Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To have ‘defaced’ this photograph??

818 replies

Boobsakimboo · 14/08/2022 09:39

We have lockers at work, in our break room where everyone goes and one co-worker,
Jim, has a photo of a famous, topless page 3 girl on the inside of his door.
the girl in the photo was 16 when it was taken, and he’s had it since around the same age - he wrote into The Sun and got a signed one sent- so it’s very precious to him.

several women have mentioned to Jim that they’d rather he didn’t have it there as the locker door is often left open and we can see it. Jim thinks we’re prudes, because it’s famous page 3 girls, and IN his locker it’s not an issue.

Anyway, cut to last week. I was alone in break room. Locker door was open so I’m looking at this picture. There were Sharpie pens sitting on the table. So I gave the child in the photo quite a substantial bikini top with the permanent marker.

shit has hit the fan! Management don’t quite know what to do. Jim is furious, and the workforce divided into those who think it’s funny and those who think it was wrong.
no-one know who did it… Jim
his suspicions …

So MN, was AIBU??

OP posts:
SaggyBlinders · 14/08/2022 22:06

Boobsakimboo · 14/08/2022 09:50

‘What have management said in the past when you've brought to their attention that many of you are offended by Jim's photo?’

management are 3 blokes in their 40s and saw no harm as it was in his locker. Plus it was ‘ arty’ apparently. When I said - you know she was famously 16 in that picture, the answer was ‘it was different back then! And 16!is the age of consent.

I swear page 3 used to "count down" to a girls 16th: they'd publish photos of them in less and less clothes, and then publish a topless one on their 16th birthday. I remember thinking it was creepy af.

YANBU. Jim should have taken the photo home if it was so precious. Perv.

PoseyFlump · 14/08/2022 22:17

I swear page 3 used to "count down" to a girls 16th: they'd publish photos of them in less and less clothes, and then publish a topless one on their 16th birthday. I remember thinking it was creepy af.

They did. How on earth anyone ever thought that was okay is beyond me. It wasn't even that long ago in the whole scheme of things. Eeww.

WheelofLife · 14/08/2022 22:24

Ive said YABU. I would have complained to management. Defacing someone’s property is wrong, and two wrongs don’t make a right.

Watzzap · 14/08/2022 22:26

I am obviously not Jim. I still think the Op was in the wrong. She should have used the proper channels to deal with the issue.

If the Op is so pleased with what she did and thinks that she did the right thing, why is she so scared to admit to those at her workplace that she was the one responsible for defacing Jim’s property. Rather than laughing and smirking behind his back, why not say “it was me, I defaced the photo”? As I said before “If you think that what you did was okay, then own it! Tell him it was you!”

Well Op, are you a coward only willing to boast anonymously on here, where no one knows who you are, or are you going to “own it” and admit to Jim (and management if necessary) that you defaced his property?

SaggyBlinders · 14/08/2022 22:27

Just Googled it: yep the Sun did the 16th birthday countdown thing until 2003, when the law got changed so they had to stop. Like wtf. So grim and creepy. The girls would have still been 15 when their "birthday" photoshoot was done.

mariesatonhisknee · 14/08/2022 22:27

Boobsakimboo · 14/08/2022 10:01

‘Do you ever see topless women on holiday? God help you if you ever do - you'd probably cry’

as a woman I see naked women all the time. As a gay woman I absolutely would not bring a almost naked picture of a woman that I masturbated to as a teen and pin it up in my workplace where it’s visible to others. Then refuse to believe other might not want to see it… and in fact I might wonder whether it’s appropriate at all for a grown adult in their 40s to be drooling over a picture of a topless teenage girl.

Where is it appropriate to bring an almost naked picture of a woman and pin it up in your workplace ? Are we back in the 1980’s and it wasn’t appropriate then either

Boobsakimbo2 · 14/08/2022 22:29

‘swear page 3 used to "count down" to a girls 16th: they'd publish photos of them in less and less clothes, and then publish a topless one on their 16th birthday. I remember thinking it was creepy af.’

They did, my dad used to buy The
Sun back in the day ‘for the football’ apparently, and I was baffled as a kid as to why they had almost nude women in them and I remember the count downs which I found weird as hell

CandyLeBonBon · 14/08/2022 22:30

Regardless of your opinion, you have stopped him ogling the breasts of a 16 year old girl in the workplace* damaged something that he obviously likes very much*

There. Fixed that for you!

XelaM · 14/08/2022 22:49

mam0918 · 14/08/2022 11:10

You damaged someone elses property in on their property... you commited a crime, of course you are wrong.

Regardless of your personal feelings, it was and still is legal to own and you dont get to impose your personal beliefs in vigilanty actions outside of the law.

Also as a woman who worked for a company similar to page 3 I have never met a woman who it wasnt wholehaertedly her choice to pose topless, many of us feel our breasts are not 'shameful' or 'offensive'... its not femanism to impose control over other women and attempt to shame us or forcibly remove our own choice.

