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

If it was a time consuming activity that would stop you from fighting all the other bad things in society, you might be right. But it isn't, is it.

The picture of Page 3 itself may be mild, but its effect isn't. It's got a far further reaching effect than Ann Summers.

i don't like wank books like 50shades but don't want to ban the genre either

I assume you will not allow your daughters to look at Reubens then. I have a different pov to you; I have a daughter of 15. Do you seriously think she might not value or respect herself because my pov is different from yours. I don't think page 3 is great but I don't think it's horrific and I don't think it devalues or bebases women; I think an awful lot of women who keep their clothes on do that themselves.

you're struggling because I'm not minded to have ban it as my default for things I don't like ?
I most certainly don't like p3 but imo don't need to ban it
how you talk to your kids is your responsibility not mine.dont shunt your discomfort onto others

While we're at it, can anyone who has no problem with page 3 give me a reason for it that I can tell my girls (they are 3 and 5). I am struggling.

So we need to make a list of all the bad things happening in society (just ours? or globally?), decide which the worst is and then work to change that and forget about everything else until that thing is fixed.

Hmmmm.

I think the situation for women in the DRC is probably top of my list of "bad things". So I should cancel all charitable donations to anything else, not sign any petitions to do with anything else, let work know i won't be joining in with the community day challenge after all, cancel my membership of various politicial organisations and lobbying groups etc etc and so on.

Really? No of course not, that would be silly. Suggesting that people can't engage with multiple actions is silly. Taking 2 secs to sign a petition for something is hardly going to prevent that same person taking action on other things, is it.

We should be dealing with the worst things going on beyond society rather than page three which is at the very very mild end and happens within society - albeit the blue collar working class end. I don't really see that page three is any more vulgar than Ann Summers which is on every high street and which frankly I would like to see the back of first.

standing by and doing nothing is supporting.

Marriedinwhiteagain.

So you would sign a page 3 campaign if the sex industry and all its problems were sorted, based on your priorities? And what are you doing to achieve that?

Why would you prioritise like that when a signature takes all but 30 seconds.

You can fight a fight on more than one front you know, especially when it takes only 30 seconds to show your support.

yy to creeping and tabard especially.

you are v pompous and sweeping in your indignant how can any woman blahblah
I dont like p3 but don't want to ban it.this in no way renders my pov inferior to yours
but I'm bemused at your assertions if one doesn't want to ban p3 one is complicit in supporting it

What an utterly miserable view of society that if a young woman can't get a job on page 3 then her alternatives are to become a prostitute or work in hardcore porn.

Firstly, we should be aiming for a society where there are other options FGS and TBF most of the time there are.

Secondly how terrible to write that and not identify it as a problem.

It makes girls feel horrible about themselves when their schoolmates leer over Page 3 girls openly. Page 3 encourages young boys to compare not only the Page 3 girls, but also judge their classmates with the same standard. And why not? It is in a newspaper after all, it must be what it's there for. It must be okay.

But it isn't.

It is difficult to put that across at an age when peer pressure is more influential than parental guidance, and grown-ups must be doing it as well, otherwise it wouldn't be in the paper. We can try and do try to bring up our boys being respectful to other people. But I think it shouldn't be in the paper in the first place.

the prison system is full of men whose mothers know they aren't rapist. I said my son won't be allowed these things, (as in the future and I said my daughter was still little.. never implied they were older) yes, there will be mothers more interested in being their childrens friends than their parent as you have demonstrated very well, I can't control that,. What I can control is how much the media filters porn down to one the masses via the news. One way to do this is education about rape culture and through protesting and petitioning. I am doing what I can now. page 3 contributes to the rape culture we live in by saying women are there to be looked at and used.

If appearing as a topless model keeps a young woman off the streets when she has nothing to sell but her body then I think it's preferable for her to model topless. There is a chasm between hard porn and soft porn and this is an issue which in my opinion needs to focus on the worst end first.

Topless on page three is relatively harmless; the sex industry and associated drug addiction is not. Priorities.

We have a Bernard Dunstan nude hanging in our bedroom - do the same people who complain about page three think that should be banned too; that life models should be banned, that the human form and it's artistic characterisation should be banned?

More vulgar than page three to my eye are the herds of young women in dayglo mini skirts, five inch heels, fishnet stockings, sashaying drunkenly through city centers at night. They are probably putting themselves in a great deal more danger too.

I knew a page three model once, her day job was as a temp secretary in a City bank. She was one of the nicest people I have met and saving up to buy a flat. Not stupid, not common, not vulgar and not loose - just making the best of all the assets she owned because in the early 80s not many girls in their 20s had had the opportunity to go to university.

Hullmum

I thought you had at least brought up a ds the way you spout such rubbish. You have a lot to learn, if you don't think a mother can know her sons aren't abusive.
How does abuse come into anyway? Looking at pge 3 for a gigle with your mates, makes you an abuser. Well both my ds schools must have produced a hell of a lot of abusers then.
Will you suggest your ds will become an abuser when he sees soft porn in the playground? Will you know for sure it wasn't him that took it to school, how will you handle it? what will you tell him? How do you know he won't be more curious, or get a habbit looking at porn.
I know the answers to these questions because I have been there twice.

Page 3 is not the worst example of sexism or porn in our society. It is however in a national newspaper.

The implicit message of it appearing in a newspaper every single day (rather than being restricted to a (soft)-porn magazine) is that society approves of women being presented and judged like meat, while men, in stark contrast, are presented because of and judged by what they do, with clothes on.

This implicit message is harmful, and it is what makes the death of Page 3 worth fighting for.

I'm 100% sure what my one year old son is up to all times yes BTW. when he is an adult I won't have any other idea then what he tells me though and I'm not clueless enough to assume otherwise. he will however be taught that women are more than a series of parts. Hopefully that will be enough

*how many mothers know their sons are abusers

how many mothers of abusers sons are abusers do you think? and how many know. you're deluded enough to assume you would know. I'm sorry he may have "kept his girlfriend happy" for for years... interested to how that means he isn't abusive? do you think abused women leave as soon as abuse starts? and you know he hasn't pressured someone? you don't know anything how ridiculous to pretend you do.

Also.
Y6 was the first time my ds1 came home and said he had seen it. By the time the teacher found it all the boys had had an ogle. The same with ds2.
No matter how many times you tell your dc, or try and educate them, there will always be a few parents who couldn't give a shit and allow their dc to corrupt others.
I think the most you can ask for is that its not yours.
I think pge 3 is the least of your worries if you allow your dc fb accounts, mobile phones, i phones and unsupervised internet access. The content possibilities here are far more disturbing than a pair of boobs. So much so that are dc are going to have to learn about pornography.

Hullmum

Theres only one of them sexually active and whilst I'm not in their bedroom, he has kept his girlfriend happy for 4 years.
Of course he wouldn't presurise his girlfriend for sex, nor would he hit her. What a ridiculous statement.
I think its you my love who don't have a fuckin clue, mine were man enough to admit to doing this. Are you sure you know what your dc are doing?
Why on earth would you want to source it for your dc if you don't like it? I have no objection but wouldn't encourage mine, perhaps my values are better than yours.

yes nothing stopping dads or even teachers reading it in front if young people.

NMP3 is not stopping anybody from looking at soft porn if they want to. There are plenty of magazines especially for that.

It just shouldn't be in a newspaper.

I'm going to raise my son to be a decent human. I'm not scared of that. I'm scared that should my daughter be heterosexual that she'll only have the option of boys who have been brought up on soft porn to sell newspapers and casual misogyny. it's your sons that scare me