Should we back the No More Page 3 campaign? Please let us know what you think...

[JustineMumsnet]

Hello all,

As some of you will know, there have been a few on-board debates about the No More Page 3 nomorepage3.org/ campaign, and whether or not Mumsnet should 'officially' join up as a supporter.

Previous threads here here here and here have been on balance supportive but not of a sufficient consensus for us to feel comfortable putting our full weight behind the cause.

With our most recent blog post on the issue, however, support seemed a bit more clear cut and there were lots of calls for us to back the campaign.

So we thought we'd canvass support more officially and widely. Do please use this thread to let us know whether you think we should sign up.

Obviously this is by no means a precise science, but in order to try to get a representative Mumsnet view, we will be placing a bit less weight on the views of those who have signed up to Mumsnet very recently.

YES, YES, YES

Sorry for shouting but I feel very strongly about this.

Yes. Losing page three is a vital step towards stopping the rest of the terrible pictures...

Daughters and sisters shouldn't see this.

Yes. It's not just a consumer issue. It's not as simple as saying if you don't like it don't buy it. The Sun has a readership of 7 million and the paper is available to read in hospitals, libraries, cafes etc. I've never bought the Sun but I've seen page 3 regularly.

The Sun believes itself to be so powerful that it will claim to win political elections (after supporting Tony Blair for example). Yet we're supposed to believe its portrayal of naked women on the most prominent page of the paper does not have an impact. Either the content of the Sun is meaningless or it isn't. If in doubt would you think a racist picture on page 3 would have no wider implication? Of course you don't.

How women are portrayed by the most powerful newspaper in the UK matters. Women on page 3 are young, white, naked, available to male and there to stimulate and entertain. In a NEWSpaper This is a very narrow definition of sexuality.

Mumsnet - loads of charities and organisations have added their support and signed the petition - it's a no brainer. You'll be in good company if you do though Russel Brand link is dubious

You tube Doc Brown and no more page 3.

TheNightIsDark I totally agree all those things are awful. Supporting the NMP3 campaign doesn't mean not campaigning for all that to change too. In fact MN could put out a statement saying they are supporting this campaign as part of a broader view than encompasses all those issues. It doesn't have to be one or the other. But I see this as one step along that road, not a separate road.

Yes, I would be really pleased if MN supported this campaign. Signed the petition when it was in its infancy and believed that p3 is just one of the many insidious examples of casual sexism. I can't see why you'd have to think so carefully about supporting it!

Yes please do support the campaign.

@TheNightIsDark

I think there's more important things to campaign about. FGM, childcare costs, more support for MH awareness and losing the stigma and the increasing pressure on children to be older than they are (make up, video games etc.)

Not to mention from the campaign I've seen (the SN one) they seem to run a bit on here but I've never seen one in a newspaper or magazine where it could reach people and have an effect.

Hi there TheNightIsDark, not wanting to go off on a side track, but you can read more about our most recent campaigns here. Quite a few do get a fair bit of press coverage (print, radio, other sites) which helps us reach others that might want to campaign on the issue, and importantly those that might be able in a position to respond to our campaigns.

Keep your eyes peeled for something on childcare costs later in the week.

Yes I'd like to see it supported.

em if they could run it alongside a broader campaign that would be brilliant. A stamp out sexism thing rather than just a single minded aim would probably reach more people.

My posts made so much more sense in my head before I typed them.

Thanks Katie. Will have a read through

Yes, I feel that Mumsnet should definitely support the campaign.

It contributes to a culture in which women are judged solely on their sexiness.

It's NOT a campaign to BAN it!!!

It's to make David Dinsmore and Murdoch review using naked women to sell newspapers.

Let's face it, The reason why they are holding onto page 3 is because print newspapers sales are going down the pan so they will cling on to page 3 rather than risk losing advertising revenue and readership.

I don't know what the NMP3 are asking Mumsnet to do but every other organisation have put together a supporting statement and signed the petition.

Those supporting this campaign are not chained to the Sun offices or throwing themselves under horses.

I would like mumsnet to support this campaign.

It's not just the sun though. There's that other paper (the sport or the star?) that is covered in half naked women and is also at child view in newsagents. Also, dear Deirdre has half naked women in provocative poses that even if they agreed to stop page 3 they would still be in there.

Apologies if this is covered under no more page 3.

Caja I totally agree with you. However I would just like to add that sons and brothers should not have to see this either. I truly believe that pornography (as that is what page 3 is) is as damaging to boys and men as it is to girls and women.

Yes, I think MN should support the campaign. Depicting topless women in sexualised poses in the front pages of what is supposed to be a family newspaper is utterly unacceptable. It's bringing the values and aesthetics of porn into everyday life.

Yes please

I'd be pleased if you supported this campaign.

I'm surprised there's even a debate. Of course MN should back the campaign.

Definit
ely.

Absolutely YES!

NMP3 is about so much more than getting rid of sexualised images of women in a national newspaper and I have fully supported it for ages.

YES please support the campaign, MN!

I'm in.
And while you're at it how about getting other..er...'newspapers' to withdraw their pictures/or treat them the same as the mags (covered and up high)?

Yes of course.

It doesn't support parents in any way does it? The overt sexualisation of breasts in the media, in particular Page 3 but see also "Lads Mags" does nothing to support parents or parenting for the following reasons:

1. Premature sexualisation of our children.

1. Exposure of our children to misogyny in the most accessible format possible, an image.

1. Perpetuates the myth that the sole purpose of breasts is sexual. The biological reasons for them are rather more relevant to parents than most.

1. Exposes everyone to overt misogyny which has implications for how women see themselves and are seen including perceptions of power balances in relationships, the workplace and family life and the expectation of what constitutes a worthwhile relationship.

For every strident supporter of Page 3 I bet there are at least 3 more that are stridently against and another 4 who are apathetic.

Yes, you should definitely support/back it.