No More Page 3 petition

"there is no petition to keep page 3."

Oh but there is. Any time someone puts their money down and picks up a copy of the paper, they sign it.

If it's true that the Sun is the UK's best-selling newspaper, then there are that many people approving of Page 3. We can hate what it represents, but we have to acknowledge that lots of people like it, and lots more at least accept it.

Petitions don't work on the basis that every single person who want something will sign them. They work on the idea that it is representative of a larger group.

And there is no petition to keep page 3.

Not everyone who reads the paper reads it for page 3, unless you believe all the female sun reader are lesbians (and non feminist lesbians)? NO the majority put up with page 3 because they find it an easy --mindless- read on their lunch break.

Really need to leave it as often FWR trolls are at work here.

No one's answered so I'm repeating this:

Frans1980, what do you say to the point about children seeing these images at the doctors/dentist/on the bus/hairdressers/beside the comics in the supermarket? Who could argue they aren't influencing our young people's views?

Also, re the point about the petition stalling. I agree it does seem to have stalled and that's disappointing. Once upon a time the majority of people didn't care that women couldn't vote. You have to keep pushing your point if you care for it enough. In a few generations people will be looking back on us wondering wtf we were thinking that we thought it was ok to objectify women in the same place we got our news.

it's not a moot point. it's an important and relevant point.

The petition has been around for a long time and has had a lot of publicity on MN and Twitter and FB, yet it's stalled at around 60,000 signatures.

Therefore it's not unreasonable to conclude that it's not a subject people care too greatly about.

Your point is moot....unless there is a petition to KEEP these ridiculous pictures in that rag and the numbers overtake those of the petition to remove them, then you have NO idea how the majority thinks. And as for supporting an organization that lies...it sounds very much like YOU support the Sun, the king of liars!

Sorry the point is why should a minority decide for a majority. Bottom line even if the petition gets to 300,000 that would be 10% the size of the female readership of the Sun. A vocal minority is still a MINORITY.

As to Object they have been called liars for their use of reports that have been proven false and they know the figures are not correct. How can anyone support an organisation that knowingly misleads people?

"They care when they get they get felt up on the bus, they care when they have to defend their clothes when they get raped, they care when they are sexually harassed at work."

And this is all page 3's fault? If page 3 were to end so would the above?

Frans1980, what do you say to the point about children seeing these images at the doctors/dentist/on the bus/hairdressers/beside the comics in the supermarket? Who could argue they aren't influencing our young people's views?

They care when they get they get felt up on the bus, they care when they have to defend their clothes when they get raped, they care when they are sexually harassed at work. This all feeds it. In to the culture that women are there for consumption. The sun is a newspaper, do I read it? No but the majority of the UK do, so it matters. If you are unable to understand that no amount of arguing will make you,

"The cause of most women will be helped by ending pg3"

To be perfectly honest I would guess most non-feminist women don't care if page 3 exists or not.

"breasts aren't news" neither is anything the sun prints! Stop complaining about crappy tabloids because tabloids always will be crappy. If you want news then buy a decent newspaper.

Franz, feminism is about helping women as a group. The cause of most women will be helped by ending pg3. Those models who lose their jobs will find clothed work else where I'm sure. Nothing wrong with women being topless at the beach. I that's the point breast aren't news

That's my pathetic liberal dilemma I suppose Frans you're right - I'm anti these things. But obviously it's all about freedom and choice and I wouldn't want to be like France insisting on a ban on burkas - but I do have issues with the way women are controlled by various religions.

But if I'm going to take a side of the fence - I can say I'm anti something - and I'm anti page 3 and don't think a newspaper should show bare boobs. I think it's demeaning and dated.

There is a difficult line to tread when you think something is wrong but don't want to hinder an individual's freedom of expression and I absolutely accept I'm on that line.

"Frans, whether the models want to do it or not is beside the point."

So you don't want the models to choose. You want to choose on behalf of the models?

