A victory for the PC brigade?

Forget terrorism, worldwide economic disasters waiting to happen, etc, let's get to the important stuff...

So, according to the BBC, the Sun has caved in to pressure and stopped having the Page 3 girl. The anti Page 3 movement have declared that it is only a partial victory as this doesn't go far enough.

Of course, if true, then the Sun wouldn't admit that they caved in but I wonder what will be next?

Personally, I don't think page 3 did any harm and that it is a shame if it stops.

I knew several such girls (unfortunately not in the biblical sense) from the earlier days. I worked in a shop in Watford with Karen Richardson (not sure what happened to her) , I worked at IBM in Raynors Lane with Kathy McKinnon (was a tape librarian but ended up married to radio 1 DJ. David Hamilton) . Suzanne Mizzi (tragically dead now) was a friend of mine who ran several businesses with reasonable success, and I knew Sam Fox in her page 3 days and she lived 2 doors from me. She didn't do too badly either. They all seemed quite happy, well adjusted people and none of them felt exploited as far as I am aware. My clerical assistant in the early 90's had been a page 3 girl a couple of times just a year earlier. She was very bright, very good at her job, and is now a senior manager in a national company. It didn't seem to do her any harm either!

I understand the arguments, I just disagree with them. Apparently seeing a topless girl in the paper has a terrible affect on us all...

...and I see that Youtube bans videos with breasts but allows videos of terrorists shooting policemen in the head.:doh:

 

Well I did suggest personal anecdotes and here they come with a vengeance! Wouldn't it have been easier to have listed the Page 3 girls you didn't work with?

 

Page three may have been popular with you but you must be aware its had its share of knockers.

 

Who reads that comic anyway?

 

I don't read the Sun anyway but for what it's worth feminists and the like should be focussing on areas of inequality where it matters such as equal salaries etc.

 

I'm glad it's gone. I'm not for censorship or prudery in the slightest, but it's all about context. Newspapers are read in public, often early morning. If the BBC was shoving out 16/17 year old's breasts on breakfast TV it'd be 'BBC Perverts Gawn Mad'. A newspaper is not really the context for material to spaff off over - such I believe is freely available on the internet should you require it.

I would not have 'banned' page 3, but I'm glad the grubby little *******s at News International have decided to grow up ever so slightly. And well done to the women who had the courage to say no to it publically.

 

Absolutely. But now they've just put a load of females out of work!

 

Loved they think it woz the campaign wot won it.

The Sun has ignored the campaign for years and they suddenly decide to do away with it, probably as no one really gives a **** anymore.

Let us begin the ramifications of feminists 'winning' when it's unlikely to have any impact on their decision.

 

Why the change then?

It's true that they never gave in before, but though the campaign may not have directly won it in reality they won a culture war a long time ago that meant it could only survive whilst enough sad old monkey spankers were buying the paper. Everyone else treated it with disdain. Now they are not they need to change it's image and this campaign just highlighted how out of touch it was.

 

Boo! ... the closest I got was working on a scaffold alongside Linda Lusardi's boyfriend. Mind you I once had the most vivid of wet dreams of her and I in the back of a taxi ... and by vivid I mean that real it's still implanted in my brain (unfortunately my mum wasn't too impressed with the extra starched sheets!).

I also bought a copy of Sam Fox's 'Touch me' ... it was rubbish but hey!

 

Way too much information GF.

 

Absolutely hilarious if they printed a pic tomorrow.

Sexism goes both ways. When they stop moaning about men being stupid in adverts, poking fun at leaving the toilet seat up, forgetting birthdays & aniversaries etc etc. Then I'll pay attention to the PC rants. We're different, stereotypes are funny and on the whole do no harm.

I presume the diet coke advert with the bloke mowing the lawn will now be banned.

There's still plenty of **** on telly anyway. Most of them are in the big brother house.

 

Isn't the point of the diet coke thing that it inverts an old standing advertising paradigm about women? It would be like that David Cameron saying I'll be a more effective prime minister when people stop making funny cartoons about me in the newspaper.