This.

Sam Fox herself always defended her choice to do page 3 as far as I'm aware.

OP sounds horrible and actually committed a crime of criminal damage. It's not a funny joke to damage someone's property- be is the bible or a signed topless photo.

XelaM · 14/08/2022 22:49

be it*

greyinganddecaying · 14/08/2022 22:56

I think YWBU to only draw a bikini top on her. I'd have drawn a polo neck jumper.

Boobsakimbo2 · 14/08/2022 22:56

‘Sam Fox herself always defended her choice to do page 3 as far as I'm aware.’

it made her famous world wide. I’d still
question the wisdom of letting a 16 year old ‘decide’ whether or not she wanted to become famous/infamous for her tits for the rest of her life.
not the point though. She did it,
I t was legal Jim got a pic.
it’s the having a topless photo on show at work that was main the issue here.

seems that mge just shrugged it off in a well shouldn’t have that up in the first place. Prob for the best…

Boobsakimbo2 · 14/08/2022 22:59

consider it karma for every time I saw a page 3 girl as a child and believed that that was some kind of ‘high’ or an acceptable route to game and fortune for a WC girl like me.

Arkestra · 14/08/2022 23:52

A big "not unreasonable" from me, OP

Jim left his locker door open so everyone could see the photo. Several women mentioned to him that it was grossing them out. Jim continued to leave the locker door open. OP took direct action. Good for them.

The phrase that comes to mind for me is "Fuck around and find out". Jim fucked around. He found out. He and others around him may, or may not, learn a lesson from this about what's acceptable behaviour nowadays. Or maybe he'll just bore everyone endways with how he can't have a 16-year-old's chest on display at work anymore.

Personally I would have been too chicken to do what the OP did. But I can't fault her for doing it.

Trixiefirecracker · 15/08/2022 07:46

XelaM · 14/08/2022 22:49

This.

Sam Fox herself always defended her choice to do page 3 as far as I'm aware.

OP sounds horrible and actually committed a crime of criminal damage. It's not a funny joke to damage someone's property- be is the bible or a signed topless photo.

Show quote history

I hardly think it’s ‘committing a crime’ 🤣

Quia · 15/08/2022 08:06

Trixiefirecracker · 15/08/2022 07:46

I hardly think it’s ‘committing a crime’ 🤣

Show quote history

But in fact it is.

WaveyHair · 15/08/2022 08:11

whalleyt · 14/08/2022 13:44

@WaveyHair why do you think it's not illegal?

Because at the time it was not actually illegal which is how the Sun got to print these photos in a public newspaper.

Illegal is different to objectionable.

midgetastic · 15/08/2022 08:24

If you could see it it wasn't hidden
It's completely inappropriate at work
He refused to take it down knowing it was offensive
He would have faced disciplinary action if reported
YANBU

Trixiefirecracker · 15/08/2022 08:51

Quia · 15/08/2022 08:06

But in fact it is.

Show quote history

@Quia i hardly think she’s going to be arrested for it.

Quia · 15/08/2022 09:08

Trixiefirecracker · 15/08/2022 08:51

@Quia i hardly think she’s going to be arrested for it.

Show quote history

Nor do I, but it doesn't change the fact that it's a crime - which you categorically said it was not.

Boobsakimbo2 · 15/08/2022 09:33

Final update!
Jim deffo knew it was me - he asked and I didn’t deny it, just said ‘should that picture have been up here in the first place?’
he walked off.
turns out I’m not getting fired, or prosecuted for criminal damage or marched through the streets while people shout ‘witch!’ despite the concerns of some posters about Jim’s rights.
most of the staff seem amused, and manager has apparently just shrugged it off with a ‘
tough’ not much we can do and do you HONESTLY except me to investigate this???

end of. Sanity and common sense prevailed.

Bloodybridget · 15/08/2022 09:35

KrisAkabusi · 14/08/2022 09:47

I said you were unreasonable, because you damaged someone's property. He shouldn't have had it there, there's no excuse for this in the workplace any more, but there were other options other than destroying it.

agree with @KrisAkabusi

Sparklingbrook · 15/08/2022 09:41

most of the staff seem amused, and manager has apparently just shrugged it off with a ‘
tough’ not much we can do and do you HONESTLY except me to investigate this???

So HR not getting involved then? I couldn't work at a place like that, I'd be looking tor a new job.

Figgygal · 15/08/2022 09:43

As much as i admire the sentiment it wasnt your property and you shouldnt have done it.
Your employer should have been more proactive in having it removed if he wouldn't as theres no place for that sort of material in workplaces today particularly if complaints are made.

MrsMcisaCt · 15/08/2022 10:00

So @Boobsakimboo you are now @Boobsakimbo2 and you are the OP - no wonder I've found this thread so confusing! Ah well, maybe Jim will keep his perversions at home from now on.