The end of the Sun's page 3

[BadFish]

What are all you loons on about!?

This isn't about censoring women being glamour models, or getting their kit off for photos whenever they please.

It is the appropriateness of a portrayal of women in a NEWSpaper.

Bloodyhell, anyone would think the feminists are overreacting shrill screaming bedwetters, but they're nothing compared to half the posters on here throwing their toys out of their prams because there is no longer a pair of tits in a NEWSPAPER!

Don't forget that most of them have said they don't read the sun. This means they are committing another nsc cardinal sin and being outrageded on other people's behalf.

 

[piersa]

No we haven't.

What the "one-legged bra-burners" object to is men judging women's worth solely on their looks.

It's called evolution. People judge others on their looks on first contact. That's life, get over it. Looking at a half naked woman on page three should not be a problem. Anyway, page 3 has details about their age, where they live and what they like so it's not solely on looks.

 

[spring hall convert]

Since when has enjoying looking at page 3 made this the case ? You're saying that liking a nice pair of tits on page 3 inevitably means I will judge ALL women solely on their looks right ? Christ what a grey ,boring sterile world you and the likes of you want , you've certainly turned football into the atmosphere free bore fest that that you want for society in general.

No, you're putting words into my mouth. I have never said that. Undoubtedly page three was symbolic of that attitude (what was "news in briefs" about if it wasn't?) - that's not the same as saying that all fans of page three viewed women as solely sex objects.

Having learnt my sexual swear words pretty much exclusively in the North Stand of the Goldstone, I despair of where modern football has gone. Not because I miss the racist or homophobic abuse but it has sold itself to the highest bidder. There will be a sting in the tail for modern football and its coming. I don't really see the relevance to having a pair of tits in a widely read National Newspaper though.

 

[Don Quixote]

If they don't read the 'newspaper' why are they so ofended by it? Many people get whipped up by stupid things like this, when they should probably be wasting their time doing something else instead.

 

[User removed 4]

No we haven't, we have just developed a more respectful way of expressing that attraction. Well on the most part anyway.

how did you ever manage to actually pull a bird ? Is she as boring and buttoned up as you ?

 

[spring hall convert]

It's called evolution. People judge others on their looks on first contact. That's life, get over it.

Some people judge. Most people notice.

 

[Soulman]

I think we should take things a step further, perhaps a complete cover up of women, this respectable stance has already taken off in a few areas. Yep, time to get a fb page going....ah too late.

 

[BadFish]

how did you ever manage to actually pull a bird ? Is she as boring and buttoned up as you ?

I just flash a copy of the sun at them, let them know I am all man. Knocks Em bandy.

 

[Randsta]

Couldn't care less... But am slightly sad its the number 1 selling paper in the UK

 

[Moshe Gariani]

Anyway, page 3 has details about their age, where they live and what they like so it's not solely on looks.

 

[Danny-Boy]

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"

And like hating Palace it's a waste of time and bile, like all those saddoes on here posting smileys about the Burnley score on Saturday.

PS When did you ever win 5-0 against Palace?

Get a life and look at the league tables.

 

[Danny-Boy]

Overly intellectual nonsense.

Massive differences between a random topless 18 year old on Page 3 and a film star on a beach.

The celebrity in bikini beach pictures are obviously several steps down the exploitation/degradation tariff.

What about celebrity flashing her thighs as she "accidentally" exposes too much getting out of a car in froont of a load of paparazzi?

As the media have pointed out, at various times in history women have commonly bared their breasts. It does solve the problem of breast-feeding.

But down below has always been off limits except for photographers and before them painters. Rubens Goya etc.

 

[spring hall convert]

As a side issue - Can anyone find me someone who isn't a straight male or hasn't directly or indirectly financially benefitted from page 3 that is speaking out on behalf of it?

 

[gripper stebson]

And like hating Palace it's a waste of time and bile, like all those saddoes on here posting smileys about the Burnley score on Saturday.

PS When did you ever win 5-0 against Palace?

Get a life and look at the league tables.

I'm confused.

The first sentence of your post seems to be agreeing with me.
The second is a friendly jibe about us and Palace.
The third seems to be full of the bile you seem to dislike (see sentence one)

 

[Diablo]

As a side issue - Can anyone find me someone who isn't a straight male or hasn't directly or indirectly financially benefitted from page 3 that is speaking out on behalf of it?

