page 3 is one of the least horrible things the Sun publishes. Do people really think that if Murdoch were to make the tokenistic gesture of getting rid of Page 3 the Sun would suddenly stop peddling its usual vile cocktail of bigotry, misinformation, fake outrage, manipulation of the stupid and dangerous lies?

junobaby74 Fri 20-Sep-13 13:29:30

I too find it very depressing when other women don't see anything wrong with page 3. I agree with another poster that they probably just don't want to come across as prudish or jealous. I sometimes think this about my sister. Once upon a time we would have had conversations about the objectification of women and how it denigrates us all, now however I don't want to ask her opinion of the get rid of page 3 protest because I fear what her answer will be. A few years ago she went to Thailand and when she came home she was quite open about the go-go bars she had been to there with her friends. Recently when my mum complained about, what she considered gratuitous and unnecessary nudity (female of course) in a film she was watching my sister said to her "just because you are uncomfortable with your own body". So yes I personally think many women are kidding themselves about it because they want to come across as cool and liberal, un-jealous and good fun about these things to other women but also to men.

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