The end of the Sun's page 3

[Prince Monolulu]

Meaning exploitation doesn't need to come at gun point. I would suggest that many exploited people are making the choice to be the situation they are in, doesn't stop them being exploited. Maybe they have little other choice.

I agree it is pretty sad, but surely it is symptomatic of a larger problem if girls feel that the only thing they can offer the world is getting their tits out for the pleasure of men. Personally I would like to live in a world where girls (and boys comes to that) have a wider choice of vocation.

A bit of an assumption saying that they are getting 'em out 1) for men only and 2) not for that lovely cheque at the end of the photoshoot. That career would be very short lived, and many cash in whilst they can

 

[pastafarian]

I presume the natural progression of this campaign group is to ban tits on the internet

 

[father_and_son]

Different strokes. I'm sure many people think watching 22 blokes kick a pig skin around a field is a waste of time. Plenty of people cared I don't think it makes their lives "empty."

Personally I found it distasteful and contributed towards engrained stereotypes of women, it looked like more of a relic with each passing day.

Do I think it ever did any real harm? Probably not. But then as a straight, white, male, I'm inclined to think that.

Spot on. Part of a low level of discrimination that portrays women as just a collection of erogenous zones and nothing more. A long way from the straw that breaks the camel's back in terms of perverting the education of young men to view young women as equals but also a fairly pointless exercise in titillating the same young men who can see much much more with a single google search on a mobile phone.

It will be looked back on in a decade or two's time with the same disbelief as casual racism of Alf Garnett and the homophobic stereotyping of Mr Humphreys is viewed now.

 

[Chicken Run]

Aren't they just going to change it to a woman almost naked for men to goggle over? And isn't that sort of the same thing?

Yes your right and it isn't the end of page 3, you will still find it in the online version, still let's not let a good story get in the way of the facts!

 

[Hillian1]

Less tits is bad.

 

[BadFish]

Celebrating the removal of choice, sad innit. If they all found it so abhorrent then theres a very simple way it not ever affecting their lives in any way - don't buy the thing. But no, thats not enough, they have to have it removed so NOBODY can make their own choice any more. Pathetic really.



There certainly are plenty of people who think 22 blokes kick a pig skin around is a pointlessly dull waste of time (I've been inclined to think that way most of the season). I don't care about darts either, its the most boring spectacle on the planet, doesn't mean I'd launch a campaign to have it banned though.

Whatever happened to live and let live ?

A somewhat hysterical reaction I think!! Surely you are not going to suggest that those wishing to see a pair of tits are going to be massively hampered in doing so by them not being in a newspaper. I think that the desire to see tits is easily sated in today's society. Are they really needed in a newspaper?

 

[Easy 10]

I am friends with one of the girls who organised it all on FB (used to work with her) and believe me they are celebrating like a 5-0 win against Palace. The official title for the campaign was 'No More Page Three' but I feel a better title may have been "We hate men, no really hate them, aaaagggghhhh we really hate men"

I think it is yes, not really adding anything was it? Bit of titillation while you are reading your exaggerated and trivial nonsense. Pandering to our base level emotions and desires is exactly what Murdoch wants to achieve.

Come to think of it there is probably quite a lot of harm in it.

It never added much to the world in the great scheme of things, neither will its removal bring about some kind of sweeping equality utopia. Its just another little erosion of choice, something thats been removed because some yoghurt-knitting, tofu-munching sandal-wearing Guardian readers got their undercrackers in a twist over it.

Quite what tangible harm it ever caused I'm at something of a loss - could you be specific ? The girls were doing it out of free choice, and some went on to have lucrative modelling careers out of it. Who's losing out ?

 

[Chicken Run]

It never added much to the world in the great scheme of things, neither will its removal bring about some kind of sweeping equality utopia. Its just another little erosion of choice, something thats been removed because some yoghurt-knitting, tofu-munching sandal-wearing Guardian readers got their undercrackers in a twist over it.

Quite what tangible harm it ever caused I'm at something of a loss - could you be specific ? The girls were doing it out of free choice, and some went on to have lucrative modelling careers out of it. Who's losing out ?

All of the above…

 

[BBassic]

Meaning exploitation doesn't need to come at gun point. I would suggest that many exploited people are making the choice to be the situation they are in, doesn't stop them being exploited. Maybe they have little other choice.

I agree it is pretty sad, but surely it is symptomatic of a larger problem if girls feel that the only thing they can offer the world is getting their tits out for the pleasure of men. Personally I would like to live in a world where girls (and boys comes to that) have a wider choice of vocation.

