Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

....to want to ban page 3???

736 replies

DianaVreeland · 20/07/2012 16:07

I remember seeing a page 3 girl for the first time when I was about 6 as my neighbour bought the Sun. I cringed inwardly, and haven't stopped feeling the same since. I have 5 nieces 3 nephews and my own 2 sons.....I hope they could grow up without seeing images of women objectified like this. Clearly I am not showing this to them but at some point I know they will. Does anyone else feel the same?

OP posts:
GhostShip · 08/09/2012 11:43

Nope :)

Shagmundfreud · 08/09/2012 11:43

Ghostship - it's not about looking at you 'as a person'. If that was the case they wouldn't have you in full make-up, pouting and thrusting your tits at the camera. I quite like looking at pictures of naked people. I love the human body. But I like photos that aren't cliched and pornographic. You know - suck belly in, swish your hair about, tense your pecs so your tits stand up a bit. Maybe even do some nipple tweaking to make them look a bit perky. It's just such a fecking cliche.

Shagmundfreud · 08/09/2012 11:48

Ghost - you are 'allowed' to use your body. You can accept payments for sex - you're just not allowed to solicit for it.

I have no problem with you doing pornographic pictures. But I can't how these highly sexualised images are deemed suitable fodder for family viewing.

spoonsspoonsspoons · 08/09/2012 12:01

Can someone please explain to me how page 3 is 'highly sexualised'. A definition you could use if you were to ban it. Yes, they're topless but last time I looked the only difference between page 3 and a Lingerie model was the absence of a bra.

FreudianSlipper · 08/09/2012 12:05

lingerie models are there to show off the lingerie not their boobs and lingerie is not advertised in a national newspaper

dysfunctionalme · 08/09/2012 12:21

When I first moved to the UK, I was so shocked by the Page 3 girls. I felt v uncomfortable on public transport when someone near me was reading a tabloid.

But over time, I stopped minding - and that's the bit that bothered me most. I became desensitised to the everyday degradation of women. God knows how it must feel to be a man and be expected to enjoy that crap. So brainwashed. So degrading for us all.

Shagmundfreud · 08/09/2012 12:30

spoons - if you want to know the difference between them then try to imagine lingerie shots where the models are not actually wearing any lingerie, and are thrusting their breasts towards the camera.

RuleBritannia · 08/09/2012 12:35

FreudianSlipper

I agree and it's not just that. Page 3 women pose in particular ways to excite and lingerie models just sit or stand normally to show the underwear - not themselves. I like the way ShagmundFreud described it. Got it to a tee!

GhostShip did say that she needed money to ensure that her mother had a roof over her head but if, my mother had been in that situation, it would just not have occurred to me to take off my clothes for Page 3. I would have found something else to do or found help elsewhere.

hmc · 08/09/2012 12:46

Ghostship - you are right, I certainly wouldn't want any man I was with to look at page 3, but that's because (a) I would rather be with a partner who has the intellect to read a proper newspaper (b) any partner of mine would share similar values to me and consequently would consider page 3 degrading to women

GreenD · 08/09/2012 12:47

How do page 3 models "pose in particular ways to excite"? I'm almost certainly sure they don't. The pictures about as unprovocative as pictures of a topless woman can be.

GreenD · 08/09/2012 12:49

"I just object to the sexism of the whole thing. There are many women and gay men who would love to stare at a very young man's genitals while eating their breakfast. Why don't newspapers like the sun have regular highly sexualised images of handsome naked men for their readers to enjoy?"

Are there really that many women that would love to stare at a young mans genitals over breakfast? I know I wouldn't.

GhostShip · 08/09/2012 13:20

Rulebrittania - I didn't say I did it for that reason. It helped my mother but I didn't do it for that reason.

And i did do something else. Like I said I was a carer. But what job can you find that pays £300 for 2 hours work?

FreudianSlipper · 08/09/2012 13:45

not many jobs do pay that sort of money, ones that do it is after years of hard work and studying

(apart from prostitution, at one time lap dancing jobs that exploit women)

emcwill74 · 08/09/2012 13:55

GhostShip - so because there is a job that pays you £300 for 2 hrs work then it should stay? Never mind that a heck of a lot of people on here say it doesn't belong in a newspaper, especially the largest-selling one, that is seen by children because it is marketed to families with Lego giveaways, and 'help your child with their homework', that completely normalises a woman getting her tits out for strangers for money. Doesn't this strike you as a bit selfish? Fine if you want[ed] to make money in that way, totally up to you, all some of us ask is you do it not in a newspaper but a top shelf mag. It's not like, as I keep saying, the Sun is the ONLY place where there are tits on show for nothing but male titillation. Just it is the only one that is not on the top shelf and hence looked at in private.

JamieandOscarSittinginATree · 08/09/2012 13:57

No, no spoons is absolutely right. Page 3 is not sexual, it's young women giving us their studied opinions on the Euro crisis or whatever.

GhostShip · 08/09/2012 13:58

Freudian - what is your point? And just to add after 5 years of studying I won't be on that.

Emc - no one is forcing you to buy it. Don't buy it if it bothers you that much.

bethjoanne · 08/09/2012 14:01

it brain washers men to think looks are important i dont what my son to think this .i want to bring him up to respect ladies( important for future wife)..whats on the inside is more important. you spend a long time married by the time we are 50 looks fade and spending retirement with someone nice on the inside and spending time with your grand kids in (30 years time ) the ilnesses we will face make you realise looks are nothing -but a kind, caring, loving person does .its a shame men dont realise this and respect ladies when they are younger.respect in a marraige is the key to a long one.

FreudianSlipper · 08/09/2012 14:05

what it says not many jobs do pay that money that is just the way it is

i will not earn that sort of money, i too shall have trained for 5 years i feel my work is valuable in other ways and will pay a good but not great salary

emcwill74 · 08/09/2012 14:07

GhostShip: As I have repeatedly said, I don't buy it! Of course I don't!! But I have made the point so often in this thread that my not buying it doesn't mean it doesn't have a detrimental effect on society by portraying women as a sexual underclass who are no more than the sum of their boobs. If stuff in the papers doesn't have an effect on how things are perceived then why do advertisers pay so much to advertise in them? It is nothing to do with my buying it. And before you tell us again it empowered you let's have a read of this:

?I?ve asked my source at News International [with regard to the 'News in Briefs' editorials on Page 3 in The Sun]? and my source says the deputy editor who?s in charge of Page 3 decides the topic and then one of the subs writes it. The girls have nothing whatsoever to do with it, because apart from the one with a degree, they?re as daft they look.? source here. So they pay you not all that much really, so strangers can cop off on your boobs whenever they fancy and judge you as to whether you're a stunna or minger, meanwhile the paper writes a piece of text to ridicule you by putting mock intellectual-sounding words in a caption for everyone to snigger at because a woman with her baps out must be thick. [The view it perpetuates via this running 'joke', which is great for women everywhere obviously, to be divided into thickies with their tits out or brainy but dogs.] Really empowering! The news in briefs is almost the worst thing about it!

JamieandOscarSittinginATree · 08/09/2012 14:10

Ghostship - The "don't buy it" argument misses the point. If you believe something is wrong, damaging to society, you don't stand by and let others get on with it.

If we had the attitude "just don't look, you don't have to take part yourself" we'd be turning a blind eye to all sorts of crime and prejudice.

GhostShip · 08/09/2012 14:15

This isn't crime. Nor prejudice

JamieandOscarSittinginATree · 08/09/2012 14:19

It incites attitudes towards women which result in stereotyping, prjudivce, and yes, even crime.

I can see you can't be convinced

JamieandOscarSittinginATree · 08/09/2012 14:19

prejudice

merrymouse · 08/09/2012 14:38

I can't help thinking that the page 3 ship has sailed.

Young girls already circulate pictures of themselves in various states of undress for free. Perhaps we wouldn't have the whole Jordan/TOWIE culture if it wasn't for the influence of page 3 in the 70's and 80's, but I don't think campaigning against page 3 will make any difference now.

I suspect that in a few years News International will magnanimously abandon page 3 in their newspaper, because the people who still have to rely on printed copies of the Sun to see topless women have died. They will of course be making money out of women in some equally tacky and cheap way. It just won't be in print.

GreenD · 08/09/2012 14:41

I don't think Page 3 has anything to do with the Jordan/TOWIE culture. America has a similar culture and to the best of my knowledge, they have never had anything like page 3.

I can't imagine many people buy the Sun just for page 3 nowadays. It's a relic from the 70s and 80s that they can't get rid of for fear of appearing to be kowtowing to the PC brigade.

Swipe left for the next trending thread