AIBU to want to go boo hoo hahaha when men say they feel excluded by the the term "feminist"

[GoddessWhoWalksEarthAsWoman]

Just wondering if anyone else thinks like me...Go.

Don't you think that's an over reaction? Men can see breasts anywhere, some argue 'so why put them in a newspaper?'. Well why not? They aren't offending anyone, and quite frankly to say any bloke who looks at boobs in page three is causing a sexist society is an insult to men. You can't assume just because a bloke is looking at page three is instantly a sexist pig.

sausageeggbacon11 Some men care and sympathise about the challenges that their females partners/friends/colleagues/daughters/mothers/aunts face day in day out. My DH checks his own privilege just as I check my mine. He didn't start out as a feminist ally but as our relationship developed and my interested in feminism grew he was certainly interested in understanding the constructs in society that benefit men and the ones which oppress women and men. He wants his son to be able to choose to be a SAHP without stigma, cry without fear of ridicule and pull his weight at home so he can enjoy an equal and fulfilling relationship. Not all blokes are into feminism to get in someone's knickers.

"You can't assume just because a bloke is looking at page three is instantly a sexist pig"

No, just an idiot.

Isn't more that the paper is sending the wrong message that women getting their boobs out has such a high value as its near the front with the most newsworthy 'articles'?

A man is an idiot for looking at boobs. Guess all straight men are idiots then. How is it the wrong message? The Sun isn't groundbreaking journalism, it's just a tabloid. I yet to see any solid evidence of page 3 having such an adverse affect on society.

I was insulting all Sun readers really, I don't discriminate.

"I yet to see any solid evidence of page 3 having such an adverse affect on society"

And I have yet to see evidence that is doesn't.

But wouldn't evidence of it having a detrimental effect give actually weight to the 'no page 3' argument? Other than 'well no one can prove it's bad but I'm against it anyway'. The argument as a whole intruges me, there is nothing fundamentally 'bad' about it, there are worse things in papers (invasion of privacy, following human rights lawyers into court just because she's a married to an actor etc), but this is the one that causes nation debate?

Because tits are only acceptable for the male gaze and there is no equivalent to cater to straight women so half the population are considered dead from the waist down (as per usual) That's why I don't support page 3.

I love tits as much as the next girl who got drunk in the 90s.

I would happily look at tits all day, be they nursing a child or dancing about my living room, they're great.

What bothers me is the pervasive idea in society that women's bodies are there to please men, and that women's bodies should take a certain form in order to be most pleasing. And also, that woman and their sexuality are, to an extent, disposable. Page 3, well, yes, it's a bit of a 'make a big deal about a small part of the issue' thing, but then, you've got to start somewhere, and imo it's as good a place as any.

I don't really think anything about the men who look at Page 3. It's not about men. It's about women. It's about what we're subtly and constantly told to see ourselves as. What our value is. What we're FOR. It's fucking EVERYWHERE. And it's really annoying.

So yeah - Page 3, whatever. But I was glad to see people coming together about SOME aspect of this. I really was. And I would like to see it gone. A drop in the bucket, maybe. But still, a drop.

There's plenty of evidence of harm caused to women and girls by Page 3 on the NoMorePage3 website - including letters from school girls who were bullied and harassed by boys waving page 3 at them - had they waved a porn mag at them, it would have been confiscated by the school - but the Sun as a "News"Paper was allowed in school. There are also some former page 3 models who have joined the campaign.

No equivalent? It's been a while since I bought Cosmo magazine but didn't they always have a nude bloke as the center each issue? It's not just the sun that prints boobs and arse, but page three hasn't done that much harm to women. I doubt Katie Price is having sleepless nights of regret anyway. I can understand your reasons not to supported it, but is that enough of a reason to campaign for it to be banned?

I can understand why some people don't like it, however the original point is, can women be allowed to tell other women when or where to get their baps out when men clearly aren't allowed to without being sexist. Page 3 was just an example. Censorship is a different issue to feminism or this debate.

I dunno itsnotme. I guess I'm struggling to align the two, cos I feel like bap-direction, with men it'd be more like 'get your (specific) baps out' which is not ok (presumably we agree on that front), and with women it's more 'put your (not specific 'your') baps away' which in some cases I can kind of see a reason for?

