Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

I support Page 3, who's with me?

628 replies

Beth9009 · 17/01/2014 12:10

This might not go down well, but I cannot accept the campaign to ban Page 3. Here's why:

There is nothing wrong with the naked female body. A woman posing with her breasts on show is not lewd nor is it harmful to children.

Hypocrisy - Page 3 is no different to male models posing shirtless in women's magazines.

Prudishness - People who claim that newspapers should be banned from showing topless women are no different to the Victorians or to people in conservative parts of the world who don't allow women to show bare legs. It's the same principle.

Market mechanisms - if there is a demand for something and a consenting adult willing to supply it, then who is the government to get in the way?

Freedom of choice - if you don't like it, don't buy the Sun!

OP posts:
AMumInScotland · 17/01/2014 13:41

Secondary sexual characteristics then.

Anyway, my point is the same whatever you say in terms of definition.

A woman's bare breasts are not the same, in our society, as a man's chest or anyone's legs.

The important thing about all of this is whether Page 3 pictures are indicative of, and feed into, a whole attitude towards women's bodies which is objectifying and damaging. And I would say that they are.

Do you think otherwise? Do you honestly believe that treating women this way - posing them as vacuous sexual playthings, to titillate men, and having those pictures lying around in normal everyday contexts where both boys and girls see them and unconsciously take in the message that this is what women are for - is a good thing?

Original poster
Beth9009 · 17/01/2014 13:40

Buffy - That is one of the most sad things I've read on this forum. And I include the abusive trolls in that. You think there's nothing wrong with a young man viewing his female peers as attractive objects? Is that what you meant to say?

You think it's wrong for boys to see girls as attractive object, or girls to see boys as attractive objects? Why is it wrong?

When I look at a hot guy in the street, all he is to me is an object. I don't know him and I don't need to. I'm just looking because I want to. Is that so wrong?

OP posts:
Viviennemary · 17/01/2014 13:40

Page three is unacceptable. Why is it acceptable to bear breasts in a newspaper photograph but not to go down to your local supermarket like this.

OddFodd · 17/01/2014 13:39

You've posted some rather interesting threads OP. This, your fiance who can't come except on your tits, your fiance's son who you're really good mates with ...

HeeHiles · 17/01/2014 13:38

It was one of the Big Brother contestants - with another young woman - I saw the image a few years ago. I won't be going on the Sun website as I have no desire to give them a 'hit'

BuffytheReasonableFeminist · 17/01/2014 13:36

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster
Beth9009 · 17/01/2014 13:35

Page 3 Twitter*

OP posts:
Original poster
Beth9009 · 17/01/2014 13:33

HeeHiles
___

I've just been on the Page 3 website and I think your description is not representative at all. Almost all pictures are of young women looking seductive with their breasts out. What is child-like about that? Surely it's the opposite!

OP posts:
IndigoTea · 17/01/2014 13:33

I'm not with you on this, the 3rd page is an insult to women and that as well as other things our destroying society.

Mitchy1nge · 17/01/2014 13:33

that's why I think sexual objectification is bad anyway, or one of the reasons, there's too much evidence that it stops people (women) from enjoying sex instead of worrying what they look like during it

Original poster
Beth9009 · 17/01/2014 13:31

AMumInScotland Fri 17-Jan-14 13:29:14
Breasts are part of your reproductive system.
__

Nope, look up the definition of female reproductive system. It doesn't include the breasts.

OP posts:
Mitchy1nge · 17/01/2014 13:30

it's really not a basis for great sex to see the other party as an object, or indeed yourself (which is what happens to lots of women, they self-objectify as a result of the bombardment of images - I have friends who don't like having sex with the light on or won't take their bras off or whatever)

OP do you understand what people mean when they talk about being the object or subject of any given experience?

HeeHiles · 17/01/2014 13:29

As I said above!

Original poster
Beth9009 · 17/01/2014 13:29

lottieandmia Fri 17-Jan-14 13:28:10
How is he going to know the personality of someone in a newspaper?

He's not and he doesn't need to. You get to know somebody's personality by conversing with them.

OP posts:
AMumInScotland · 17/01/2014 13:29

Breasts are part of your reproductive system. They are therefore different from men's chests, and from legs.

As a biologist, I would say they are sexual organs.

The point is the same either way - they are not normally on show, because they are part of your reproductive system.

lottieandmia · 17/01/2014 13:29

I assume his peers are clothed so he gets to know the whole person. Rather than a posed, half naked picture...

Original poster
Beth9009 · 17/01/2014 13:28

HeeHiles, what are you saying exactly? How does Page 3 depict women as child like?

OP posts:
lottieandmia · 17/01/2014 13:28

How is he going to know the personality of someone in a newspaper?

Original poster
Beth9009 · 17/01/2014 13:27

Buffy

But his female peers ARE attractive objects to him. What's wrong with that? It's part of nature. It doesn't mean he can't see his female peers as personalities as well.

OP posts:
HeeHiles · 17/01/2014 13:26

So by 'innocent' looking women you mean when two women with bare breasts, hair in pigtails, short skirt that reveals their butt cheeks innocently sucking on a lollipop? Childlike you mean? yuk!

lottieandmia · 17/01/2014 13:25

Breasts are not shameful. But page 3 is shameful, sexist and outdated. Your arguments are weak and miss the point. Comparing with men is a nonsense because there is still no level playing field for men and women.

BuffytheReasonableFeminist · 17/01/2014 13:24

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Timetoask · 17/01/2014 13:22

Your step son is a teenager. My son is 6 years old, no I don't want him to be exposed to this stuff yet.

Original poster
Beth9009 · 17/01/2014 13:21

Tracy - finally someone with sense.

Breasts are not shameful and the anti Page 3 crowd are essential women shaming.

OP posts:
LRDtheFeministDragon · 17/01/2014 13:20

'for evolutionary reasons'. Oh, bless you. Nowt to do with sex in evolution or reproduction, ohno.

tracy - TBH, as a not entirely heterosexual woman, I find it hard to believe men like breasts because they're taboo. I also find it hard to believe page 3 ought to be part of any healthy person's sex life, though, so ...