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?

@Flora

Still slandering with no counter...you really are an academic lightweight.

My apologies, bum, you said they get laid less than young, attractive women.

Which has precisely what to do with page 3?

bum It's not slander to point out that you have yet to make an argument to counter.

With respect, bum, you're not exactly coming across as an intellectual heavyweight yourself.

But on the other hand, I've ticked most of the squares in my 'evolutionary psychology' bingo card, so my time on this thread hasn't been entirely wasted.

"Then explain why old fat ugly women don't get laid as much as young, slim waisted, pretty, big breasted ones then?"

You are wrong. Old fat ugly women get laid just as much as young, slim waisted, pretty bigbreasted ones. By the way, most old fat women are also big-breasted - on the whole, if you're fat, you have big breasts, just sayin'.

Most old fat ugly women were young slim waisted and pretty once and they got married and are still shagging.

Although possibly the old fat beautiful ones get laid more often, I don't know, I don't believe there has been any meaningful research into this.

As for someone who quotes evo-psychology calling anyone else academically lightweight - Arf.

Still nothing but vapour from you Flora...

@WhentheRed

Men are always going to objectify and stare at women. Indeed, it is one of the pleasures a man has that makes the world a more bearable place. It isn't going to change. Indeed, Jayne Mansfield's scantily clad D cups painted on a Flying Fortress made the men's lives who were fighting WW2 a little more bearable.

Men, are, and always will be the disposable sex. One man can fertilise numerous women, it doesn't work the other way around. Hence "woman and children first". This is how nature works. It doesn't give a damn about feelings or politics. Men die to protect their women, look at WW1. Women would give white feathers to send guys into the trenches by shaming them with cowardice. Who am I to dictate if a man should not get pleasure from ogling women. Indeed, I suspect those who shrill loudest get ogled least!

Also page three is not page one. If you don't like it don't buy the newspaper. Now the Daily Sport is a paper I would cheerfully take up an argument against. It is on the bottom shelf and displays sexualised imagary, which I don't want my kids to see.

@Blueberry "You are wrong. Old fat ugly women get laid just as much as young, slim waisted, pretty bigbreasted ones."

Not by high status males...who usually have a soft harem of pretty young ones.

" Indeed, I suspect those who shrill loudest get ogled least!"

Ah yes, the usual anti-feminist insults. You only care because you're ugly.

In fact you're probably those ugly fat women who shouldn't be shagging at all, it's horrific that you are.

Who let this one in?

@Blueberry

In fact you're probably those ugly fat women who shouldn't be shagging at all, it's horrific that you are.

and when did I say that...?

Visitors again?

I think we give less and less of a shit about 'high status males' or what they want or think they are entitled to.

We've got high status females too now you know, not just the big breasted slim waisted ones either. The ones that intimidate men like you because you think the world should stay like it was in WW1 or WW2 that you're obviously obsessed with.

Women and a large proportion of men have had enough of the tired peddling of these myths that you seem to want to cling to, where women are '10s' if you want to fuck them and have little value if you don't.
Sorry if this frightens you or makes you angry.
Things are changing, page 3 etc won't last now. get used to it.

bum, whenthered threw you a lifeline in trying to bring your EP nonsense into the discussion in a meaningful way but you're still just saying men fancy hot women and anyone who objects is shrill and jealous. The EP part is an attempt to make it sound clever and sciencey and important.

I'm married to a high status male and that damn harem is so annoying, their veils cluttering up the washing machine. Don't get me started on the eunuchs!

@ FrameyMcFrame

Doesn't frighten me or make me angry at all. There has always been high status females as there always has been a sisterhood...Page three may go but there will always be a demand for images of young pretty women. Always!

If you think feminism will change the male sexual response then you are deluded.

Bum, are you starting a campaign against the Daily Sport? Excellent.

@When I see, so page 3 is a sop to the low status men who read the likes of the Sun? A means to permit them to dream about a woman they will never get.

Yes. Nail on the Head

"If page 3 was a means whereby a physically "10" woman (no objectification there) could bag a high status man, the women models are getting it completely wrong. They are targetting the wrong demographic. High status men don't read the Sun."

They are doing it for the money and the status. How many of them end up with high status footballers. Quite a few I think. They certainly wouldn't be dating a man with no future.

"Likewise if high status men chose from the page 3 ranks, and I have never met a CEO who is married to a former page 3 model, there would be page 3s in the Financial Times."

