Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Why ban page 3?

582 replies

jackburton · 12/02/2013 20:44

Hi, this is my first post, please be gentle :) . I'm looking for some thoughtful discussion on page 3 and the objectification of women, my wife suggested posting here. Any recommendations for good articles or feedback would be great.

My main issue with a lot of the traditional discussion on this issue is that there seems to be an implicit assumption of passivity and conformity in women that I can't really relate to as a man (or feel is present in many of the women in my life). I don't particularly worry about my son seeing body building or gay lifestyle magazines or other fetishised representations of men because I see them as part of a range of different types of lifestyle that he could adopt. I would think it quite alien that the occasional image of men in this way would significantly affect me (or him). In contrast, advertising and lifestyle magazines aimed at women seem to impose a very disturbing level of conformity and one that I feel would not be acceptable to most men. Frankly a lot of female targeted products seem to objectify (in the sense of judging purely by appearance) and be misogynist (in the sense of appearing to gain pleasure from and dwelling on the humiliation of women, particularly if their superficial appearance is non-conformist). In contrast most pornographic products aimed at men include a great diversity of female personality types, some are passive but many are not, Jordan being a classic example. They aren't treated as objects in the sense that their desire is critical to their appeal, sex dolls are relatively undesirable. While there is certainly some pornography and lifestyle discussions that appear to encourage pleasure in the suffering of women I feel this is in the minority with most magazines presenting their female models as stars who are the centre of attention and whose happiness and desire is an important part of their appeal.

My initial feelings about the campaign against page 3 is that these images are being judged assuming they were present in the kind of magazine targeted at women i.e. they are a conforming image and that they would lead to humiliation of those that didn't conform. I think the majority of male culture is not oppressive in that way. Personally I find mainstream female culture to be much more of a problem for women's liberation than these products. What am I missing?

OP posts:
BubblesOfBliss · 13/02/2013 13:52

"And I thought feminism was complicated!"

Not really. Just that male dominance and misogyny are as much the norm in the gay community as the rest of society.

namechangeguy · 13/02/2013 13:21

Well, thanks again. And I thought feminism was complicated! Confused

BubblesOfBliss · 13/02/2013 13:15

gay women.... the subgroup. It use to be 'gays' and 'lesbians' - then the male generic as in every other area of life 'gay' to describe homosexuals as a group. Using 'gay women' implies that the rhetoric and understanding underpinning the ethos of the magazine comes from the male dominated gay community rather than from the woman-centred lesbian feminist community.

BubblesOfBliss · 13/02/2013 13:11

I have to say - the OP makes me want to weep... It illustrates just how impervious to understanding women's reality male-privilege makes men - even when they appear to be genuinely seeking to understand.

Seeing how much it taxes male imagination to even get the vaguest hint of what forcibly and unavoidably slaps women in the face every minute of every day- it illustrates the profound inequality of it all. SO depressing Sad

namechangeguy · 13/02/2013 13:08

Thanks for that BoB, although I am now more confused than ever! From Diva's website;

^DIVA HISTORY

DIVA was first published in March 1994 and remains the only monthly glossy newsstand magazine for lesbians and bi women in the UK.

THE DIVA MISSION

DIVA aims to deliver the best information, inspiration and online shopping to lesbians everywhere! We aim to provide excellence in innovation, information and entertainment for all our customers, and to make them feel individually special, and connected to our wider community. We provide the highest-quality magazine, retail experience and web presence possible for gay women and are dedicated to creating and evolving a magazine and a community to be proud of.^

Nothing about men in there. They claim to be all about women.

BubblesOfBliss · 13/02/2013 12:56

Diva from what I've seen isn't particularly feminist. Its loyalty is more to gay/queer - ie- male-defined homosexuality over women as a group or female-defined homosexuality.

Although lots of feminists are lesbians and lots of lesbians are feminists, not all lesbians are feminists by a long shot!

namechangeguy · 13/02/2013 10:12

I am going to post here as the OP is a man, and I am assuming he wont immediately want to jump up and down on my head.

I was wondering how lesbian lifestyle magazines might conduct themselves with regards to advertising, and the presentation of women. The only one I am aware of - and feel safe googling at work - is Diva, so I had a quick look. Top of the homepage is an advert by an underwear company. It shows the pelvic region of three models, wearing tight boxer shorts. No face, no body, no legs - just a tanned and toned midrift and tight undies. No muffin top, no fat, perfect skin.

I would expect the readership of a publication like Diva to be pretty politically aware, and to be conversant with many of the basic tenets of feminism. I would also expect their readership to be overwhelmingly female. So why would they run an advert like that? That is a genuine question, by the way. I don't know much about Diva, and it might not be a great example.

sashh · 13/02/2013 09:37

I'm not sure page 3 is responsible for men liking to look at women's breasts.

It's not the looking, it the belief they have a right to look.