I don't doubt that some of them may have this mindset but I imagine there are far more who realise, and use the fact, that men will pay money to look at body parts they were born with.

Look at all those webcam sites; there are women on there who live off the donations of their viewers. Never have to do anything in their life beyond flirting and showing some skin. And why not? I imagine it can be quite empowering; being paid to be beautiful.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

I presume the natural progression of this campaign group is to ban tits on the internet

In which case we can wave goodbye to NSC !

I'm not overly bothered one way or the other about Page 3 but I do find it strange that people got their knickers in a twist about it given the girls did it by choice and the hard core porn on the web featuring both women and men.

 

[BadFish]

It never added much to the world in the great scheme of things, neither will its removal bring about some kind of sweeping equality utopia. Its just another little erosion of choice, something thats been removed because some yoghurt-knitting, sandal-wearing Guardian readers got their undercrackers in a twist over it.

Quite what tangible harm it ever caused I'm at something of a loss - could you be specific ? The girls were doing it out of free choice, and some went on to have lucrative modelling careers out of it. Who's losing out ?

i will leave that one with you There is plenty of sociological and phycological information about this kind of exploitation (on my way to lunch so you may have to find it yourself, is you are interested) but I am going to stick with my gut reactions of considering a scenario of my daughter deciding to take up something this as a career. The thought of her feeling like this is all she has to offer world fills me with sadness.


On this basis i am going consider this a small victory for society.

 

[Moshe Gariani]

It never added much to the world in the great scheme of things, neither will its removal bring about some kind of sweeping equality utopia. Its just another little erosion of choice, something thats been removed because some yoghurt-knitting, tofu-munching sandal-wearing Guardian readers got their undercrackers in a twist over it.

Quite what tangible harm it ever caused I'm at something of a loss - could you be specific ? The girls were doing it out of free choice, and some went on to have lucrative modelling careers out of it. Who's losing out ?

The actors in "Mind Your Language" were presumably glad of the work and lots of people found it funny. Should there be a revival...?

 

[BadFish]

I don't doubt that some of them may have this mindset but I imagine there are far more who realise, and use the fact, that men will pay money to look at body parts they were born with.

Look at all those webcam sites; there are women on there who live off the donations of their viewers. Never have to do anything in their life beyond flirting and showing some skin. And why not? I imagine it can be quite empowering; being paid to be beautiful.

Not really adding much to society though is it? Will have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

[Easy 10]

A somewhat hysterical reaction I think!! Surely you are not going to suggest that those wishing to see a pair of tits are going to be massively hampered in doing so by them not being in a newspaper. I think that the desire to see tits is easily sated in today's society. Are they really needed in a newspaper?

I'm far from hysterical, but my point stands. The choice has now been removed for the models, and the readers, and that choice has been removed specifically by people who (I assume) never buy that particular rag because they object to it. Yes there's always other papers, and the internet, and wherever else someone feels the need to go and hunt down a pair of tits. No doubt they'll move their campaign on now so that not so much as a nipple is allowed to be published anywhere - that would seem to be their ultimate aim.

 

[Moshe Gariani]

Discrimination against who?

against whom?

 

[spring hall convert]

Whatever happened to live and let live ?

I do see your point of view but it was inherantly sexist, there's no getting away from that point. Objectification of women is so much more prevalent than of men and that is wrong. Page 3 contributed to that in a very mainstream, visible context.

Page 3 is far from the only mainstream offender though. Pop acts marketed at young teens have videos that would have been considered soft porn 30 years ago.

 

[Prince Monolulu]

against whom?

 

[Carrot Cruncher]

There's far more poisonous things in the Sun that really should be railed against than Amy, 22 from Derby getting her bangers out.

 

[Hillian1]

The actors in "Mind Your Language" were presumably glad of the work and lots of people found it funny. Should there be a revival...?

Rubbish comparison.

People still act, there is not a blank half hour where Mind Your Language once was.
There will however NEVER be 18 year old women getting their bangers out again on Page 3.

Sad times.

 

[Chicken Runner61]

So are they going to ban that Coke ad where the secretaries ogle over the bloke washing the windows without his shirt?

Its one thing having a civilised equal society but we are creatures evolved on survival, tribal and natural selection. Blokes are attracted to pretty young women with busts and boobs and women are attracted to blokes who can provide strong health offspring. I can't help it if the minger doesn't float my boat but I'm blowed if I'm going to be castigated for it.

And it wasn't advertising or society that formed my preference either - over the years I've come to many hair types, different bust sizes and slight or fuller women and I've been attracted to strong dominant women as well as quieter thoughtful girls. I'm only ever put off by evil bitches who tell me what to think and how to live my life in their shadow.