The better option would've been an e-safety campaign with the government offering subscriptions to netnanny (or something similar), that way it's up to parents to choose what their child can and can't view.
Last edited by gtg93; 27th November 2013 at 01:26 PM.
Though let's be fair, the newspapers that do this tend to just be boobs and celebs, so shouldn't really be classified as such!
Last edited by gtg93; 27th November 2013 at 01:51 PM.
We can argue all day about the rights and wrongs of pin up pictures (Page 3, Pirelli Calendar etc), but they have been around for a very long time now and whether you agree with them or not, it still comes down to parental responsibility to educate their children as to the rights and wrongs of images of this and a much stronger nature.
I've had this discussion with many people before and what I find interesting is that the very parents that bleat on about the evils of topless models in the papers are the same parents who will sit with their children all day on the beach frequented by topless bathers.
Case in point: During the 2012 olympics, despite us having female atheletes winning gold medals almost daily, the biggest and most prominent picture of a woman in The Sun each day was (and still is) a teenager with her tits out. People like Jessica Ennis barely even got a look in. What kind of message do you think that sends to young women and girls? Do you really want to raise a daughter in a world where this is the case?
Remive the images and remove an aspect of rape culture? Seriously?
What about 2000 years ago, rape was happening then, hardcore porn or wank mags (as you put it) didnt exist. Same for 1000 years ago, 500 years ago, 50 years ago.
As for men thinking of women as things. Sorry dont buy it. That usually only happens in a backwards cultural upbringing. I was raised and taught about page 3, i had access to porn as a teen. Do I see my wife or daughter as things i own? No.
As for the sun. Are you seriously telling me the almost daily 16 page pull out for the olympics, plus the 10-16pages of sports at the back, plus the front covers highlighting gold medal winners from team GB isnt giving enough coverage to the athletes? What planet are you on.
I dislike the sun for ita journalism, but they are highly passionate about sports for the country.
You also mention the Olympics, so I assume you've not forgotten about the sheer giddiness that overtook most media when Tom Daly stepped out in just his trunks?
I also agree that it shouldn't be the main highlight when you open a newspaper/magazine etc - it needs toning down a little (a lot). I'm 20 years old and don't see women as "things" or "posessions to be owned", and I don't think it's images like this that cause people to think that way either, I think it's down to the people they're brought up around (not necessarily parents or close family) and their attitude towards women.
Again, I think it's down to educating people on the subjects, letting them know what's right and what's wrong. If someone wants to look at pictures of semi-nude models, then as long as the models are happy doing that for a living then why not let them? And I'm not just talking about female models either - although they're not as well published/seen, I'm pretty sure there will be published images of men of a similar orienation.
Last edited by gtg93; 27th November 2013 at 03:48 PM.
I'm more of the opinion that we all need to stop thinking of sex as something dirty that needs to be hidden away like a sin. Its something that healthy views need to be generated about from childhood. As it stands, we spend our lives being told that sex is basically bad. Ok, it isn't as bad as the older times when puritanical views of sex being only for babies were prevalent but we still have major hangups.
We also need to stop obsessing about body image entirely. We need to focus on health, not image. Photoshop editing of models photos should be banned in all media, male or female, child or adult.
The porn is a reflection of the demands of the consumer. If people didn't want whatever porn they produced, it wouldn't exist. If people's attitudes to sex changed, so would the availability of, or the desire to see, porn.
Focusing on filtering or getting rid of boobs in The Sun is nearly the most pointless example of grandstanding for votes that I can think of.
Ok here we go:
Things change - 2000 years ago we had slavery, homophobia and open racism. The same for 1000 years ago, 500 years ago, 50 years ago. Does that mean they're still okay today? This argument is utterly and totally invalid, sorry.What about 2000 years ago, rape was happening then, hardcore porn or wank mags (as you put it) didnt exist. Same for 1000 years ago, 500 years ago, 50 years ago.
I don't think anyone conciously thinks like that, I wasn't trying to imply that they do. But seriously, have you heard the way teenagers talk to each other nowadays? Are you aware of things like The Game/"PUA" culture, negging, being "alpha"? These things are extremely damaging, and they definitely revolve around treating women as things - points to be scored, notches on the bedpost, challenges to be conquered. Things like page 3 directly contribute towards this culture by providing validation for these opinions, and by teaching young men that women are objects to be desired, to be tarted up and trotted out for the enjoyment of men.As for men thinking of women as things. Sorry dont buy it. That usually only happens in a backwards cultural upbringing. I was raised and taught about page 3, i had access to porn as a teen. Do I see my wife or daughter as things i own? No.
Look at the scorn a woman gets for deciding, for example, not to shave her arms/legs. The Sun directly propogates the outmoded idea of gender roles like this through Page 3.
I bought the sun every day during the olympics. The biggest and most prominent picture was of a topless woman. Every day, before we even turned to the olympics pull-out section, we were treated to a three-quarter page spread of young Lacey from Essex proudly getting her tits out for the lads. This was never intended to be a criticism of how The Sun reported the olympics, just commentary on the prominence they gave (and still give) to page 3 over actual news.As for the sun. Are you seriously telling me the almost daily 16 page pull out for the olympics, plus the 10-16pages of sports at the back, plus the front covers highlighting gold medal winners from team GB isnt giving enough coverage to the athletes? What planet are you on.
JUST TO BE CLEAR: I am not saying we shouldn't have pornography (we shouldn't, but that's a whole different argument which should really be in a different thread). I am saying that we shouldn't have pornography on the third page of the most widely read paper in the UK. A paper which - as I said earlier - is available on the bottom shelf of newsagents everywhere.
I should also be clear that I don't think removing page 3 from the sun will resolve the entire problem either. We've got a long way to go from there (look at how advertising is targetted towards men and women, for example). It's one step which we need to make down an incredibly long path if we're ever actually gonig to have real gender equality, though.
Last edited by Sdrawkcab; 27th November 2013 at 04:10 PM.
Naked pictures shouldn't be in our national newspapers. It's as simple as that.
localzuk says - If we ban it so children don't see it, we're making the whole topic of sex a taboo subject - by allowing it, we're in no way saying that objectifying/raping women is OK.
Last edited by gtg93; 27th November 2013 at 04:38 PM.
I don't get it, takes a simple search on the internet on how to manage what websites your children can view. Even some routers for example like the ASUS DSL-N55U (I have this one) you can set the firewall to block catergories of websites for example adult themes or comments on youtube. With proper research and management you can stop your children from accessing this content. Blocking porn sites is not the answer. Children can get around this very easily look at TPB that got blocked by all UK service providers yet it is still the most used bittorrent site accessed in the UK! David Cameron doesn't have a clue and I say don't mess with something that you don't understand. So now let's take into consideration other inappropriate videos. Fighting, 18+ trailers etc.. Kids aren't stupid when a website asks them for their age and they're looking at a GTA trailer they don't put in their actual age they drop it to 1979 or something. What will he block next.... We're not North Korea.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)