Most are pretty relaxed about the issue considering it an issue only for those involved. People who buy the Sun and like it or girls who choose to have their photo`s on page three. I have not bought the Sun for probably 30 years..my choice.........However I am not a Bigot and respect others opinions to either love it or hate it...The fact which you push about straight males is pretty obvious...assume gay males would like to see men on page three.
We might be in Brighton but there is still a huge majority of straight men.

 

[spring hall convert]

Most are pretty relaxed about the issue considering it an issue only for those involved. People who buy the Sun and like it or girls who choose to have their photo`s on page three. I have not bought the Sun for probably 30 years..my choice.........However I am not a Bigot and respect others opinions to either love it or hate it...The fact which you push about straight males is pretty obvious...assume gay males would like to see men on page three.
We might be in Brighton but there is still a huge majority of straight men.

You miss the point I'm making about straight men as it goes. The point I'm making is that it's not up to straight men to decide whether something objectifes women or not. It's not up to straight men to consider if page 3 causes self-esteem issues in women. This thread has so many examples of straight men telling women what they should think. It's an utter irrelavance.

The argument of "if you don't like it don't buy it" is rubbish as well. It's a mainstream representation of an outdated objectification of women. No one is arguing that women shouldn't be able to make money from their looks but is a mainstream newspaper that can be picked up by boys and girls alike the best place for it? What message is this sending to children about women, about their own bodies? I'm the first to admit that it probably isn't the worst mainstream offender but by virtue of its popularity as a newspaper has attracted the most attention.

I'm getting sick of overprivaleged, white, heterosexual, males crying at every little percieved injustice of the evening up of the modern world. Grow up. If the Sun had a cock and balls on page 3 every day, there would be murders. In fact scrub that, it would never happen because despite what some people are desperate to have us believe men are still very much in the ascendancy.

 

[ThePompousPaladin]

Going slightly off topic, but what numbers are these then? Last report I saw on gender pay showed that there was no difference.

Women overall earn less than men, but it's more to do with career choices in that they tend to pursue less well paid occupatiina and take career breaks to have kids.

If women really did get paid less than men for the same jobs, then companies would just employ women.

I'm a little surprised you haven't come across these numbers, they've been all over the media for some time now.
A quick google has this webby as the top result:

http://www.equalpayportal.co.uk/statistics/

So note the 'pay gap' applies to women in the SAME job, with the SAME experience.

There have been several studies across several sectors where they've got the numbers for new job applicants and the pay they were offered, amongst other things.

The latest data on that webby shows that women are being paid around 10% less for the SAME work.

 

[ThePompousPaladin]

You miss the point I'm making about straight men as it goes. The point I'm making is that it's not up to straight men to decide whether something objectifes women or not. It's not up to straight men to consider if page 3 causes self-esteem issues in women. This thread has so many examples of straight men telling women what they should think. It's an utter irrelavance.

The argument of "if you don't like it don't buy it" is rubbish as well. It's a mainstream representation of an outdated objectification of women. No one is arguing that women shouldn't be able to make money from their looks but is a mainstream newspaper that can be picked up by boys and girls alike the best place for it? What message is this sending to children about women, about their own bodies? I'm the first to admit that it probably isn't the worst mainstream offender but by virtue of its popularity as a newspaper has attracted the most attention.

I'm getting sick of overprivaleged, white, heterosexual, males crying at every little percieved injustice of the evening up of the modern world. Grow up. If the Sun had a cock and balls on page 3 every day, there would be murders. In fact scrub that, it would never happen because despite what some people are desperate to have us believe men are still very much in the ascendancy.

Awesome post.

There does seem to be a fair whack of 'victim mentality' on this board over this.

I wonder how many of these people are ignorant of the 'pay gap' and other inequalities that most women face in their lives. But as soon as someone points this out they become 'whaaa whaa whaa'.

How much of this is down to fear and misogyny?

 

[spring hall convert]

Awesome post.

There does seem to be a fair whack of 'victim mentality' on this board over this.

I wonder how many of these people are ignorant of the 'pay gap' and other inequalities that most women face in their lives. But as soon as someone points this out they become 'whaaa whaa whaa'.

How much of this is down to fear and misogyny?

I don't think people are truly ignorant. I don't think people are genuinely misogynistic.

I do think people are scared though. Desperately trying to hang on to what they've got. I understand that, it's human nature but it totally gets in the way of us having a fair and equal society. Page 3 is but a dot in the i of this debate.

 

[looney]

Absolutely nothing but that isn't the sum total of her worth.

Who says it is?