Why ban page 3?

[jackburton]

Hi, this is my first post, please be gentle :) . I'm looking for some thoughtful discussion on page 3 and the objectification of women, my wife suggested posting here. Any recommendations for good articles or feedback would be great.

My main issue with a lot of the traditional discussion on this issue is that there seems to be an implicit assumption of passivity and conformity in women that I can't really relate to as a man (or feel is present in many of the women in my life). I don't particularly worry about my son seeing body building or gay lifestyle magazines or other fetishised representations of men because I see them as part of a range of different types of lifestyle that he could adopt. I would think it quite alien that the occasional image of men in this way would significantly affect me (or him). In contrast, advertising and lifestyle magazines aimed at women seem to impose a very disturbing level of conformity and one that I feel would not be acceptable to most men. Frankly a lot of female targeted products seem to objectify (in the sense of judging purely by appearance) and be misogynist (in the sense of appearing to gain pleasure from and dwelling on the humiliation of women, particularly if their superficial appearance is non-conformist). In contrast most pornographic products aimed at men include a great diversity of female personality types, some are passive but many are not, Jordan being a classic example. They aren't treated as objects in the sense that their desire is critical to their appeal, sex dolls are relatively undesirable. While there is certainly some pornography and lifestyle discussions that appear to encourage pleasure in the suffering of women I feel this is in the minority with most magazines presenting their female models as stars who are the centre of attention and whose happiness and desire is an important part of their appeal.

My initial feelings about the campaign against page 3 is that these images are being judged assuming they were present in the kind of magazine targeted at women i.e. they are a conforming image and that they would lead to humiliation of those that didn't conform. I think the majority of male culture is not oppressive in that way. Personally I find mainstream female culture to be much more of a problem for women's liberation than these products. What am I missing?

[FreyaSnow]

The main role models for working class girls are the women they know. I don't think most working class people see being working class as something they're trying to escape from. For jobs that are not working class, many working class teenagers have aspired to go into teaching or various skilled health care roles, because such jobs usually rely less on connections (apart from medicine sadly) and they are familiar to young people. This doesn't seem to have changed and is the first choice for my son and the second choice for my daughter after acting.

Celebrity type jobs are desired by children of all classes, but most are aware that they are unlikely to achieve it. Most celebrities aren't famous because anybody thinks they're role models; they're famous because we find them entertaining which is usually their job. The fact that a lot of us would like to do that doesn't mean we're really planning to do it or see it as a realistic role model type situation.

I think trying to normalise or justify jobs in the sex industry as aspirational to people of school age is hugely detrimental when one in four young people are sexually abused according to the NSPCC.

[ashesgirl]

Jack, in the nicest possible way, did you actually just want to come here and ask if the reason that women want to ban page 3 is because they are jealous of the models?

Cos seriously this is what I'm taking away from your posts

[LineRunner]

jack, it's pretty obvious that you don't understand the patriarchy argument - you don't need to keep saying it and proving it.

I think with your comment on teenagers reading Katie P's biog as a guide to, well, anything, you are either (a) taking the piss or (b) seriously deluded.

[jackburton]

I think those are good points FreyaSnow my grandparents are half working class and half middle class. Those from a working class background have mostly taken teaching, and administrative roles, one has aimed for organising dance music gigs which I suppose is a variation on pursuing a singing career. Although I agree they wouldn't say they were trying to escape being working class, they do wish to avoid some of the less pleasant jobs, like retail, call centre and factory work. I think they all have had dreams of celebrity careers at some point e.g. sport, music etc. but generally haven't pursued them directly.

I certainly agree that it would preferable to have other role models than those in the sex industry. I think that should be a priority for feminism. I think celebrities and fictional heroes contribute a lot to how people think about what they should and could be. There are a massive collection of male ones and I think that contributes to helping men have the drive to achieve and to some extent might explain the relative disparity of men in high stress, high status jobs.

"one in four young people are sexually abused"
I'd love to find out more about these statistics as they seem incredibly high. Assuming that is mostly girls (i.e. almost half of all girls), that is so high it would be hard to get the statistics on it. It would require sample surveys across many demographics. It would also help to get that in perspective a bit more in terms of actual suffering, abused seems like a strong word to match that statistic. I am surprised there is not more policing of this issue if it is so widespread, I have never observed something I would term abuse. I have been hit by strangers twice and been threateningly felt up by a man as an adult (I knew him) although these incidents are memorable I'm not sure I think of them as abuse but perhaps I am being overly sensitive about semantics. I guess the real issue is how psychologically damaging such incidents are in comparison to other, non sexual forms of attack, such as bullying, to try and get such problems in perspective.

[jackburton]

"if the reason that women want to ban page 3 is because they are jealous of the models?"

Hi ashesgirl, no that is definitely not the point I am trying to make. My concern is that mainstream female culture is so conformist that page 3 models are a threat because by seeing them there is some expectation that they should be emulated or that others would expect all women to be like them. I think men don't have this concern because they have such a diversity of role models and lifestyles that other men consider valid. I am not threatened by lifestyles I wouldn't personally enjoy or particularly approve of (like cage fighting) but its existence is not disturbing to me because it says very little about how I should live.

[ashesgirl]

Sorry I just don't understand your reply.

[jackburton]

"I think with your comment on teenagers reading Katie P's biog as a guide to, well, anything, you are either (a) taking the piss or (b) seriously deluded."