It's not a personal thing. It's not about specific pairs of tits being out or not out. It's about context and a wider cultural thing.

I think men can be allies without wanting something for it. Just like I very much hope I am an ally in the fight against racism and homophobia. However, in order to be an ally you have to be willing to feel uncomfortable, guilty, weird and listen, listen, listen.

White people, men, straight people are so used to having the 'floor' it is hard to shut up and listen to people's lived experience. And writhe in your seat and stay with the guilt and discomfort.

If a man is patting himself on the back because he is a feminist, he may well be doing it wrong!

Also, people talking about how it is wrong to see all men as a threat. We are TOLD TO. Wear these clothes, don't get drunk, don't get into a car with a man, don't accept a drink or meal, don't go back to a man's house, get a cab while not getting a cab. But at the same time, treat all men like the fluffy puppies they are. Huh? HOW?

Schrodinger's Rapist.

"No equivalent? It's been a while since I bought Cosmo magazine but didn't they always have a nude bloke as the centre each issue"

I thought we were talking about the Sun? I'm quietly confident that there are more sexualised images of women available than men and would love to see evidence to suggest otherwise....

page three is made and controlled by and for men. It's got v little to do with what women want

Exactly, MrsTerry. If the rapists would just wear little labels so we would know who they are...and if society would just stop the victim blaming when it came to rape cases, things would be a lot easier.

I particularly like the point in Schrodinger's rapist that if a woman in minding her business, reading a book on the tube, and a man comes up and starts talking to her - if her "leave me alone" body language and stilted, curt replies don't give him the message to leave her alone - then it's fairly safe to assume that he may be the sort of guy who will ride roughshod over her other personal boundaries. So, one to avoid.

It's so handy that they've brought out the Menimist/MGTOW Tshirts too- so we women know to avoid them. Also any man that mentions "Paul Elam" - avoid like the plague.

Shumb, I made the point about Cosmo as a female equivalent to the Sun. The Sun is marketed at men, same as Cosmo for women. So I'm not surprised there's no equivalent in the Sun itself for women.

Anyway guys, I'm going to have to bow out. I'm pregnant, tired and can argue the hind legs off a donkey. I think I'll call it quits for tonight. Interesting discussion on the whole though .

Thanks for all the great responses especially those agreeing with me. And OMG pumpkin you were right I did get that thing about the 20 women be scared of men in case they killed them from Gillian Anderson in the Fall . But thanks to those who gave real life evidence about the number of women killed each week by their partners and the messages we are given not to trust men otherwise it's our fault if we're raped...

Cosmo is not an equivalent to the Sun. It's a glossy women's magazine - the Sun is a Daily Newspaper - the countries top seller I believe. In fact it has the cheek to call itself a "family" newspaper.

I don't know whether my views on page 3 are in line with other feminists opinions, but my feelings can be summed up like this -

• I have nothing against tits. They're great.
• I would never criticise or insult a woman for choosing to take part in glamour modelling, topless or nude or otherwise.
• I don't even criticise men for looking at it, although I worry about about the ones who are defending it so passionately for how they see women.
• My issue is with the existence of page 3, reducing women to little more than window dressing, the hideously patronising 'news in briefs' "allowing" these women to say something intellectual like a pat on the head, the implication that it's only worth getting a woman's opinion if she's got her knockers out.

Oh, and anyone who disagrees with it is told its because they're too ugly for page 3 and theyre jealous. Again, we're worth nothing more than our looks.

Burke For me the most important thing is that you don't judge me or any other man based solely on the fact that we are men.

yes dear, we know. The very most importantest thing.

Goddess that is a quote from Margaret Atwood who wrote The Handmaid's Tale.

Burke I think that the most important thing might be that you understand that when feminists talk about men as a class, we do not necessarily mean you personally.

I totally agree, moomin.

It's a small, but important point that NoMorePage3 is not asking for the 'banning' of page 3 - but appealing to David Dinsdale to take it out, because boobs are not news. Since even Rupert Murdoch thinks it's an outmoded concept, and he's the biggest dinosaur of our times, it doesn't seem too unreasonable does it?