 

Who knows? I remember reading that a new editor of the Sun a few years back was no fan of Page 3. Maybe that? Maybe they want more room to report Big Brother? Maybe because the low Calendar sales for Page 3 girls makes it pointless?

I don't disagree with you about the notion of page 3 being out of touch, but what I'm saying is that the campaign was not the reason they stopped.

If they were directly responsible, I might start campaigns about 'no dumping of rubbish in space', 'equal rights for martians' and 'no teeth in our blood sausage'. If and when these things are achieved, I can claim personal victory.

 

The campaign would not have been the reason on it's own without falling sales.

 

The spaffing off is the elephant in the room here. All the proponents claim that 'it's a bit of fun' or to 'appreciate' the (teenage) female form. But really it's something to spaff off to. Claiming it's not is like imagining people watch porno to the end just to appreciate the writing and directing.

Be proud Sun readers. You like looking at teenagers and knocking one out.

 

This explanin everything about Mr Top.

 

less a victory for the pc brigade, more a victory for society

 

Anyone who's spaffing to page 3 is doing themselves a disservice, with the richness of material available these days.

 

It amuses me when people talk about the 'freedom' to view these images being taken away when there is a Tsunami of porn available at the click of a mouse.

 

Links or GTFO

 

Oh I don't know ... Sam Fox wasn't that bad

 

Thanks for the mammeries!

 

Shame love it or hate ,show sense or be PC the sun page 3 has been a national institution for years . Going in to work monday morning pissed off coffee and a glance at page 3 kickstarted manufacturing industry for ages ( in the days when Britain had a manufacturing industry before lab and con killed it and turned us into a finance centre!)
End of an era ,sad to see it go ,but times move on and not necessarily for the best.

 

Why are you sad to see it go?

 

because it kickstarted the manufacturing industry! duh

 

Ha ha, this thread has made me laugh. I hadn't realised that all this happens in the minds of adults.

Some of you obviously think that breasts something that should be hidden away until the appropriate "intimate moment". In which case I can understand their view that Page 3 represents sexual gratification to them. Each to their own.

I can understand someone reading the Sun on the way to work on the train. But I shall now think of people taking their copy of the Sun home on the train in the evening in a different light. We all know what they are going to be getting up to now, don't we! Now we know why you lot all read the Guardian. If you had the Sun, the expectation of sexual fulfillment at the end of the day, must be unbearable. No wonder some people spend the afternoon clock watching.

It is probably the same people that find breast feeding in public to be a bit of sexual event to be hidden away in the toilets somewhere.

Fortunately, I'm not one these people - well not since I was about 16 yrs old or so.

It makes life so much simpler.

PS. I wonder where the censorship brigade will focus now. It wont be against anti religion jokes in a magazine, as ISIS have already got that in hand. No **** on the TV, sounds like a good target.

 

Disagree ZZ, I think breasts should be on display alllll day long, by law.

 

I'm confused. If people like looking at breasts, but it's not anything sexual then what exactly do these titties have that old men's knees and feet don't?

 

Page Three started in the sixties meaning that this 'British institution' pretty much oversaw the wholesale decline of British manufacturing you daft old so and so.

But let's just agree it's not a point of any relevance whatsoever.

 

It is a mystery to me, moose. But you said the following so you seem to know, maybe you could enlighten me...

I think it may be about context. I dont find that page 3 turns me on remotely. Whereas the same view in the flesh and in my bedroom probably would.

 

This thread is amusing. Some people seem to be opposed to page 3 going because it's 'PC'.

I don't see how anyone can be angry about it going, if you want to look at breasts a quick google search can help you.

 

Yep, that's true. The 8.05 to Euston will now be full of perverts googling away on their mobiles and knocking one out.

 

I think it is censorship. The suggestion that google is a suitable reason for censorship is definitely a slippery slope.

 

But that's the thing I suppose - if it's not solely sexual then what aesthetically makes it so 'good'.

Are you not ever convinced by the argument around demeaning images of young women? i.e. that for many years the primary image of youthful women in the Sun has been as objects of male gaze? Doesn't this whole glamour obsession encourage some rather dubious ambition in some young women of the get your **** out and marry a footballer variety?