To ask you all to sign the "No More Page 3" petition?

[UnrequitedSkink]

It's a bit of a no-brainer really. How are we ever supposed to show our kids that women are more than just sex objects when Page 3 exists? It's archaic and totally unnecessary. It's also an anachronism and offensive. Please sign if you believe that pictures of topless girls don't belong in a so-called family newspaper.

More info here and a facebook page here

Fantastically, the petition has gone from 2,000 signatures yesterday morning to over 16,000 today!

lobbying the paper's advertisers is not really in keeping with the 'we're asking you nicely' petition is it?

Typical women. Can't make their minds up.

Nancy perhaps they are asking the advertisers nicely to prompt them to think? Just a thought.

Daddancer

"delightfullyfragrant They can skip past page 3 rather than stand there gawping at it. Basic manners i would have thought."

So you are admitting it can be offensive to people then? You will also agree it is a newspaper which is aimed to read amongst other places on public transport?

I rest my case.

Bare breasts should not be banned in newspapers, but should be on a higher shelf, and getting the supermarkets to agree is the best way to achieve that quickly. No-one at the Sun is going to listen to 20k, 100k or even a million non-Sun readers.
But Tesco will listen to Tesco customers. And if you win, and the sales decline because it is on a higher shelf, and thus displayed less prominently, I'd bet my mortgage that even the Sun Executives will take notice and suddenly decide to run an editorial saying that after much consideration, they have decided that page 3 has become 'unsuitable for a modern newspaper like your number one Sun', or some such drivel.

Bottom line is where it counts!

gilbertta - good points, but with nothing to show the support I suspect Tesco highly unlikely to agree to move the country's biggest-selling paper off the main news stand! Perhaps this petition might encourage them to consider it? As has been often stated now, there is nothing in the petition about a 'ban'.

great posts BTW EMC and princesschick amongst others

emcwill74 'but my feeling is to start with the Sun and go from there'

It's this statement that leads me to believe that maybe you do have an agenda for a ban. When will you end?, next it will be the Star, the Sport, Nuts, Loaded, Razzle and then female mags that depict women topless in a way that doesn't suit your criteria, then art mags and on and on and on...............Also the newsagents better get some extra big reinforced top shelfs fitted to accommodate all the extra weight of magazines and newspapers you want consigned there! lol

With regards to your response to my previous post I would ask the same question to yourself that maybe you have been embedded with so many feminist principles that you have lost all perspective and now every little thing is somehow deemed as sexist? Evidence of this was when i got crucified for saying 'hello ladies' for example. It's going overboard and that is how I feel towards your attitudes regarding page 3. It's a step too far. We have equality laws now and if they are not being adhered to then that is a separate issue that you should be addressing. All you are doing with your page 3 campaign is trying to suppress a persons sexuality and identity. Make the models and the persons who read the Sun feel bad about their behaviour and feelings. It?s very similar to homophobia or any other kinds of prejudice really. Shame you can?t see that.

princesschick 'Finally, I read this morning that Lucy and the campaign are contacting companies who advertise in The Sun to withdraw their adverts to help back up this campaign. I'm not sure where this will lead but hopefully they'll get the support they need. '

To me that goes beyond just having your say and is pressuring and trying to manipulate people. The companies who advertise already know that the Sun has page 3 so why should you hassle them about it?

You know what, I think I may go and buy a copy of the sun. It can be like my counter to your petition.
The question is, will I be able to view the page 3 girl as anything more than the equivalent to a beef joint or a pork chop? I couldn?t possibly think she?s an attractive girl and wonder what her personality is like could i?

Yes, being against p3 is just the same ad homophobia...

hahaha homophobia, now that is fucking hilarious!
I am sure my gay uncle having suffered years of prejudice would beg to differ.
These women get paid decent money to show off their tits to the lads, we simply want it removing from a family paper and put where it belongs in a "lads" mag. tits for the lads in a lads mag =proper place!
Imagine if Terry the 19 year old trainee plumber's flacid todger was in the equivalent paper on page three. Would love to watch the lads gagging on their cooked breakfasts haha.
and before anyone says anything, I do not want a woman's version of page 3 because looking at cocks is not what I want to do when reading the national news thanks very much.

You can believe what you like about my agenda. Since I haven't stated any then that is mere speculation as to my 'criteria'. I was replying to a direct question as to why the Star is being 'exempted' when it is just as bad - if not worse - than the Sun. I think there is a wider problem with the way the tabloids depict women, it doesn't end at page 3, certainly. However this thread is about a specific petition. My comment 'go from there' was vague, right now I have no specific action plan beyond hoping this petition convinces the Sun that women are worth more than being depicted as a pair of tits out of all other context.

Thanks for helpfully telling me I have lost perspective. Very helpful to be put in my place in such a patronising manner. It's not that 'every little thing' is sexist, but when behaviours that many women don't like are extended to them and not men, then that is sexism. Yes we have equality laws and I don't actually see how page 3 sits within those in any way. I am not trying to repress anyone's sexuality but here we are again back to the whole prude thing. There is almost no point in continuing to counter this because I've done so before and you haven't understood so you are either unable to do so or choosing not to. As if it needs saying again: if women wish to engage in topless modelling there are other contracts than the Sun and other newspapers on the main news stand! I am not trying to make the models 'feel bad' but if they feel bad then should they ask themselves why? This is akin to your saying that I hate page 3 because I feel bad about my body. What about developing girls/teenagers who see page 3, feel they don't look like that and feel bad about their bodies?

Far from seeing my attitude as similar to homophobia I find page 3 itself similar to homophobia. It encourgaes society to view women differently - and in an inferior way, this is really hammered by News in Briefs which just takes the piss out of the models! All it does is joke with the punter 'ha ha! as if a woman with her tits out has a brain cell! what a larf!' I've said this before and no one has answered me yet: if it were a picture of a steretypically gay man in a limp-wristed pose, wearing a sailor's hat with a comment along the lines of 'backs to the wall boys!', would that be OK? I think not, I think it would be encouraging homophobia and there would (rightly) be a huge outcry. So why is it OK to do this to women?

I'm just getting tired of writing the same stuff again and again and appreciate people who disagree me with probably equally wish I'd shut up and stop 'banging on' and repeating myself, but it is so frustrating when people don't get it. I'd really rather say now we disagree and leave it at that. Fine - buy the Sun. Whatever. But if you really are looking at that girl on page 3 and wondering what her personality is like, why does she have to be semi-naked for that? Doesn't a girl have a personality when she has clothes on? I have a quote for you: 'feminism is the radical concept that women are people'. Next time you find yourself thinking 'I really need to see some tits and ass' can I suggest you just have a think about that quote? Just see how it feels at that moment when you want visual gratification? And no, I'm not having a go, or attacking you, making a serious point for you to have a think about.

emcI think all the points you have made are valid. and I agree the daily star is just as bad as is the daily sport (is that still going??)

DadDancer yes, I would like Lucy to get wider support for this. I think it's important. I know you disagree. I respect your entitlement to an opinion. I don't understand why you feel the need to pick every tiny little thing that is said on here to pieces? Is there a point that you are trying to get across but isn't being understood? If so, please make yourself heard loud and clear.

So I'll try and explain again.... to me this campaign is important. I realise you are irritated by this thread and petition. Did you say you have a daughter? You may feel differently when she is older and is subjected to some of things that my friends, relatives and I have experienced throughout our lives and which are considered "harmless fun" but actually give us deep seated anxiety, worries, make us depressed, undervalued, useless, inferior and 2nd class citizens. Many people recognize that women are not yet treated equally in this society. There are also all sorts of stats to back this up. I don't think it's appropriate to put tits in the news. I've explained my reasoning to you. I've even said, I understand where you are coming from and I respect your right to an opinion. Thanks for explaining. But still you want me to come back and validate every tiny point I make. In someways, I feel that you are taking exception to every little thing that I have said. Why? I want to be treated as an equal to you. As long as girls (and they are girls) are objectified in this way in a national newspaper which normalises the idea that girls are for leering at not for treating with respect, it makes it very difficult for me to be treated as an equal. I know that you don't fully understand this. I can tell from your tone that you don't fully want to understand. You can't possibly, you're a man. And a man who support lap dancing and page 3 at that.

Can I ask what's wrong with asking politely for some advertisers to consider supporting the campaign? Maybe they will say no, or maybe they will go, d'ya know what, I hadn't really considered that. I don't want to support women being objectified and I think page 3 is a bit out of date. Yes Lucy I will support your campaign? They can only say no and everything is worth a try. As I said, this is important to me.

This was on something on TV today when I was cleaning my rug 85% said yes Page 3 should be banned.

Mellower - it was on Loose Women on ITV. A lot of people have told me this petition is just by middle-class lefty Guardian readers so is basically invalid. I doubt that defines the Loose Women audience - there will be a much broader demographic of viewers, some of whom may even be Sun readers. Interesting.

Oh yeah it was around lunch-time!! That would be the one, I generally have TV as background noise, but picked up on the Page 3 bit after seeing it here yesterday.

Oh if you are a Sun reader anyone please can you send me those tokens?? PM please

Its so strange that every one, though I agree, see it as a left wing argument.

Several of my male friends are adamant It's a right wing, daily mail, Mary whitehouse argument, And nothing I say can convince them otherwise...

Tips to win this against them?
I'm wondering if they are deliberately viewing it from the wrong perspective to make me look bad.

watchout - People say it's right wing because they see the intentions as prude and therefore illiberal. I was thinking about this today too funnily enough in light of some comments on the Indie website that hosted an article by the petition writer. You have to convince them you're not a prude: good luck!!

They know me, know I'm far from it :)

My post on the subject started, ' I like boobs, I like porn'
So, they understand It's not about that...

I'm just being lamblasted for bring right wing, banning peoples rights and then defending porn as I like it, therefore apparently contradict my own argument and am stupid.

Which I'm.not, they can't seem to wrap their head around it. I'm.not nuts, am i?

Daddancer
I would really like your comments regarding my post at 12.53.

I said "I remember squirming with embarrassment when I was around 16 and sitting on the tube next middle aged men 'reading' the sun with the full page spreads of tits next to my elbow. Yes, I'd look away but soft porn images of girls around my age at that time are not something I was comfortable inadvertently having to share with men old enough to be my grand father. It made me feel really queasy."

you said it was "bad etiquette" and "They can skip past page 3 rather than stand there gawping at it. Basic manners"

so you agree it can be offensive to women? In which case why are you against a petition to "politely ask" it to stop.

Why should I and lots of other women feel like this, it's vile?

Signed. Makes me think of that thread aaaaaages ago about the man in the playground waiting to pick up his DCs pausing on page 3 for a very long time to the discomfort of the OP waiting for her DCs. I wonder whether Daddancer would consider that "bad etiquette" either?

watchout - no you're not nuts. You are just being belittled by people who have no desire to understand. It must be nice to be male and not have to. [And no I am not a 'man-hater'! I'm not saying this applies to all men! My husband restores my faith in humanity, as do my many male friends.]

Have signed

How utterly depressing that people can seriously believe that torso of the week and a pair of tits are on a par. Or that men are objectified in anything like the way women are.

I remember once I was walking to work and a bloke in a van called out 'love your tits' to a v attractive young woman in front of me. She stared ahead and kept walking but this bloke went berserk at being ignored. He started shouting out threats, interspersed with the word 'cunt', and he did his best to pull over but thank god he was unable to.

Not exactly sure why but this story suddenly came to mind. I guess to me it illustrates to me how the objectification of women often has a pretty sinister undercurrent. A man being leered at by a women would v v rarely feel the same sort of implicit threat.

Emc - indeed, they cant see the problem as ' It's just a pair of tits' I explained that that statement illustrated how objectified women were, in a NEWSpaper but again I was called a hypercrit as I watch porn.
Apparently viewing porn, in the privacy of you own home, means you should be ok with anything. And so the fact I'm not means I'm a right wing Mary whitehouse c**t.

I despair really.

Thanks for your replies emcwill74 and princesschick yes I agree we are probably never going to agree on this matter. It is a clash of libertarian vs feminst. At least we engaged in debate which has got be at least something?

If i was the Sun editor i would come to a compromise and have the news text bit on page 3 removed completely (that i do agree is demeaning rubbish). I would keep the nudity but go for a more artistic approach.

Thanks for the quote emcwill74 i will bear it in mind.. actually what was it again? 'feminsts are radicals that men should ignore' nah only kidding!

watchoutforthatsnailUsing the political compass i would say that being against page 3 can be left or right wing, it's the other axis that makes the difference which varies between libertarian at the south to authoritarian at the north.

Right my work here is done - point me in the direction of the lap dancing club thread. Actually 2nd thoughts i'll save that one for another day! Is there a Mr Tumble thread?