I am not alone in suggesting that people desire to be like Katie Price and I don't think the view is that strange, you might not feel that she is a legitimate role model but that doesn't mean others don't. To me she seems to be someone who has attained a desirable affluent lifestyle, much like the wider WAG community.

[jackburton]

Sorry ashesgirl, is this any clearer:

I don't think women are jealous of page 3 models I think they are concerned that they will be expected to be like them.

I think this is less of an issue for men because male culture is more accepting of a diverse range of lifestyles.

[LineRunner]

You misunderstand what I said, OP.

Also could you post evidence for things you say in the vein of 'people desire' or be clear that this stuff you write is actually your own personal view.

[ashesgirl]

Ok, I see what you mean. But I don't think that's the main reason for those campaigning against page 3.

[LineRunner]

"I don't think women are jealous of page 3 models I think they are concerned that they will be expected to be like them...I think this is less of an issue for men because male culture is more accepting of a diverse range of lifestyles."

I think you wrong, but wrong for very interesting reasons. Which have been told to you, if you would but read and listen.

[jackburton]

Sorry LineRunner, apologies for my style I'm a university researcher and the tendency to write in an authoritative style is hard to break. All of my comments are my own view, even those with references are very selectively obtained (usually at short notice through Google) and so are certainly not objective facts.

[ninjasquirrel]

I find Page 3 utterly grim and it's not about feeling expected to emulate it! Firstly it's the general view of women in that paper. Men = businessmen, sportsmen, politicians... Women = tits and a few celebs who might just squeeze in. Secondly I just don't want to be on a train with some bloke ogling naked breasts. It's just unpleasant! (not the breasts, the ogling)

[FreyaSnow]

Jack, there is a breakdown for all the sexual abuse figures and a copy of the research in the statistics section on the NSPCC website, so you should be able to see how it was compiled. There are also figures on the other types of abuse including physical abuse and bullying.

There was a report on the sexualisation of children that the government funded which looked at what the psychological impact was, which somebody on here might have a link to.

[ashesgirl]

Banning page 3 is about acknowledging that women are equal, that newspapers are not the sole domain of men who must be pandered to.

It's also about trying to break down the complete and utter sexualisation of women in our society.

[ashesgirl]

Good post, ninja. You summed it up well.

[jackburton]

Thanks FreyaSnow. I'll check out the NSPCC stuff. The psychological impact report would also be useful if anyone knows the link.

[williaminajetfighter]

....because it's very hard to have a civil conversation with a man at work when they're talking to you and looking at tits at the same time. And when you're their manager. A bit of a disconnect there, don't you think.

... because naked women shouldn't be something you have a lookie at while you're trying to read slightly legitimate news.

I have been waiting for this day forever. 2 years ago I asked my boss if we could remove the Sun from our staff sitting room---- it was there every day and bugged me that it was often open to page 3. I thought she would understand especially as a young, highly paid female manager but no... she said she 'doesn't condone censorship', told me I sounded like a bit arrogant complaining about it and made out like I am a hater of the working classes for disliking the Sun. Other staff heard our conversation and I got a bad rap as a troublemaker. I felt like Sally Field in Norma Rae!

People are very very sanctimonious about the Sun as some kind of voice of the working classes and therefore precious about changing the paper. But they shouldn't be precious about retaining naked women.

[jackburton]

"Banning page 3 is about acknowledging that women are equal, that newspapers are not the sole domain of men who must be pandered to."

I don't think newspapers should be thought of as anything other than entertainment products for different demographics. They are highly skewed to different perspectives and there is reasonable diversity between them. The existence of page 3 in the Sun places no restriction on other newspapers who don't have an equivalent emphasis. I suspect the real problem is that so many women read the Sun, if it was just viewed as another mens publication there wouldn't be as much of an issue.

[ashesgirl]

Did anyone see the Neil Wallis article on the 'wimmin' who just want to get it banned? This really narked me!

He says it's middle class wimmin who eat 'wheatgerm' trying to impose their views on everyone else. And the working class women who buy the paper don't care.

Well I was brought up in a working class household where my parents bought The Sun. As a girl growing up, I used to squirm so much when anybody turned over the front page. How awful for young girls exposed to it.

So I have never bought the paper myself but I feel it does affect my life. Bugs me, when people say don't like it, don't buy it.

Bloody annoying article here ...

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/neil-wallis/page-3-should-not-be-banned_b_1908751.html

[LineRunner]

OP, I don't find your style authoritative at all.

[ashesgirl]

Right Jack, so tell me why you're not allowed to show sexualised topless women on TV before 9pm on telly?

[jackburton]

Great points williaminajetfighter I think things are very different in a workplace where a person is often forced to experience something and I can certainly understand that the dynamics you describe are unacceptable.

[FreyaSnow]

Here is the report about sexualisation. The impact of sexualisation isn't going to be the same as the impact of sexual abuse; the NSPCC might have more on the impact of sexual abuse:

webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http:/www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/Sexualisation-of-young-people2835.pdf?view=Binary

There was another report about sexualisation more recently. I think it might be the Bailey report.

[BubblesOfBliss]

" if it was just viewed as another men's publication there wouldn't be as much of an issue."

I wonder Jack if the penny is beginning to drop about the issue people have been repeating in this thread: Men as default, women as 'other'...

The way things stand in a patriarchal society is that everything unless stated otherwise is for men.