Blimey, this still going ??
NotanOtter - I fail to see what the death of Emily Davison has to do with this. She died (to my mind pointlessly) in a campaign to give women the right to vote, to hold property, to have rights over their own lives.
Well "lovely Lulu (23) from Epping" Or whoever is on page 3 has taken that right and used it. She has the freedom to get her boobs photographed and shown off in the press, and she has the freedom to have her own bank account into which to put the money she gets paid for that.
Right, now lots of you say that you don't mind boobs, but apparently you do mind tittilation.
Well, putting aside the fact that if tittilation is such a bad thing, how come sooo many of you are parents, you are all making the assumption (along with the OP) that said bloke was ACTUALLY tittilated by the picture, and that is what you find so offensive.
Now as I said back at the beginning of this thread, I assume he wasn't actually exhibiting any openly sexual behaviour (I think OP would have said so). I think the 5 and 6 y.o. kids you are sooooo concerned about wouldn't have noticed the newspaper anyway, and none of them would get the "tittilation" factor anyway, even if they had noticed it, because 5 and 6 year olds aren't equipped to even know what it's about.
So in this case, the only one who might have been harmed by any of this is in fact the OP herself.
She nebbed at what said father was doing, she apparently kept watch on him
"The dad must have been receiving some sexual gratification from the picture (albeit low level) otherwise why would he have been staring at it for so long"
and then she got all offended when he "huffed and puffed" cos she told him he shouldn't be doing it