Rhiannon86 · 13/02/2013 09:08

This reply has been deleted

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

sashh · 13/02/2013 08:16

For me page 3 is about making it normal for a man to look at my breasts and think he has a right to. To think that I don't mind. That I actually might enjoy it.

It's then about him believing he has a right to touch them, in a public place such as a bus or train.

The first time I was groped I was about 11 or 12. I was in school uniform.

I had blond hair and large breasts. I was still a child. But page 3 identified me as being sexually available.

Have you ever been groped? Probably not.

I didn't choose my hair colouring or my genetic make up but I have been judged on it every day of my life.

Darkesteyes · 13/02/2013 01:00

And because of the pornification of our culture even older men are expressing disgust at pubic hair.
This actors reaction towards this writer was sickening IMO.

www.getthegloss.com/article/going-south-my-first-bikini-wax-in-20-years

Darkesteyes · 13/02/2013 00:57

Unlike female magazines which basically have a hot-or-not section in every issue, most of these publications are only focusing on 'hot' they aren't there to be judged, just desired.

Um no they dont. Pick up a copy of Psychologies or Red sometime.
Not all mags aimed at females are like Heat or Grazia.

jackburton · 12/02/2013 23:31

Thanks for all your comments this has been very enjoyable and very interesting. Off to bed myself. Will look into your references more. I'm very interested in learning more about the underlying causes of the emphasis on appearance, I hadn't thought of it as women maximising a valuable commodity because all others were taken.

OP posts:
kim147 · 12/02/2013 23:27

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

jackburton · 12/02/2013 23:26

"If so, do you promote Jordan as a role model to her? Am very curious about that."

That is a good point. I don't have a daughter but if I did I wouldn't promote her as a role model. But I also wouldn't promote Dolph Lundgren or Steven Seagal as a role model for my son either. I would promote role models that match my own values, rather selfishly, so they would be relateable to me and would have qualities I admired in myself.

OP posts:
AmandaPayne · 12/02/2013 23:25

Sorry, really off now. Night all. Yes, Kat Banyard also good.

ashesgirl · 12/02/2013 23:25

Read about patriarchy, seriously. Because this is what produces a system where women's appearance is made ultra-important.

Is it any wonder that women become focused on this when appearance is such a valuable commodity in our society?

So rather than simply saying this is about women judging eachother, you need to look at the reasons and the system that bring this into play.

AmandaPayne · 12/02/2013 23:24

You were saying that you thought Jordan would be a credible role model if the sexes were reversed. I was pointing out that the sexes can't be reversed. There is no such equivalent. There is no such equivalent because of the patriarchal structure of society (not as limited as 'women don't buy porn). You can't separate one from the other and claim she'd be a role model if you reversed the sexes without reversing everything. In which case, erm, she wouldn't be a good role model.

FastidiaBlueberry · 12/02/2013 23:24

jb why do you think our culture has developed in such a way that when you look at pictures of men and women together on the red carpet, they look as if they're in different climates, one half being half naked and the other half fully dressed?

I'm off to bed now but would also recommend a bit of reading. Kat Banyard, the Equality Illusion, is excellent "feminism for beginners" stuff (better than Caitlin Moran) and has a chapter about objectification in it.

jackburton · 12/02/2013 23:23

Thanks Amanda, good talking to you.

OP posts:
jackburton · 12/02/2013 23:21

"Right, so where is the equivalent male role model to Jordan?"

I agree that this exact position doesn't exist, although it may do within the gay community. The barrier I think is the lack of women who are interested in buying pornographic material and thus the inability to get rich by being an object of lust. The closest I can imagine is a body building actor who can't act, like Steven Seagal or Dolph Lundgren.

OP posts:
FastidiaBlueberry · 12/02/2013 23:20

Do you have a daughter jackburton?

If so, do you promote Jordan as a role model to her? Am very curious about that.

"I know that this can be common in the press but I don't feel it so strongly within male entertainment."

What d'you mean by male entertainment?

Nuts, Zoo, Playboy etc.?

Or mainstream publications like the Sun, the Times etc.? (Because if you look at the journalists, editors, directors, owners, they are mostly male. And IIRC they have more male readers than females - the Mail and The Telegraph used to have the highest female readership at about 50%, but newspapers are still overwhelmingly dominated by male readers.)

AmandaPayne · 12/02/2013 23:20

Off to bed now.

AmandaPayne · 12/02/2013 23:20

Ah, the BAFTA stuff is 'for women'. Oh gosh, I am sure you mean well, but you are falling into every 'male privilege stereotype' going. Honestly, do some reading. You seem a nice guy and I'm sure you'd find it interesting. We're always happy to chat.

AmandaPayne · 12/02/2013 23:18

I honestly can't believe a person can read those magaziens and see them in those terms.

What about, from a quick glance at the home page of Nuts, "Assess my breasts 12,000 breasts, get assessing". No heads or bodies by the look of it. Just breasts.

Ranking of sportsmen? I think, if you really want to get this, you need to try and stop finding male equivalents of everything.