No more page 3

Rant and rave at will, that's why you're here, this is the internet after all

Moderators: marowak, Blonde, skhmmxi

Pete
Posts: 6621
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 10:10 am

Re: No more page 3

Post by Pete » Mon Sep 16, 2013 4:31 pm

Evan wrote:So I am not going to read any of this and just presume we are all here because we love boobs in our newspapers?

BOOBS AND NEWS! BOOBS AND NEWS!! HOOORRRRAAAAYYYYY!!!

Mammaries
I actually only arrived as the lack of a question mark had me believing this had actually happened. A moment of sheer panic when I thought I'd have to start buying the Star or Sport for my soft porn requirements.
frank wrote:Think of it like weight-lifting. High notes are heavy weights.

Venomous_Bear
Posts: 452
Joined: Wed Jul 17, 2013 9:07 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: No more page 3

Post by Venomous_Bear » Mon Sep 16, 2013 11:00 pm

Pete wrote:
Evan wrote:So I am not going to read any of this and just presume we are all here because we love boobs in our newspapers?

BOOBS AND NEWS! BOOBS AND NEWS!! HOOORRRRAAAAYYYYY!!!

Mammaries
I actually only arrived as the lack of a question mark had me believing this had actually happened. A moment of sheer panic when I thought I'd have to start buying the Star or Sport for my soft porn requirements.
Though I'll fight for its right to exist, I still think imagination wins over such things. Yaaaay for that power!
Toronto (x3), Hatfield, Derry, London (x2), Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Saskatoon, Winnipeg, Detroit, Buffalo, Boston (x4), Ottawa, Fake London, Nottingham, Manchester, Portsmouth

User avatar
darlenet.
Posts: 751
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 11:58 pm
Location: Gainesville, Florida USA

Re: No more page 3

Post by darlenet. » Tue Sep 17, 2013 12:56 am

So I've been confused by this page 3 thread thing (never heard of it) so googled and saw some sample pages and read different opinions. Both sides of the issue use the phrase "to sell newspapers." So to clarify: do people actually buy the paper just to see page 3? Really? I mean the Internet is free.

But, putting aside the feminist and possible exploitation angle, it's kind of cool that it's allowed and condoned in a good natured way. (Please don't get offended). I can't imagine this happening in America.
shows? 70 so far

Gleena
Posts: 355
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 10:17 am
Location: London, via America and Australia

Re: No more page 3

Post by Gleena » Tue Sep 17, 2013 3:09 am

Venomous_Bear wrote:
Pete wrote:
Evan wrote:So I am not going to read any of this and just presume we are all here because we love boobs in our newspapers?

BOOBS AND NEWS! BOOBS AND NEWS!! HOOORRRRAAAAYYYYY!!!

Mammaries
I actually only arrived as the lack of a question mark had me believing this had actually happened. A moment of sheer panic when I thought I'd have to start buying the Star or Sport for my soft porn requirements.
Though I'll fight for its right to exist, I still think imagination wins over such things. Yaaaay for that power!
I am imagining Pete and Evan with boobs right now.

I'm not sure that was the intended effect though...
Yank at large, hiding in London
https://twitter.com/Gleena
Shows: 32 in five countries and on the ocean.

Pete
Posts: 6621
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 10:10 am

Re: No more page 3

Post by Pete » Tue Sep 17, 2013 10:24 am

It's not too far wide of the mark these days.

I'd also like to clarify that I don't really buy the sun.
frank wrote:Think of it like weight-lifting. High notes are heavy weights.

sarahg
Posts: 367
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 8:01 am

Re: No more page 3

Post by sarahg » Tue Sep 17, 2013 11:19 am

Ah, yes indeed page three will always have their knockers....

Christina
Posts: 36
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 11:21 am

Re: No more page 3

Post by Christina » Fri Sep 27, 2013 8:24 am

Personally, I think the Editors of the Sun should remove remove topless photos from page 3.

The only reason for the continued existence of pictures is for the sexual pleasure of men.
Women are not just there to exist for the sexual pleasure of men.
Most people in the 21st century know this, but the Editor and Rupert Murdoch continue to defend page 3.

I am not just a sexual object thank you.
I am more than a pair of boobs.

I hate the Sun.
It is so widely available as a newspaper.

As a young girl, this was my first exposure to a pair of boobs. I am not perfect. I am not a page 3 girl, and I would never want to be.
It's amazing how many teenage girls aspire to be, thinking their only worth is in their bodies.
To please men. To be beautiful and sexy.

I am a woman. I am not perfect. I have stretch marks and scars. I am not here for the pleasure of men.

I don't want my sons to grow up to objectify women and I don't want my daughter to grow up in a society where page 3 exists and is so widely accepted as the norm.

/endrant
Bob.

Pete
Posts: 6621
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 10:10 am

Re: No more page 3

Post by Pete » Fri Sep 27, 2013 9:12 am

Do you think the Diet Coke adverts should be banned too as it objectifies men?

