No more page 3? Don’t worry, there are plenty more boobs in the world

The Sun makes ‘landmark decision’ to remove topless Page Three Girls

no-more-page-three-cara-sutra-topless-and-naked--CS

This week’s big media story is Rupert Murdoch, David Dinsmore & co finally deciding to pull the plug on topless women on page 3 of the daily national newspaper, The Sun (as confirmed by The Times). For 44 years The Sun has had a ‘topless beauty’ adorn the third page, which many saw as a British tradition. Although not solely the territory of the greasy spoon visiting butt-crack-flashing builder type, Page 3 was definitely assigned to that portion of society. Indeed, many men (in particular) have spoken out about how absolutely dreadful and unfair it is that their coffee break boobs have been so rudely ripped out of their daily grasp.

https://twitter.com/Jaydon_P_Gibbs/status/557149974652518400

https://twitter.com/T3mplarKn1ght/status/557834223378526209

It’s more than a little scary that if wank fodder gets taken away from a certain type of man their first instinct is to have a tantrum, call names and insult women – insult their looks mostly, for what else do women have?

So who is to ‘blame’ for the door closing on boobs in The Sun? Most put this squarely at the feet of ‘those stupid feminists’. We can assume that this refers to the Say No To Page 3 campaigners (find on Twitter and Facebook), who have certainly not made a secret of their feelings about boobs on page 3 (or indeed any other page) of The Sun. Bare breasts in the paper has been labelled misogynistic, objectifying and primitive and the campaigners tirelessly petitioned to get this feature permanently removed from The Sun. Upon hearing the announcement on the 20th January, the Say No To Page 3 campaigners were absolutely ecstatic in their triumphant celebrations.

https://twitter.com/MeghanEMurphy/status/557819170348625920

What do I think about it all? I think it’s a good thing to remove topless women from a national newspaper. My personal feelings are that it does objectify women to the viewers of this paper, normalising a woman’s role as solely a sexual one. That women are simply in existence for men/other people’s sexual gratification and as ornaments, nothing more. This does not mean that I think the models were in any way forced into posing topless for The Sun, nor do I think they were necessarily unhappy. However I do feel that serving up a topless woman as daily titillation with the morning cuppa and biccie is categorising porn in entirely the wrong place. I don’t expect to buy a hairdressing magazine and then there on page 10 to be confronted with a ginormous shiny pair of testicles. if I want to see a ginormous pair of testicles then I will either buy a porn magazine (probably gay themed, there doesn’t seem to be a lot of call for ball-porn from women) or I will type it into Google.

That’s the crux of my argument really. I am not against topless women. I am not rallying to stop all visualisations of boobies in the world. I like breasts. What I don’t like, without getting too ‘won’t somebody think about the children’ about it, is that The Sun and other nationals are so easily accessible by kids. Not that they will go into a newsagent or garage and buy the paper themselves, but it can so easily be glanced at over a shoulder in a cafe, or on a bus. The Sun and other daily nationals are referred to in colloquial terms as ‘rags’, to be ‘used’ or read once then discarded of. Except they’re rarely put in bins, because the general consensus is that someone else can read and enjoy them. So they’re left on tables in cafes and on public transport, where simply anyone of any age can get hold of it and view the contents (the written content of The Sun being as inappropriate for young eyes as much as Page 3 is, in all fairness).

On a larger scale, I don’t understand why we even still need daily national newspapers to be printed. It’s a waste of ink and a waste of paper. This is 2015 and I don’t know anyone who doesn’t have access to the internet or a smart phone. If you want to view breasts (or cock, or pussy, or a woman rotating an apple in her arse) then let me introduce you to a handy little thing called Google. Or is accessing porn over your full English breakfast an admission that you might actually enjoy visual representations of sex? You’re not ‘one of those blokes’, right? You’d never do that kind of thing. Not in public anyway. But buying a national newspaper under the premise of wanting to read the daily news then complaining when your topless woman feature gets removed is a little hypocritical. Are you buying the paper for the news or for the boobs? Just because something is traditional doesn’t make it right or appropriate. You know what else was traditional? That men wrote on cave walls and then later on that women didn’t get to vote. It’s called progress and I hope the people out there complaining about the removal of topless page 3 women will soon catch up with the rest of us.

Like I say, I am not against nudity for art, or sexual representations of men and women in photographic or film media. I’ve even posed topless myself on the internet.

cs-footy-edit-1

Blossoming

There is a backlash against the decision to ditch ‘page 3 girls’ from, unsurprisingly, models featured on the page whether formerly or currently. Jodie Marsh has had her say, dubbing women against Page 3 as ‘jealous and insecure feminists’ and ‘probably the same women who are pro breastfeeding in public’ (thereby entirely missing the point).

Jodie_Marsh

Another page 3 model labelled the women against page 3 (as the majority of campaigners are women) as ‘comfy shoe wearing, no bra wearing, man haters’.

Why can’t page 3 models get similar work with a porn magazine or website? Nobody is stopping them getting their clothes off for money, if that’s what they want to do. I just don’t want to see it between the pages of the daily newspapers.

I wrote recently how terrifying the UK porn ban is. I am against such censorship of free thinking, sexually liberated adults. But between the first few pages of a national newspaper is simply the wrong place for softcore porn. Access it on the internet or buy a magazine specifically devoted to naked women diddling themselves, if that’s what you’re after. Get your clothes off for PornHub, Playboy or one of any of the hundreds of millions of porn websites if your employment is affected.

Please, let’s try and keep the newspapers for the news.

 

 

 

Please share your thoughts!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.