Is It Time To Put Page 3 To Bed?

[sp1814]

It's been many, many years since I've read The Sun - so much so, that I'd forgotten about the Page 3 'stunnas'.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/feb/11/page-3-women-rupert-murdoch

Is it now time, as Rupert Murdoch seems to be hinting, that Page 3 (as it currently is) be consigned to history?

[Mick-Talbot]

It's their body, why should you decide what they do with it?

[Sparkles62]

I think page 3 is well past its sell by date.

Back in the 60's the options for a bit of titillation were limited, to top shelf mags from a 'private' book shop, the odd naughty movie, and the cheap daily fix of the Sun with page 3.

Nowadays with top shelf mags freely available in the newsagents, post watershed nudity and sex scenes on tv, 24 hour nudity and porn on the net. and numerous porn channels available on tv, page 3 is well outdated and the space could be put to better use for news ( in the Sun...Ha) or advertising.

[sp1814]

M-T

I'm not deciding what young women should do with their bodies. If Page 3 didn't exist, there's still Zoo, Nuts and FHM for them to expose their breasts in.

[homedeeth]

They should get rid of pages 1-2 and 4-46

[youngmafbog]

I see all the high and mighty posts on here trying to appear aloof. Shame your beloved Guardian does not have the sales of the Sun though isn't it, what does that tell you? Perhaps it means far more people like the Sun then the Guardian and YOUR views are the minority and should be suppressed.

If people don't like it don't buy it, if girls don't want to pose in it then don't. to my knowledge no one is forced into either, but if they choose to are put down by the sniveling chattering classes, many on this site.

You are just a bunch of snobs.

[naomi24]

I'm pleased it's not just me who thinks page 3 is out-dated. I don't care what people do for a living, as long as they do something and don't live by crime or scrounge on society, but page 3 does seem awfully old fashioned. Maybe it's because little shocks us now.

[jd_1984]

I guess I am coming from a "what harm does it do" point of view. But equally there is a "what good does it do" point of view as well. The world would neither be a better or worse place without Page 3. If you want to look at Boobs, there is plenty on the internet!

[humbersloop]

ymb, you missed out liberal, lefty, handwringing and do-gooders

[Booldawg]

yes, flashing a bit of boob is not there for male enjoyment. Its crass, outdated and sexist - unless of course it helps women get off with a speeding ticket.

[anotheoldgit]

sp1814

/// Perhaps we don't see women in the same way we did back in 1969? ///

Perhaps you don't SP, but I am sure heterosexual men still find the fairer sex attractive even in 2013.

[sp1814]

AOG

Not sure even that's true. If we still viewed women in the same way we did in 1969, there would be few female company directors, no female sports commentators, and rape within marriage would still not be an arrest able offence.

[sp1814]

youngmafbog

Any chance you'd like to engage in the debate without resorting to cliched insults?

[ummmm]

It's very out dated. There's more titillation in a pop video nowadays.

[LazyGun]

If a dinosaur like Murdoch can question the relevance of Page 3, you know that the concept is past its sell-by date.

Its long past time to put page 3 to bed.

[FredPuli43]

The attitude of men to women has certainly changed. Back in 1969 and for years afterwards, a woman called to the Bar was expected to do family law and would only be offered a tenancy in chambers on that basis. It was very rare to see a woman doing criminal cases; there were only three in London, Ann Curnow and Ann Goddard, both of whom only prosecuted, and Hermione Lethbridge. Defence solicitors would not instruct a woman, giving the reason, if anyone was bold enough to ask, that the defendants wouldn't trust a woman to defend them (which may well have been true; they would have the attitude of the time).

It is only in recent years that Parliament got around to making it illegal for clubs to admit women, or treat them, on terms different from men; men only bars and dining rooms, associate membership and the like.

But I don't see that page 3 fits in with an attitude that women are inferior or sex objects, nor that it is demeaning to women. Men like looking at female breasts and always have; it's part of their chemistry; and surely women understand that.

[ummmm]

Fred - Yes they do, and most women can also appreciate a good pair of breasts.

[tamborine]

if you've got it, flaunt it...to best advantage

[tonyav]

tambo that's a lovely erm stone on your avatar !.

[joggerjayne]

Even as someone who only reads the Guardian, I think they are making a fuss over nothing.

Abolish Page Three? That will make a huge difference, won't it ... as long as they abolish the World Wide Web at the same time.

[anotheoldgit]

sp1814

/// If we still viewed women in the same way we did in 1969, there would be few female company directors, no female sports commentators, and rape within marriage would still not be an arrest able offence. ///

Who said anything about the 1969 attitude towards women, surely to view is to see or look?