"And I'm anti burkas and to a lesser extent hijab"

Anything else you want to ban? Why don't we just ban everything we don't like and we can have a country just like China and have the Government tell us how to live our lives and what we can and can't do?

In Europe a lot of women choose to go topless at beaches. Should we ban that too incase a tiny percentage of people get offended by the human body (despite the fact we are all born naked)?

I'm not a prude. I'm anti page 3. And I'm anti burkas and to a lesser extent hijab - and the Catholic Church and those in the CofE who don't want female bishops. So it's definitely not about being prudish. It's about women not being reduced to their sexuality / gender or being defined and controlled by their gender.

To me saying this is just us being prudish is similar to saying those who spoke up against Black and White Minstrels / casual racist sitcoms / women being slapped in face were being too sensitive or didn't have a sense of humour. It's a much wider and greater issue than you seem to realise.

Frans1980 - I agree I dont have to buy the rags if I dont want to. However, I do have to live in the world it creates. I do have to be faced with pictures of womens tits everytime I go to the supermarket. I am not a prude. My problem with this is that men do not have the same thing. I actually asked a young man in a newsagents if he would be ok about having pictures of fit young guys with nice packages in nearly every shop and he, bless him, was totally honest and said he wouldnt be. This is a gender issue as far as I am concerned. I went in a newsagents the other week and the manager had put the Sun/Sport and Daily Star with the mens magazines. I asked him why he had done it and he said he was sick of children being infected with all this negative rubbish about women and he also felt for his female staff. I was proud to meet him! I also realise the models are all over 18 but they are often made to look much younger. I realise people should have a choice about what they 'read' but I should also have a choice and I dont. The other week I was on a train. A man aged about 80 opened a copy of the Daily Star on his table straight to the picture of the naked women. Sitting opposite was a little girl who looked over at it and asked her father why that picture was in there. He was embarrassed. I asked the elderly man to put his soft porn away until he got home or at least look at it without having to show it to the rest of the train. I was actually shocked because the father of the child thanked me and said he wished he had my courage!

Namechangeguy - I would love to shut them down but its just too much to hope for.

Sausage - I am a member of OBJECT - dont worry we dont need putting out of our misery - we arent in misery!

If page 3 was banned, would you still be happy about the Sun/Star/Sport, and the kind of 'journalism' you get in them? Wouldn't it be better to shut this kind of gutter press down completely? (and for the record I am happy to ban Page 3). Page 3 is a problem. Gutter press is a bigger problem (in my opinion).

Laps joining Object? Seriously? They were ripped apart on "that blog" again in the last week or so and called liars. And I can see the point of the article writer. Sorry Object should just be put out of its misery.

Male privilege in action here.

Are Page 3 models children or young teenagers? No, they are all 18+ years of age.

Are Page 3 models forced or trafficked? If just one model was proven to be non-consenting I think it would be the end of The Sun as well as Page 3, I don't think The Sun would take that chance. There is no shortage of willing women anyway (as evidence by the large number who enter the Page 3 idol contest each year).

Is The Sun the only newspaper available to buy? No there are plenty papers to choose from.

If it is so offensive why is it the UK's biggest selling newspaper? If it was so bad then noone would buy it and they would go out of business and disappear, no banning would be necessary.

So what's the problem? Is it just prudishness?

Every day sexism via No More Page 3 facebook page have drawn attention to this in FHM......

here

It's all part of the same crappy attitude to women / violence against women within UK press.

Page 3 is wrong wrong wrong! When kids see the objectification of women in NATIONAL NEWSPAPERS it influences the way they see the world. Getting rid of this in our national newspapers is a big step in the right direction. In a generation it stops being normal. What's not to like about that???

I really don't get people's objection to this campaign. No one's talking about banning sex or porn. We're talking about our newspapers ffs.

Stop reading The Times! Seriously I read it for years (pre my feminist wake up call). Now I read either the Guardian or the i/The Independent.

Join OBJECT.