To ask how I can explain to DH why page 3 was wrong?

[Ifyourawizardwhydouwearglasses]

He just thinks it was harmless. 'If you don't like it, don't look.' I'd like to educate him but I can't seem to find the words.

He's intelligent but can't seem to get this one.

Seff I think if you had read the thread you'd see Bruce is one of the good guys.

He posted the fact that whilst he wants the end of Page 3 his wife and daughters couldn't see what the fuss was.

Not surer I'd agree with that assessment MyFriendlyDragon TBH.

To say the only argument that matters is supply/demand and thus dismiss the experiences of women and girls who have had page 3 used to make them feel uncomfortable and worse as not mattering is terrible.

Oh i love mn. Omni calls me an "utter cunt" and that's fine and dandy, i suggest she appears slightly unhinged and my message is reported and deleted. Laughable.

Although tbf, twas no suprise. Those who dish it out are generally cant take it back.

When my friend was 14 she was told by a bus driver that he'd let her off her fare if she showed him her tits.

At the time we all laughed about it because that's what teenage girls are taught to do in the face of sexual harrassment from men - or at least they were when I was growing up I hope this is changing slowly.

However, part of the reason that this comment was probably just on the OK side of acceptable was because young women's bare breasts were in the paper every day, and there's no harm in it and what's the fuss about.

This stuff is insidious and pg 3 has a lot to answer for as a part of the normalisation of harrassment of women and girls over the years. men on teh street don't usually shout "show us your cunt" they often shout "get your tits out" because that's just fine and OK and normal.....

Not expressed that very well but still.

If you feel a personal attack was made on you, Simon, it's up to you to report it. You've been on heated threads on MN often enough to know that.

YonicScrewdriver

Sadly I'm not wrong at all. We may not like it but it's probably the truth of the matter.

Examples of black people shining shoes is really irrelevant as we're discussing why the Sun is still publishing pictures of naked women. I realise we can only speculate but my opinion is that it's still there because of the demand. Until the law says that it's illegal then it really is up to RM.

Why do you think the page is still going? If it's not about supply/demand then what else?

The thing is, RM is never going to bow down to the campaigners when there are many more women supporting page 3 than there are against it. It will now be a matter of principle for him and he will only drop it when he wants to. He will never give feminists the satisfaction of a victory.

Most women don't give a fuck, he says.

That's what they said about women and the vote. Most women don't want it or don't care. That argument was successfully waged for years, to persuade women they didn't want equality.

Also the class assumptions here are pretty offensive. I grew up in a working class northern town. I ate my breakfast while tits were displayed in front of me every morning in the Sun

Dismissing everyone here as a middle class liberal lefty is again a diversionary tactic.

It's only makes me think how threatened some people feel about the growing debate against p3.

Oh I missed what you wrote about me to get deleted simon

BTW I said that men who sit next to 14 yo girls on the bus and stare at page 3 are utter cunts. So if you took that to mean you, I can see why you are so invested in keeping page 3.

You are quoting out of context. The only argument that matters to RM is supply and demand. I don't see anything in Bruce's posts which sought to belittle the experiences of individual women.

Bruce's first post was raising the point of how does one make this a mass campaign when the majority of women don't seem to be on side.

The female buyers of The Sun are somewhere between 40- 48% of its sales. That's a lot of women who presumably aren't bothered by Page 3.

"Examples of black people shining shoes is really irrelevant "

Why? I was trying to pick an example that would be legal, that might not be racist as a one off but which certainly would be as a recurring, posed feature. Just as p3 is.

So yes, if people can look at it and think "well, why does this antiquated thing still happen in the 21st century", I think it is more likely to go, possibly through advertiser pressure if nothing else.

As for supply and demand - given you could find many more tits free on the internet, I'm not sure how many of the 2.2m are spending their 40p for the tits and would stop if they were gone - but if it were as high as 10%, I'd be surprised.

MyFriendlyDaemon

Thank you

I am genuinely behind the campaign and the discussions raised with my family were firstly to see what their views were and to listen to any concerns. The other was to mansplain when I found they weren't bothered about it.

My personal view is that they should get rid of the entire newspaper. Despite my quoting of numbers I think 2.2million of the UK population could find an alternative means of reading the news!

Me or Selff, daemon?

So far as simon hmm not sure what he's up to. The attacks on Bruce - seriously your interpretation skills need honing.

Oh and before someone one misinterprets my posts as a secret hairy palmed male Sun supporter because you don't recognise the name it's's a name change as old name had too much personal info disclosed.

Yonic I was commenting on Seff's post and Omnipotent's

Why? I was trying to pick an example that would be legal, that might not be racist as a one off but which certainly would be as a recurring, posed feature. Just as p3 is.

But since you're asking Yonic I don't think a made up example of something which doesn't happen addd much to the discussion.

The female buyers of The Sun are somewhere between 40- 48% of its sales. That's a lot of women who presumably aren't bothered by Page 3.

It's amazing what people can turn a blind eye to. The Sun's columnist Jane Moore made a Channel 4 documentary where she frothed about the pernicious effect that women's magazines ideas of body image had on teenage girls like her daughter.

I asked her how she felt about Page 3. That was different, she snapped.

I didn't make it into the final cut.

From reading his posts, I would say Simon's here to tell us not to bother about Page3. To not worry about such a 'small thing' - that feminists have lost their way, that chipping away at sexism in the media is pointless, and that we're arrogant to expect any manner of representation in the media that is equal to men.

Or he might be doing: THIS It seems to amuse some men to do this on Mumsnet.

yonic example was a good one. It helps to broaden an issue with analogies when people refuse to grasp the essential bones of a viewpoint.

Daemon, quite often people will recoil if an example of sexist language is recast as racist language, using similar outdated stereotypes - but they barely hear the sexism in their words.

Eg "god, women are over emotional/irrational" from someone who would never say or stand for someone else saying "god, black people are lazy/criminals/ insert other offensive stereotype here"

No Yonic's example was not a good one as her analogy was of a non- existent situation which is not going to happen and may well be illegal if the intention was to promote racial hatred.

Limited's point about what people can turn a blind eye too is very pertinent. I don't know how one addresses that without running the risk of being patronising or indeed "mansplaining"

Sorry Yonic. I'm not trying to get at you but I genuinely don't think it was an analogy, let alone a good one. I agree with most of what you're saying, particularly in response to Simon.

The analogy doesnt need to be in existence to be valid.
And god forbid any man feels patronised. Best keep making 14 year old girls feel creeped out and upset then.

Do you have an alternative analogy?

OmnipotentQueenOfTheUniverse

Just to clarify, my comments on supply and demand were purely in relation to what I belive RM considers. They do not represent what I think as I thoought I'd made my opinion clear from the outset.

To RM, the only thing that is important in this debate is likely to be supply and demand. Quite clearly the issue of morality eludes him, or is less of a priority than keeping his customers happy.

To reitterate, it has become very clear that what we think is ultimately irrelevant to RM. Until his customer base makes it know that they no longer want page 3 then it is unlikely that it will end.

Anyway, FWIW thanks again MyFriendlyDaemon for interpreting my posts in the way that was intended.