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

hoping it might happen when millions of people buy the paper for this very reason, is another

Do you honestly think that millions of people buy it just for that reason ? If so, then there's a market to be had by just selling Page 3 on it's own so why doesn't it happen ? Perhaps because no-one would buy it because they'd be openly owning their dirty little shame and heaven forbid we make men uncomfortable about that. And if they feel embarrassed or ashamed to openly buy a Page 3 - boobs of the day sheet then that really says it all about what it really is and the effect that it has.

Saying that you don't mind or object to page 3 says to me that you don't mind the fact that it makes me and other woman feel incredibly uncomfortable. It disappoints me that any woman would take such a stance.

It's such a simple thing to object to but that sends out a powerful message that women are not put on this earth to be ogled by men at their leisure for the princely sum of what - 50 pence or so ?

As for that whole liberal crap of censorship - the rights of men to look at breasts does not trump the right of women to feel comfortable going about their business. In fact, I'm not so sure that there is such a right to leer at breasts.

Page 3 serves no purpose whatsoever other than to provide a cheap thrill to saddos - do you really think that the censorship argument holds any water in that context ?

Wanting the editor to do something is one thing....hoping it might happen when millions of people buy the paper for this very reason, is another. If the editor stopped P3, they probably wouldn't have a job anymore.

Because being a feminist is about having the right to make your own choices
and if that means getting them out for wank fodder
oh wait

Ha, ha Hully. Now it[s probably time to hide this thread - there's only so much I can take of femisim-is-about-the-right-to-choose, if-you-don't-like-it-don't-buy-the-paper, there-are-worse-problems-in-the-world and all the other crap arguments page 3 apologists come out with.

OP you don't like page 3. The campaign has got over 100,000 signatures (taken a long time) the rag has an estimated 7,000,000 readers. If people stopped buying it maybe breasts in the papers would die out but you have an opinion that I guess 7m people don't share. Each to there own.

I am about people exercising choice, if people want it to stop you just have to cut the readership. I wonder how many of the 100k were Sun readers and have stopped? I would take a wild guess at not many.

As to objectification I had real issues from the age of 14 until XH made it a positive for me rather than a negative. Now I miss the attention of guys as I have gotten older as I personally enjoyed feeling desired.

I don't get the censorship argument either tbh. If you take the censorship argument to it's logical end, why not campaign for more nudity in the Sun? What about my right to see fanjos? And willies for that matter? Or topless builders? Why oh why are they censoring the labia?

That said, I want them to stop because it's the right thing to do. It is past its sell-by date.

The NMP3 campaign doesn't want legislation to ban naked breasts in a newspaper. It wants the editor of the sun to stop running it. It is an editorial decision to have a page 3 and it can be an editorial decision to stop having it. Like some posters suggest they wouldn't mind if it died out, that is exactly what the NMP3 campaign hopes to encourage.

no one can possibly defend it that has even one insy winsy tinsy brain cell

no one

and that means anyone defending it on this thread

please feel free to take offence

Because being a feminist is about having the right to make your own choices

and if that means getting them out for wank fodder

oh wait

sorry i mean i was against page 3 until murds said he was against it too

The only thing is, when Rupert Murdoch suddenly tweeted 'page 3 may be past its sellby date' or whatever he was, I suddenly saw that he'd decided what was the point of paying working class women to take their clothes off, when 30 years of soft porn 'empowerment' has persuaded women that being objectified for free in the papers is a brilliant laugh?

so I was against it until Murdoch said he was for it. i would argue up was down if he proposed otherwise tbh.

OP, just because you don't understand someone's point of view does not mean it is not valid.
I am not particularly keen on page three and would not buy the Sun for many reasons, but I don't wish to ban it.

If you do wish to campaign for a ban good for you - go for it. I support your right to do so.

Maybe you could have the courtesy to allow me to have a different opinion though.

I have a problem with P3.

I don't have a problem with a photo of naked breasts in a newspaper, accompanying a report, and is not something I would want censored.

How do you introduce legislation which bans one, but allows the other?

I have to say I'm baffled too that so many people don't see the bigger picture, how having a page 3 in a newspaper implies that women are mainly newsworthy for their breasts (and only a certain size) while they are next to pictures of clothed men who are mainly newsworthy for what they do. How can anyone not object to that implicit message? This is apart from whether one is offended by naked breasts or not (I'm not).

And then there is a petition that objects to how Merida is revamped by Disney (all barbiefied) and it gets over 200,000 signatures in no time. While that is a cartoon character! Page 3 girls are a reality that is being fed to us! I have signed the Merida petition of course, but I fail to see why Merida should be so much more successful than NMP3. It is all part of the same horrible sexist way women are too often portrayed in the media.

when people say they don't support censorship, did they draw a line at all?

^^ Yes to this.

We already have many forms of censorship (see Ofcom, British Film Classification Board, libel laws, contempt of court, hate speech, advertising standards, PCC etc.) decided by parliament and the courts, as is proper in a democracy.

OP, I think it's easier for some people to think there is nothing wrong with their world than to want changes.

*do

when people say they don't support censorship, did they draw a line at all? if the Sun were to stick a racist slur across the front page would you genuinely not want the law to step in?

I support it by not buying the sun. I don't want censorship, because that means a committee deciding what we can see, so I help nudge the market away from tacky photos.

and to answer the ops question I think it's ignorance. I don't know any people who have educated themselves about women's rights issues who think everyday objectification if women ok just because it's not as bad as other things. When else would that be ok? A little homophobia is ok as long as you don't abuse someone outright?

I fully support it !!! I even got the tshirt !!!

and the op and many others are allowed to feel that an opinion that degrades them is not a valid opinion. I wouldn't expect a black person to say racist opinions are valid. because they aren't

The sun newspaper started with provacative photo's of models. And then topless, in 1970. Throughout the 70's the sun was one of the most most popular papers. Why do you think that was?

Leading on, With the internet, porn is readily available for our children to view. Some of it very harcore. Some of it extremely vulgar and disturbing. Maybe that makes some of the topless photos seem less sordid?

I doubt that we will ever be able to get rid of nudity, topless photo's or porn.

I am not THAT opposed to the campaign. I suppose I am the very kind of person that Op can not comprehend.

The world is FULL of hateful, ignorant, batshit opinions DoctorRobert. But opinions is what they are.