Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Andrea Mann

GET UPDATES FROM Andrea Mann
 

Page Three: Shouldn't We All Be Petitioning The Daily Mail, Too?

Posted: 18/09/2012 01:00

As both a woman and someone with boobs, I'm fully behind Lucy Holmes' petition asking Dominic Mohan to "Take Page 3 out of The Sun".

But I'd argue that the newspaper which is far more damaging to women's self esteem - and equally if not more adept at portraying them as merely physical objects - is the Daily Mail.

Day after day - and hour after hour on its website, the Mail Online - the Daily Mail continues to bombard us with 'stories' about women which revolve solely around how they look.

How much weight they've gained. How much weight they've lost. What they're wearing - or the lack of what they're wearing.

One look at the right-hand rail of the Mail Online shows that the paper is never interested in these women's careers, talents or brains. It's never interested in women as actors or musicians or businesswomen. It is solely interested in how they look - and in criticising them relentlessly about it.

I'm sure that they think they're somehow making us 'real' women feel better ('real women' being an awful Daily Mail/women's magazine phrase to mean non-celebrities, as if famous people were less 'real' and thus less deserving of our respect) by holding up images of 'unreal' women and criticising them. But in fact, it damages all women - because the subliminal message is: "You know that really, really gorgeous woman who's completely beautiful and extremely slim? Well, we think she looks like SHIT! So guess what you look like?! Hahaha!"

So by all means, let's petition Dominic Mohan. But let's also petition the Mail Online's publisher, Martin Clarke. To follow Ms Holmes' example, maybe the petition could read thus:

Martin Clarke: Take The Barely-Disguised Misogyny Out Of The Mail Online #nomorerighthandrail

"We are asking Martin Clarke to drop the barely-disguised misogyny from the Mail Online.

We are asking very nicely.

Please, Martin.

No more fixating on how women look.

George Alagiah doesn't say, 'And now over to Angela Merkel, who's flaunting her curves at the G20 summit today' does he, Martin?

Philip and Holly don't tell Claire from Steps that she's wearing just the latest in a series of unflattering outfits on This Morning, do they, Martin?

No, they don't.

There would be an outcry.

And you shouldn't show naked misogyny in your widely read 'family' website either.

Consider this a long overdue outcry.

Martin, stop criticising young women for the way they look on Britain's most widely read news website, stop conditioning your readers to view women as physical objects.

Enough is enough.

Thank you."



Would anyone else like to sign it?

 

Follow Andrea Mann on Twitter: www.twitter.com/AndreaMann

FOLLOW UK COMEDY
As both a woman and someone with boobs, I'm fully behind Lucy Holmes' petition asking Dominic Mohan to "Take Page 3 out of The Sun". But I'd argue that the newspaper which is far more damaging to ...
As both a woman and someone with boobs, I'm fully behind Lucy Holmes' petition asking Dominic Mohan to "Take Page 3 out of The Sun". But I'd argue that the newspaper which is far more damaging to ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 41
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DJPotterWriter
05:54 AM on 09/24/2012
People notice what they want to notice. I suppose you haven't noticed that the 'Daily Mail' does comment on men's bodies, albeit less often than women's bodies. But, should that be controversial? Women put more effort into making themselves look good than men, for obvious Darwinian reasons. You can't discuss fashion, health or cosmetics without making some women feel self-conscious! Also, a person's body is not just an aesthetic issue: it's also a health issue. Britain has tragic rates of obesity: the problem isn't that women (or men) think it unacceptable to be fat!

Part of growing up is realising that other people have opinions that may offend you. Nobody is obliged to read the 'Daily Mail'. Are you demanding that women should be treated like children and shielded from things that might upset them? Bear in mind all the legal restrictions placed on children, and be careful what you wish for!

Physical beauty may not be a person's only important characteristic, but to disregard it altogether is spiteful and disingenuous: we have no problem discussing the physical beauty of the natural world or of painting or of sculpture. Do you want to tell good-looking women (or good-looking men) who may have no other skills that you want to get rid of their jobs because they make you feel inadequate?

Stop using the word 'misogyny' so lightly. Misogyny is hatred of women.

In the age of the Internet, page three is pretty much irrelevant any way.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
loulou11
07:29 PM on 09/19/2012
If you don't like it don't buy it. The sun without page 3 would be like Christmas without turkey!

Most magazine publications are similar to the daily mail and purchased by women too. Sometimes it better to worry about trivual things like how you look than take stock of the reality of our sad world today.

