Sun Drops Page 3

Is it just me that thinks the Sun i.e. RM, is sticking it's fingers up at the campaign?

When I heard the news I thought it was progress but had to put palm to face when the newsreader said they were still running page 3 but with bikinis and lingerie.

I'm a man so forgive me if I've missed something but how will this end the objectification of women? Okay so no nipples is better but doesn't really change a great deal. I think the Sun know this and are playing campaigners like fools.

Natnad, but hopefully the rest of the country will "proudly continue" to not bother reading it. It has about a 1/5 the circulation of the Sun.

The Star are "proudly continuing page3" , page 3 is still online on the sun website, all is not lost for these glamour models I recon

I completely agree with you all. she will have more than enough oppertunities to get her boobs out for the boys, if she wants too.

PS Hasn't Mr Dinsmore told her he's still doing 'page 3' online? Maybe she hasn't checked her email yet.

Ginger, I didn't see it, but in answer to your question I'm going to c+p something I wrote upthread: 'Page 3 isn't a job. None of the 'girls' are employed by the Sun, and therefore none will now be unemployed. It doesn't pay at all well (a couple of hundred per photo, if that) and the models are only appearing every few days. So this is just one contract out of their portfolio gone.'

Even if she argued it is limiting the opportunities for her career choice, well I'm afraid that can sometimes happen as society changes for the better. Presumably women who wanted to be cigarette vendors in cinemas have had a career avenue taken from them. But that is the price a few pay for the many of us not to have to put up with smoke in a cinema. Her appearance on page 3 contributed to a sexist society, which negatively impacts on me, and that I have no choice whether I live in or not.

Loads of opportunities for her to have pictures of her breasts all over the place. Just not the annual picture she might have got in the S*n, if she was lucky.

Perhaps she hasn't heard of the internet Ginger? After all, no opportunity there to exhibit her breasts to all and sundry. Oh no, not at all.

sniggered*

did anyone see the page 3 girl on the news, saying how unfair her career choice was taken away from her?

me and the other half just smothered addmittedly when we spoke about it, but just wondering what everyones thoughts on her "argument" is?

As always, cats understand best

A small, but really meaningful step forward for feminism, and its battle for equality and respect for women. Very happy to see those changes actually happening.

Maybe this is what he meant?

I love pretty flowers. And kittens. And artwork. And breasts, breasts are bloody amazing, the way they are engineered and function is a cause for huge celebration, they are also extremely attractive, no matter their size, shape or perkiness. I am even partial to breasts accompanied by pretty flowers and kittens in artwork.

Still not seeing how that makes it ok to ogle teenager's bare breasts in a 'newspaper' over your corn flakes though.

And your I'm not trolling comment?

Birdo, did you petition for p3 to be replaced with Manet's Olympia et al, to get boobs and aesthetics at once?

im not trolling. I just don't see what's wrong with looking at pretty boobs in the same way you look at pretty flowers or artwork?

Um, because it would be hilarious to read, I'm sure could you please point me in the direction of one your well written articles explaining that while men like to look at breasts, women like to look at flowers and art?

I'd look myself but google is really only for the logical and my uterus keeps distracting me

Pretty Welsh name is 'Mair'. We got 2 working at my firm - making up a fifth of the workforce. I don't think either read the Sun.

Because women aren't decorations, solely there to please your eyes?

I'm not trolling. I just don't see what's wrong with looking at pretty boobs in the same way you look at pretty flowers or artwork?

I mean, seriously ... 'mair'...???!!

Even spell-check doesn't like that word.

I'm amazed that people are bothering to engage with an evo-psycho bird-brain...

Good news and about time too.

I do think though that this was never really about feminism or page three, but instead it was about sticking one to Murdoch (which is fair enough - but why not say so?) People are now talking about trying to target Mail Online's sidebar of shame. Yet no mention of the Daily Star which still has page three and has a circulation of about 500,000 last time I looked. If it really was about tits in newspapers then people wouldn't be talking as though the campaign has ended or needs to look for a new target. It feels like this isn't part of a sea change in attitudes but a token that has symbolic power for a day or two, like toppling Saddam Hussein's statue.

Tell him he has small, bald testicles, of course!