High status men don't go looking in newspapers...the young women flock to then in herds.

"At the end of the day, however, your message seems to be that women are objects whose goal is to make life more bearable for men."

Partly true...indeed women (and their tits) do make life bearable for men. Women's primary role and goal IN NATURE'S STRATEGY is to bring new life into the world and continue the species by selecting the best genes she can to reproduce. The women with the most beauty can command the most resources to further the security of her offspring. Simples.

@Doctrine

The Daily Sport is where the issue lies for me...it is on the bottom shelf with sexualised images on the front cover where any child can see it. I hate it with a loathing. Page three you have a choice, if you don't like it don't buy it. You don;'t have to see it. With the Sport there is no choice. It should be placed on top shelf by law.

I don't really care about the male sexual response Bum, believe it or not, it's not the most important thing in the world!!!

I want to see the end of page three because I don't like the messages it sends to our daughters and sons.

Nature's strategy? Is she good at chess?

I suppose this EP bollox might make some men feel better about their lack of success in life, "it's not my fault I am a "low status male" / can't get a not babe, it's nature's strategy"

Look outside your cave for a moment. What? You don't live in a cave? That's because we are not cavemen. So-called Evolutionary Psychologists have no clue what the psychology of the cavemen was because THEY ARE ALL DEAD! It is a non-science based entirely on speculation with absolutely no relevance whatsoever to modern politics or society.

@Frame

Actually the male sexual response is one of the most important things on the planet. Where would women get sperm from without it! You wouldn't exist if it wasn't for your dad's testicles and his sexual response to your mum.

"I want to see the end of page three because I don't like the messages it sends to our daughters and sons."

You are entitled to your opinion. However I argue that those messages are always going to be there as they have always been through history. Every culture has objectified beauty and virility. You cannot ban or stop it as it would continue like the prohibition in America. As I am sure you are aware the best defense is the healthy upbringing of children in an environment where they feel secure and loved regardless of their sexual desirability.

Page three is under control, we can chose to buy...The Sport thrusts it in our faces...we have no control. In my mind targeting the Sun is a waste of time...The Sport is where the attacks should go.

@Flora Nature's strategy? Is she good at chess?

Nature created Gary Kasparov...so yes I guess she is.

"I suppose this EP bollox might make some men feel better about their lack of success in life, "it's not my fault I am a "low status male" / can't get a not babe, it's nature's strategy"

How would it make them feel better? It doesn't change the fact they are not getting laid.

You do live in a cave...only it's got central heating, usually installed by a bloke! (Had to get that one in! Heh)

I think it was custardy who said on another thread that in the end, MRA posts boil down to "a bloo bloo bloo my penis". In this case, "my very important sexual response".

bum the answer to your question to me is in the quote you included "it's not my fault"

The world you imagine yourself to be living in bears no resemblance to real life. There will be no black market versions of the Sun produced and circulated surreptitiously. In the real world, most of the time boys and girls grow up, fall in love and get married and reproduce via the male and female sexual response. This stuff about high status males with harems of women and low status men who never get laid is nonsense spouted by bitter PUA sheep who obsess about women being 10s or 3s or whatever and how can they shag a 7 rather than a 6.

Oh and have a for the ickiest post yet.

Bum I think you're missing the point. We could argue back and forth about EP forever, that chestnut will never be resolved but that has nothing to do with the campaign against Page 3.

Women understand that men like "10"s as you put it. But that's not the issue is it?

The issue is that we don't want to live in a culture where women's bodies are seen as commodities, because women are human beings and whilst men might see us as sexual objects first and foremost, we don't see ourselves as sexual objects and don't want to be treated as such.

The other thing you said regarding "womens preference for athletic six foot high earning men" begs the question why there is such an imbalance. Why all naked women and no naked men? Who is being pandered to here and why?

So men fancy women and women fancy men (except for when men fancy men and women fancy women) - so what? In what way does that justify P3 in today's world?

The 'don't like it, don't buy it' argument is BS - it's everywhere - on trains, buses, in cafes, pubs and workplaces. It contributes to a hostile environment for women who, in todays world want a bit more than to be treated as something to ogle, TYVM. It's soft porn and has no place at the breakfast table or anywhere else in mixed company.

I'll support your campaign against the Sport though, let us know when you've set it up.