How can any woman NOT support the No More Page 3 campaign?!

[DoctorRobert]

This is inspired by a thread about the No More Page 3 campaign on another forum I'm a member of. Some of the attitudes over there (all by female posters) are just depressing.

So many women who don't see a problem with Page 3 & describe it as harmless fun...the old chestnut that "there are worse things in the world to worry about" (maybe, maybe not, but I can think about more than one issue at once)...Page 3 being defended as tradition...and a complete inability to see Page 3 as part of a bigger picture of objectification and inequality. Posters denying that there even is inequality. Posters saying they would support their daughters if they wanted to topless model.

So my question is, how can any woman in 2013 think that way?

Is it normalisation? A lot of the posters also recount their parents buying the Sun and seeing Page 3 from a young age. Has objectification been so deeply ingrained into them that they just can't see why it's a problem?

Or is that it's too uncomfortable for some women to acknowledge that we don't yet have equality? Perhaps on some level they do realise there's a problem with Page 3, but facing up to that isn't an easy thing to do?

I can't what?p3 exists as we live in society that commodofies and sells sex
I have absolutely no problem explaining that to my kids
it's not my lookout if someone else cannot think how to explain p3 to their kds

There is estimated to be over 3m female readers of the Sun. When they stop reading then things might change. Estimated the sun has over 7m readers. So when you look at the number of people who have signed the stop page 3 petition the number is a tiny percentage. Just people talk a lot, fact is unless the paper can see a reason to stop page 3 all the signatures don't matter. Perhaps when the campaign gets the equivalent to the number of female readers people will think it worthwhile to take note but till then it will only change if the those in charge want to change.

and you haven't explained why you accept it and don't fight it. When your daughter says, "ok society thinks women are sex objects, why is that ok with you?" what's your answer? I fight things if I thing they are wrong. I want my children to stand up for what's right. I work to change things I think are wrong and luckily decent people always have. if I say to my daughter sex sells so people use women to sell shit, and you will always be seen as tits and ass, but mummy doesn't care enough to try and change it. How the the fuck do you tell a kid that

oh spare me the faux paxman grilling.i have an adequate explanation
I am more than capable of having open conversation about range topic when necessary
and I am comfortable with that

page 3 isn't about the commodification (sp?) of "sex"
it's about commodifying the female body in a way that appeals to heterosexual men
The fact that the image is always of a woman, is what the problem is. That is the part that's hard to explain in any positive way. I cannot see a good way of telling small girls that there are topless women in the daily paper because male (hetero)sexuality needs to be pandered to while other sexualities do not.

If you are telling your children that page 3 is simply to do with the commodification of sex, then you are lying to them, and they will notice. They will notice that the image is always of a woman. Children are not stupid.

all change has happened because people made it happen sausage. Scottish ? you repeatedly say people should know what to say in response, and then prove there is no reasonable response. it doesn't take paxman to see you're talking shit as usual

As long as the sun has willing women to have their photos taken and and no significant loss to their client base because of page 3 there is zero incentive for them to withdraw page 3. From a business point of view they are more likely to lose readers (money). I doubt those 100,000 that have signed are representatives of sun readers so why would they care they don't buy their product anyway.

That's probably how they would view it.

is that your schoolgirl arguing?tell me you is talkin shite. are you 15?
you see I don agree with you but I can hold it together and more coherently than you
you're not going to win any substantive points if that your range

someone asked how would I explain p3, I've stated how I'd do that
if someone else cannot adequately explain p3 to kids that's not my look out
aspects of parenting is negotiating difficult topics,and explain in age appropriate way

Scottishmummy

OMG, this has to be a first but I actually agree with your last post and feel exactly the same. Never thought I'd see the day.

well we can't all be as eloquent as Scottishmummy

Rumblegreen, of course that is how they are going to view it. That is why the campaign needs to keep going, and why many more signatures are needed.

I hope it will become clear that a lot of potential customers object to having Page 3. Don't forget, there are a lot of people who don't like page 3 but do not sign the petition, for example because they think the petition wants a ban on naked breasts. And not everyone who would object to Page 3 may have heard about the campaign. Or agree in principle but think signing won't change anything.

