No More Page 3 petition

[StephanieDA]

Anyone else out there supporting the No More Page 3 petition set up by Lucy Holmes?
www.change.org/petitions/dominic-mohan-take-the-bare-boobs-out-of-the-sun-nomorepage3
I wrote a blog about it a while ago, as a mother - please look and share if you want to:
www.communicatingwithkids.com/our-daughters/

I also don't like page 3 - but it's hardly on a par with the right to vote and race equality.

Some people just can't help themselves, they feel that they are intelligent enough to decide for others what they should read. Sorry you may not agree with page 3 but the only way you could convince the paper is if you could get signatures in the order of at least a third. People buy it knowing what it contains. They have chosen and unlike China we in the UK have freedom of choice. It is amusing to see people insult people they have never met and make judgements on them. The issue with a democracy is that sometimes you have to put up with what over people want, especially if they are a majority. When minorities start deciding for the majority we run the risk of losing democracy.

In what way is it a "good" newspaper?

The tits?

The sexism?

The dodgy reporting?

The blatant xenophobia and racism?

The only redeeming quality it has is that you can finish it on your lunch break. And the SUNDOKU

sigh I am not insulting them, sausage, so can you stop with the strawman arguments? I am saying it like it is. The Sun IS written for people with reading abilities of seven year olds. Like it or not, that is a fact. Why do YOU think that is an insult? You might read that rag and feel I am insulting you but facts are facts. Sorry and all that. And I am also sorry that women have to suffer sexism because some people want their kicks or do not/can not understand the full impact of this disgusting objectification. It really is that simple.

it's NOT a fact. it's an urban myth. You saying it's a fact doesn't make it one.

Extract from the Ironbridge Institute 2011/2012 Reading and Readabilty Module 5, Interpretation:

"It is important to recognise that reading age is not related to physical age or mental age. The method above is simply a measure of how complex the word and sentence structure is, and, therefore, of how easy it is to read. A recent test on a copy of The Sun and on a feature in the Independent?s colour supplement magazine gave reading ages of 11/12 and 15/16 respectively. The Sun is not written for people who are stupid, just for those who prefer something easy to read. See: www.harrymclaughlin.com/SMOG_Readability_Formula_G.Harry_McLaughlin(1969).pdf"

Unfortunately the source link at the end of the par does not work.

Clearly though you don't have to be the sharpest knife in the box to read the Sun

Yawn....

Whatever my opinions are on exploitation of women is one matter. To bring another issue in I do not want to purchase or knowingly support an organisation who knowingly employed people who hacked into a murdered young girl's phone so that her poor frantic parents thought that she must be alive. How disgusting does the press have to get before people stop trading with them buy buying the disgusting rag. Thats just one example. When it is a celebrity some people would argue that they have to put up with it but what justifies trading with these 'people'.

By the way, I think page 3 is outdated and objectifies women. It does not just include page 3, it includes the Star and Sport. I cant believe they get away with it. I went to my local shop the other day to be confronted with a woman's arse and almost vulva in my face on front of the Spa. Anyone who thinks that is ok needs their heads examined IMO.

MrsCLown, I think I love you.

Me too

I agree that hacking Milly Dowler's phone was wrong.

However the family knew nothing about it at the time. The messages were not deleted as has been widely reported and, therefore, the family were not given any false hope that their murdered daughter was alive.

Nancy66 - thats ok then. I suppose anything can be justified. I still cant believe people do though.

rosa and muddle - thank you!

I wasn't justifying it. I was correcting your error.

Thankfully the real world continues without involvement from these boards.

It's amazing how many people will support men's privilege to ogle women's bodies.

Yes, sausage the real world continues on. And bit by little bit it gets better for all people through activism and knowledge.

By the way, I think page 3 is outdated and objectifies women. It does not just include page 3, it includes the Star and Sport. I cant believe they get away with it. I went to my local shop the other day to be confronted with a woman's arse and almost vulva in my face on front of the Spa. Anyone who thinks that is ok needs their heads examined IMO

Exactly - and explaining to a four year old DS why a woman was bending over with her backside in the air whilst waiting in the queue at Tesco Metro made me realise how innured I'd become to newspapers showing those images.

They should not be in newspapers. Simple as that. Don't think taking the boobs out of the Mirror changed it that much.

*inured

I find it so utterly brain-hurtingly baffling when I read comments from women defending page 3. I don't get it. Then I read the guff that follows about how we live in a free democracy and therefore this kind of shitty sexism is apparently really important because it's free speech and if we ban page 3 then OHMYGOD we'll have women in burqas next and it'll be like Victorian Britain and Afghanistan and China all rolled into one only with no sky because that will have fallen in.

So here's a thought. Since we have this 'free speech' on page 3, I'm really concerned that it's not having a pop at any other group that I might want to see having the piss ripped out of them daily, as is my right if I want to spend 40p on that in this democracy. Why can't I have a page 3 devoted to Afro-Carribbeans? I'd love to see the text where they say something 'political' - perhaps it could read 'I don't have no opinion on dat stuff mon because I has been smoking da good stuff all day instead of getting a job'. Then I can laugh at black people when I'm out and about because they are so hilarious and not as clever as me because they are black and lazy. And actually, what about the gays? Why leave them alone? Let's have limp-wristed man in a sailor hat on page 3 and then I can shout at the 'queers' in public and laugh at them because they are so funny and not as normal as me. And I can say to my kids - look kids! You don't want to be like that do you? Now go objectify some women quick and be 'normal'! Those gays aren't like us and we should just laugh at them. And what about the Jews? They could find some for page 3 with big noses and score their noses out of 10 for size? Bigger the better! Brilliant!

No? But free speech, innit.

If you are getting the piss ripped out of you daily because you have tits then you really should consider moving areas and changing jobs.

I'm not talking about me - I'm talking about the page 3 models. What exactly is News in Briefs doing if not that?

oh ok. Misunderstood. fair enough.

Nancy - it was not an error. Milly's messages were deleted which made her parents think she was still alive. No error involved. But if you think it is not absolutely disgusting you are perfectly entitled to your opinion even though it is a world away from mine.

Dye - I totally understand what you mean. I always go in my Spa and cover the womans arse and vulva with some obscure non offensive publication. I dont say a word to the staff but just look at them. I have never been stopped. A friend of mine was doing the same in a shop and the shopkeeper called the police when she refused to stop doing it. The police came out and said to the shop keeper 'well actually she is right!'. Its not illegal, though the shopkeeper can bar you from the shop.

They weren't deleted by a phone hacker though - they just expired.

Yes, the real world. That real world where only a few decades ago, easily in living memory of some, ads like these were perfectly acceptable and reasonable...

Show her it's a man's world.

Where she belongs.

Your wife will drive home one of the best reasons...

So the harder a wife works the cuter she looks...

...that's what wives are for.

Most men ask 'is she pretty? Not 'is she clever?'

And a 'delightful' non-gendered one...

I'm sure the first people to complain about these were seen as 'over-reacting' and 'making a big deal about nothing'. I'm sure they were also accused of curtailing 'free speech'...

Breasts in a newspaper are as outdated and antiquated as these images. If not more.

In another generation, people will snigger at Page 3 in the same way that we laugh at these, slightly incredulous that people thought they were in any way OK. Some people seemingly take a lot longer than others to to get to the point of understanding that, and so feel the need to vehemently argue for the status quo.

I lump Page 3 supporters in with the sort of people who didn't see the slightest thing wrong with these messages...