Makes light reading and yes I am female.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Laatab
All The Worlds A Stage
04:08 AM on 09/19/2012
"stop conditioning your readers to view women as physical objects"

Bit of slip there for an editor. So how should the readers be conditioned, programed to regard women, just out of interest?
09:21 PM on 09/18/2012
I remember in the late 60s being part of a debate about the sexualisation of women in the media. It seems we haven't moved on much since then except that, as many have stated, much of the sexualisation is being perpetrated by women's mags together with the multi billion pound cosmetics and fashion industries. Is this due to peer pressure or the desire to attract a mate? It's difficult to find an answer but I agree, the Daily Fail does not help by referring constantly to women as little more than 'toned' bodies in bikinis.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DJPotterWriter
05:57 AM on 09/24/2012
Women could choose to stop buying cosmetics, and almost overnight the cosmetics industry would collapse. If you want women to be saved from themselves, you're really demanding that we should live under an even greater tyranny than we already do.
09:10 PM on 09/18/2012
If women do not want to read the articles they do not have to. From what I see on the net and in the papers some women are obsessed with what they should wear and whose advise they should take and want to feed of this information. I read the daily mail because my husband buys it but as I no longer need to worry about the girlie fashion I do not bother to read the articles they are not compulsary, each to their own
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DJPotterWriter
06:06 AM on 09/24/2012
I agree. Unfortunately, to use a cliche, we live in a nanny state, where many people expect to be saved from themselves. As you imply, it's really women who obsess about women's fashion, cosmetics and bodies. I seem to remember there was an interesting article on this some time ago in the 'Daily Mail' itself. It was a report on a celebrity party of some kind, and the writer noted that, while the female guests were admiring Sarah Jessica Parker and how skinny she looked and how she was wearing the latest fashion, the male guests were admiring the full and voluptuous body of Christina Hendricks (the writer noted that Hendricks was wearing last year's fashion, but that the men didn't notice this faux pas or didn't care)!
08:32 PM on 09/18/2012
The article is either a paroody of irony or the writer genuinely hasn't read any of the HUFF output in the last 20 years...If it wasn't for the Mail, MOST of the Huff content would be non existent. Huff does exactly the same as the Mail...Re: Emma's boob slip? Sound familair? Or the continuous obsession with saying that this woman is 'rockinh' or 'working' this little black dress/thigh boots/underwear/skirt/blouse...(delete as applicable)... Before pointing the finger, look at how many point back.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:54 AM on 09/19/2012
That's a very good point!
08:17 PM on 09/18/2012
Funny how the luvvies and lefties all hate the Daily Mail with a vengence despite what the other , particularly leftie papers print. As for exploiting women? Well from what I've seen from the womens sections in every paper and in most womens magazines. All written or edited by women. I believe it is some women who are abusing or expoliting the majority of others. Read any womens section and youll see them being told, TOLD mind you. What to wear, what handbag to carry,what to eat and drink, you must only dress of treat your baby the way certain WIMMIN insist. You must also think the way they do and believe what they believe. No other views are to be tolerated or allowed. So I do feel sorry for most female readers who deserve to be regarded as free minded adults. Then again if you look at the way our institutions (increasingly run by wimmin as opposed to women) are always telling people what to do etc., you can recognise the same totalitairan style.
07:33 PM on 09/18/2012
lol ms mann comedy editor.i assume this article is written tongue in cheek.if not the words pot kettle and black come to mind.huffington post have dozen of items about women celebrities everyday,what their wearing and not wearing,who their with and what there doing. look at last week and emily watsons nipple slip or not lol.the daily list of titilation the huff gives us is endless.i suspect this is just one media cooperation having a go at another..dont you ms mann
06:54 PM on 09/18/2012
The next potential Queen Of England didn't think she was being watched as she exposed her bits to the world? BIG eye roll.
1. This was either a publicity stunt or...
2. She is an incredibly stupid girl.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
deluk
disgusted.
10:04 PM on 09/18/2012
She's not one of your desperate "Hollywood stars", she doesn't need publicity stunts, personally I suspect that she doesn't care in the least at having her assets paraded for all to see.  I suspect the royal family care about the implications of the lack of privacy.
10:30 PM on 09/18/2012
You look so much better since that nice old lady repainted you :o)
This comment has been removed.
06:35 PM on 09/18/2012
More important things to worry about in the world. Than taking notice of sad females with nothing else to moan about.
06:31 PM on 09/18/2012
Whereas the Sun is mainly a blokes paper with loads of sport in it, the Daily Mail is a mainly female paper bought largely by women and has lots of female columnists, so it's content is by and for women, if your upset at what's in it don't buy it, but clearly women like reading about such stuff.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DJPotterWriter
06:11 AM on 09/24/2012
You're right. According to Wikipedia, the readership of the 'Daily Mail' is 53% female, which makes it the only British newspaper whose readership is more than 50% female.
06:20 PM on 09/18/2012
Jeeze! If your so up and arms about all this chauvinism being sold on the news racks, why don't you petition your 'sisters' working for these dull rags to go on strike? That would mean more to the publishers than all the 'fan' mail you propose sending them with your 'petitions'. But I suppose the 'working women' wont strike as they can see thru your pointless charade as being unrealistic in a modern world. Why do you care so much??? Just don't buy their papers, is that not much simpler?
This comment has been removed.
04:43 PM on 09/18/2012
Hardly a day went by recently when AOL and Huff 'n' Puff didnt feature misery Posh and what she was doing, what she was wearing or how she looked. Tag that on to all the other Z List so called celebrities that it is obsessed with featuring and you'll see that it is in the same category as the other gutter rags.