I just think we've got to keep trying. It's all we've got.

I wholeheartedly support ones right to agitate politically,it's part of liberal democracy
I also accept we don't all share or feel compelled by same causes
that in no way renders my opinion of greater/lesser gravitas than anyone else

When men stop liking breasts there will be no children on the earth. Their sex is one of the few things many women who are low earners can sell. Arguably by denying them that you give in to male power - anyway that's one point of view.

I think (only opinion) that it is important to bring your dc up to respect women. They will come across pornography unless you intend to wrap them in cotton wool, its just up to us as parents whether we try to protect them, pretend it won't be our dc, educate them in an age appropriate way or a mix of the above.
Trying to ban the source whether The Sun, soft porn magazines, or internet sites, isn't going to stop a person's desire if this is what they choose.
The Sun isn't my thing, nor dh, nor my ds (the latter grew out of it a long time ago)

My views were laid out on my blog a few months ago and they haven't changed
Needless to say I have not heard a single view for keeping page 3 that has convinced me that it should stay.
I agree with the poster who said that at best they (people who want to keep page 3) have accepted casual, everyday sexism and at worst they hate women. Sums it up.

I don't see this campaign as a call for banning. I see it is a consciousness-raising exercise. I'm all for them - get the debates happening in the public sphere. On anything, particularly to do with issues to do with inequality, whether large or small.

Getting people engaged and thinking about stuff is the way change happens in society, alongside direct actions and fights for legal changes. And that works for stuff we don't like, as well as stuff we do.

I never quite understand the hierarchy of causes thing, though. Or, rather, I never understand why some posters post to argue against something that they think unworthy of time spent (not against the cause itself), rather than for something they think is important. What a baffling use of time. Ironically.

does it really make you feel more secure in your view to demonise others as women haters?
how do you deal with conflicting opinion in real life?label everyone else haters?
it must make life v black and white for you

Hate to point out to people we live in a democracy which means majority rule. Even when we know something is wrong we can't change it unless enough people agree. So get 7 million signatures against page 3 maybe people will listen. Or more likely those who are going to sign have signed by now and there may be dribbles but there is not the groundswell of support for getting rid of it.

100,000 or even 500,000 would not be a big enough to make a point.

I don't want to ban anything. I am not anti-democratic.

I am, however, aware that people have limited time to think about a lot of stuff and I think that consciousness-raising by drawing things to their attention with reasoned argument is a useful exercise. It might not work this time. After all, it took until 1992 to get un-consented penetration of a wife by a husband to be unlawful. (Anyone else still shocked by this? That I was an adult before this came into law still floors me). But more people will be aware of the debate. That's pretty democratic in my book.

Oh, and we're talking about a business here. Majority rule counts for nothing. Money counts for everything.

Agreed Sausage i raised a similar point earlier, it's almost as if peeps objecting on here are saying 'we know better than those other 7 million morons who read the sun'

On the other hand LittleDirewolfBitJoffrey i have yet to hear a convincing argument to ban page 3 and having looked at your blog i don't buy into this whole objectifcation argument. As i said earlier peeps are trying to make physical attraction/ fancing people into this more sinister concept of objectification. How does one know what other people think when they see a topless photograph in the Sun? everyone is an individual and has their own views and perceptions. Objectification therefore assumes people with the lowest, most primitive thoughts. This is pretty offensive and elitist thing to claim when you think about it?

Weak try of putting words into the mouth of the NMP3 supporters, libertarianj. Strawman argument.

And denying all the negative experiences people have had with Page 3 as well. That is not an assumption, it is real.

Heh, libertarians make me chuckle.

No-ones calling for a ban, are they? As in legally. Just appealing to better natures.

It's the taglines that enrage me, particularly. Mocking women by putting them in their tits out place is one thing that annoys intensely. Mocking the women posing is another thing altogether. How dare they? And, yes, put anyone else in that scenario and there would be outrage. That there isn't is massively depressing.