Yes! Lib Dem calls to ban page 3

[Michael_W]

Ban Page 3, how pointless, if you are offended by topless females, don't buy the damn thing...or read it when someone else has !

I don't like certain TV programs so I don't watch them...it's that simple

Oh and anyone who is offended by topless females, I strongly recommend you avoid those foreign beaches, or get over yourselves

[Chris_Sleeps]

Pornography?

Yet, if I comment to say that it should be removed from society. Imagine the uproar of those girls who thinks they support Women's Lib! Human Rights etc. Imagine the uproar from the guys who do read pornographic publications.

With the greatest of respect, because it is hard defending yourself against lots of people, you do come across as a little confused. Women's Liberation was a little more complex than the right for women to have sex infront of a camera. There aren't any human rights that cover that particular act either.

 

I'm not in favour of banning page 3. It is essentially titillation. It's shallow and crass but it isn't hopelessly degrading. I'd hope that The Sun could grow out of it a little and leave it to the real gutter press that doesn't even pretend to be news, but I don't think that one can legislate topless ladies away.

[salsafan]

With the greatest of respect, because it is hard defending yourself against lots of people, you do come across as a little confused. Women's Liberation was a little more complex than the right for women to have sex infront of a camera. There aren't any human rights that cover that particular act either.

 

I'm not in favour of banning page 3. It is essentially titillation. It's shallow and crass but it isn't hopelessly degrading. I'd hope that The Sun could grow out of it a little and leave it to the real gutter press that doesn't even pretend to be news, but I don't think that one can legislate topless ladies away.

What? I somehow find your comment patronising. I was being sarcastic there. SOME women thinks that it is liberating to be naked, or semi-naked, and so forth in a paper-format, film, online youtube vids, etc etc etc. When I wrote what I did, I was thinking of people like llmatron. She is saying not to be judgmental of women who wishes to do that. Yet, I am saying that, I do not think that such publications should indeed be in circulation. Yet, I am criticised for having a hang up when she cannot even "look" at men across a dancefloor ?

 

I know the historical Women's Liberation was about a different issue altogether in how women use the term "women's liberation" as a general description for today's modern lifestyle and standard. I am not stupid you know. I do have a rough idea of what Women's Lib back in history was about. Yet, one does not need a PhD in order to give an opinion on what she thinks is happening in today's society either.

 

You did not quote this other paragraph of mine:

Let us just say that, there are some smart women out there. As just there are some smart men too. However, not everybody wants to be in the "sex sells" industry. Some decency and ethics would not go amiss really.

 

I think you will find that some people out there see it as a business, and capitalise on that. Some women knows how to play the game and earn themselves money. Some thinks they do, but then gets so warped by it psychologically. Some or most women, do not think in the way that men will view them as an individual. On some primitive level, some males will see them as wanting something more than what the photos are supposed to be there for. How exactly can one defend those who do not see women as "asking for it" and so forth?

 

There is this "individual" versus "collective" view of what something is supposed to be there for.

 

I am surprised though, at having expressed some personal opinions on the matter such that, I am then subjected to attack from other females on the same issue! How ridiculous. Not everybody needs to be groomed to be aggressive. Yet, some people absolutely do not see it as titillating at all. It may work for you, yet it does not work for me. You see it as A, I see it as B. If this is really a democratic society then surely, I too am allowed my opinion from a female's perspective too? Also, I do not have to accept it, even if other females finds it okay and acceptable by their standard. We just have different perspective and values.

 

EVEN if you say that the paper published it that way with the "intent" of titillation. Well, when it gets bought in society and how it then affects society as a whole. Surely, from that context, my opinion is more valid ?

[salsafan]

... It's shallow and crass but it isn't hopelessly degrading. I'd hope that The Sun could grow out of it a little and leave it to the real gutter press that doesn't even pretend to be news, but I don't think that one can legislate topless ladies away.

If you are not a woman, how do you know that it is not degrading?

 

There is a difference between "can't", or "won't".

[G12Ravda]

Haven't the Lib/Dems noticed that this once civilised, solvent country, a place you could

hold your head up about & be proud of, is sinking under the weight of debt, uncontrolled

immigration and sleaze etc. Our schools are failing the young. Hospitals are bulging at the seams. Our elderly are routinely treated worse than animals. Europe is dragging us down, along with itself. That's just for starters and the only thing Cleggy's Crusaders can suggest to make the world a better place, is to ban "page 3" in The Sun newspaper.

Isn't life strange, at times?

[Chris_Sleeps]

What? I somehow find your comment patronising. I was being sarcastic there.

It wasn't intended that way at all. My apologies. I missed your irony completely.

 

If you are not a woman, how do you know that it is not degrading?

Does one need to be a woman to hold a valid point of view on page 3 girls?

[Big time]

I would only support the ban on page 3 girls if it was part of an entire, culture wide, thorough culture change in this country, back to decency. Sadly though, I think the sexualisation genie is out of the bottle and will be extremely hard to put it back in.

[salsafan]

It wasn't intended that way at all. My apologies. I missed your irony completely.

 

Does one need to be a woman to hold a valid point of view on page 3 girls?

One does not need to be a woman in order to have a valid viewpoint on page 3 women, but one hope that one has SOME knowledge of all the view points and so forth to make a more plausible and acceptable argument. If one does not know, then it is only honorable that one accepts and acknowledges this, really.

[RootsBooster]

Pornography?

Yet, if I comment to say that it should be removed from society. Imagine the uproar of those girls who thinks they support Women's Lib! Human Rights etc. Imagine the uproar from the guys.....

and girls

...who do read pornographic publications. Let us just say that, there are some smart women out there. As just there are some smart men too. However, not everybody wants to be in the "sex sells" industry. Some decency and ethics would not go amiss really.

 

I can understand what you are saying, but to be honest, the Sun is NOT a quality/family/factual/informative publication. I can't think of a crappier paper which Page 3 would be suited to better. Decency and ethics are abused in The Sun far worse than just on Page 3

 

 

Gosh, if that is your attitude, I can definitely see why Feminism and Women's Lib happened.

 

Seriously? You don't think that feminists want women to be admired?

[Chris_Sleeps]

Sadly though, I think the sexualisation genie is out of the bottle and will be extremely hard to put it back in.

If only people could stop lusting over gypsy girls, eh?