That's my point, I don't actually buy The Sun but people that do should have the right to decide. Not some women group that thinks of all page 3 girls are being used and have no brains. I know a girl that appeared in Page 3 a few times and she was brainy as hell.
I had no problem with page 3 girls and I wouldn't sign a petition to get rid of them, but people have the right to sign a petition if they want to and I don't care if page 3 girls are gone. There have always been people objecting to these pictures, so if The Sun is suddenly taking notice of it, there will be an economic reason for it. They may have decided to aim at a different customer profile....probably a younger group to whom these pictures are just archaic.
It's up to the Sun whether or not they publish it. I personally don't support it as it's not to do with news. If they ban models in lad mags, half-naked men in girly magazines or both, then that would be silly though.
More than fine It's just a case of keeping things out of the public eye if a casual onlooker doesn't want to see it or want their kids to see it. If you want to see it, buy it.
You dare! Anyway, Glee's ending soon so you're a bit late As for Page 3, to me it's not so much whether the women within are being exploited or not as at the end of the day they're adults and are presumably able to make their own decisions and it's their own body so they can do with it what they like. For me the big issue is the message it conveys, i.e. the women are sex objects who are there to be oggled at by men and have nothing to offer other than looks. After all, they don't choose women for their insightful political views or whatever, but their 'beauty', not to mention it sets a single standard of beauty which can cause self-esteem and self-image issues in some girls, plus it's one not necessarily everyone would agree with.
Page 3 shots are pretty harmless....they don't even try to look provocative. More like catching your sister in the bathroom.
Not just Page3 that does that..... Every magazine, paper, tv programme treats some one as a sex object. Look at soaps both women and men are treated as objects. The good looking ones pose half naked for mags or papers or their own calenders. Society itself is built on looks.
Now that's an interesting wider topic. Should society exist on the basic good looks of certain people..? It's not the first attribute that goes into a CV, yet it carries an awful lot of weight behind it. Is society that superficial..?
It is. You only have to look at sales teams and anything to do with travel(air stewards etc). I can't employ people 'haven't got a friendly face', it is everywhere.
Good job not everyone does that then Beef. As an example, I accompanied my wife to Bristol Eye Hospital today for a checkup, and the guy on the reception desk was hardly there for his looks, but was in fact the most cheerful, helpful soul you could hope to meet as your first contact in a stressful situation. The fact that he was visually handicapped himself was completely irrelevant. There is some truth in what you say, but it is because it is deemed important that to sell things you have to be what is currently fashionable in the looks department. It could be changed, but someone has to make the first move.
Will take something massive to change it. Everything is about looking good instead of being yourself. It touches 99% of things in modern day life.
The problem with The Sun and women goes so much deeper. Someone took six months of the paper and cut out the pictures of everyone in it. They separated them into pictures of men and pictures of women. The results were shocking. 2:34 is where the results start. And here's a shocker. In six months, not a single picture of a woman playing sport. Most of the women are young and posed. Most of the men are doing something. I'm not the world's most radical feminist but there's something seriously wrong with the Sun as a newspaper, with or without Page 3. Vin
And I don't read I think the reason why half naked men don't receive as much negative publicity is because historically men have been at an advantage compared to women. Not saying that's right of course, as sexism is sexism whoever is the victim. However, selling underwear is a tricky one as obviously you'll need to display people in underwear to promote it.... However, in terms of feminism, there are waaaaaaay more pressing issues out there than page 3, not that that makes the fight any less worthy.
You will lose if you fight human nature. Many jobs have nothing to do with looks, but any job involving face to face customer interaction will require that the employee, if not an out and out looker, is at least average with a pleasant face. Babies from the moment they can focus will stare longer at faces with regular features (i.e. good looks)...obviously they will make an exception for their parents
You can probably look at magazines being the same. It's all about projecting their view of the perfect image over and over again.