Do you think that the Sun should be forced to remove page 3 by legislation? Where do you draw the line? When a vocal group find something offensive should it always be removed? Should GTA 5 be banned due to how graphic it is? Should films such as Inside, Human Centipede and A Serbian Film - all of which offend the senses and effectively objectify humankind as pieces of meat.

If it offends you so much don't buy the paper. I can almost see the argument for covering up things like Zoo and Nuts as their front pages are soft porn, but when something is on the inside pages of a rag that no one forces anyone to buy and the pics themselves are so tame compared to anything that can be found on the internet in 10 seconds I can see absolutely no logic in getting worked up about it. We've actually reached a stage where there's almost something nostalgically romantic about the thought of a teenager knocking one out to a page 3 girl rather than some horribly graphic video they've found on youporn.

(NB - I'm applying the theory of romanticism and nostalgia for the purpose of debate, as opposed to admitting to having homely fantasies about young boys masturbating)
frank wrote:Think of it like weight-lifting. High notes are heavy weights.

Pete
Posts: 6621
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 10:10 am

Re: No more page 3

Post by Pete » Fri Sep 27, 2013 9:27 am

Pete wrote:Do you think the Diet Coke adverts should be banned too as it objectifies men?

Do you think that the Sun should be forced to remove page 3 by legislation? Where do you draw the line? When a vocal group find something offensive should it always be removed? Should GTA 5 be banned due to how graphic it is? Should films such as Inside, Human Centipede and A Serbian Film - all of which offend the senses and effectively objectify humankind as pieces of meat.

If it offends you so much don't buy the paper. I can almost see the argument for covering up things like Zoo and Nuts as their front pages are soft porn, but when something is on the inside pages of a rag that no one forces anyone to buy and the pics themselves are so tame compared to anything that can be found on the internet in 10 seconds I can see absolutely no logic in getting worked up about it. We've actually reached a stage where there's almost something nostalgically romantic about the thought of a teenager knocking one out to a page 3 girl rather than some horribly graphic video they've found on youporn.

(NB - I'm applying the theory of romanticism and nostalgia for the purpose of debate, as opposed to admitting to having homely fantasies about young boys masturbating)
Nice to see the mods have taken to editing our posts. Start of a slippery slope and pretty low behaviour. I'd expect that from Evan or I, but those given control over such things really should know better. Sometimes, I despair of this board...
frank wrote:Think of it like weight-lifting. High notes are heavy weights.

User avatar
Blonde
Posts: 2089
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 10:19 pm
Location: Nottingham
Contact:

Re: No more page 3

Post by Blonde » Fri Sep 27, 2013 9:37 am

Pete, I don't know what you are on about.

Pete
Posts: 6621
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 10:10 am

Re: No more page 3

Post by Pete » Fri Sep 27, 2013 9:43 am

Blonde wrote:I want to have sex with robots.
Whatever gets you off.
frank wrote:Think of it like weight-lifting. High notes are heavy weights.

User avatar
smithyramfan
Posts: 223
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:54 am
Location: Grantham Lincolnshire

Re: No more page 3

Post by smithyramfan » Fri Sep 27, 2013 9:57 am

If Page 3 is banned for being offensive for me that is a slippery slope towards a terrible nanny state. Who should decide what is offensive? If I want to read some news, The Sun is probably the last place I'd want to look, besides we can get news online for free who needs a newpaper?
crap at dancing and can't hold my drink...
Shows: Lincoln 24/11/12, Nottingham 09/02/14, Y Not Festival 03/08/14

User avatar
Blonde
Posts: 2089
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 10:19 pm
Location: Nottingham
Contact:

Re: No more page 3

Post by Blonde » Fri Sep 27, 2013 10:28 am

Pete wrote:
Blonde wrote:I want to have sex with robots.
Whatever gets you off.
Just because I won't let you watch, no matter how many times you beg me.

Pete
Posts: 6621
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 10:10 am

Re: No more page 3

Post by Pete » Fri Sep 27, 2013 10:43 am

Blonde wrote:
Pete wrote:
Blonde wrote:I want to have sex with robots.
Whatever gets you off.
Just because I won't let you watch, no matter how many times you beg me.
Saw the Blonde v Robot g@ng b@ng video on the internet just last night. If you don't want people seeing it, stop uploading to youporn.
frank wrote:Think of it like weight-lifting. High notes are heavy weights.

Christina
Posts: 36
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 11:21 am

Re: No more page 3

Post by Christina » Fri Sep 27, 2013 10:45 am

The petition isn't asking for government legislation.

It is asking the editors of the Sun to make the decision to remove the topless photos of women from Page 3.

The Diet Coke adverts are incomparable.
If a man walked down the street with his shirt off, it's no big deal.
If I (a woman) walk down the street topless, the police could arrest me for indecent exposure.

No there shouldn't be a ban on it.
The Editors of the Sun (like the Irish Sun has already) should redesign the page.

I don't buy the Sun. I do object to it to seeing it everywhere though. It is the most read newspaper in the UK.
We are not in the 1970s anymore.
It is 2013, and there is no place in 2013 for Page 3.

"the only thing certain is everything changes"
Bob.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest