I've got a confession to make. I may have been a bit silly starting the No More Page 3 campaign. You see, someone just tweeted us something. "If you don't like it, don't buy it", the tweet read.
There was I, ballistically campaigning about Page Three being damaging when, oh, I really am feeling very stupid now, because I could just not buy it and everything would be fine. So, I'll be off then. Sorry about that. Or rather. No. Just no.
There are so many reasons why "if you don't like it, don't buy it" doesn't work as an argument for Page 3, that I will be breaking out the big gun bullet points.
So, here goes. This is for you, Mr If You Don't Like It Don't Buy It and all the others before you, and that includes you, Nick Clegg.
1) I was most affected by these images at the age of 11 when my breasts were developing and my brother and his mates would be commenting on Page Three girls breasts everyday. I really looked up to my big brother and this situation taught me that my breasts were only there for men to look at. Mine fell short of the ones that were in the daily newspaper, therefore I was failing somehow and I was ashamed. I didn't buying it.
2) Jo, a teammate on the campaign, used to work in a pub in North Yorkshire, where it lay on the bar every evening, she was sexually harassed everyday as comments where made about her breasts and the models, until she was eventually sexually assaulted. She didn't buy it.
3) The school girl, who wrote to the Everyday Sexism project saying that the boys in her school hold up Page Three in the corridor and mark the girls out of 10 as they walk past, doesn't buy it.
4) The woman who was made to look at Page Three while she was abused as a child, didn't buy it.
5) When Clare Short stood up in the 80s and spoke out about these pictures being in the paper, she received 1000s of letters of support. Twelve were from women who had Page Three mentioned to them while they were being raped. These women didn't buy it.
6) The woman who sits in a staff room everyday while a male colleague shows Page Three to all the men with the words 'would you do that?' doesn't buy it.
7) The nurse who wrote and told us that she has to treat men as they comment on young women's breasts, doesn't buy it.
8) The mother who took her six-year-old daughter to a café for a treat and found Page three lying open on a table and was asked "Mummy, why isn't that lady wearing a top?" doesn't buy it.
9) The father who felt outraged that a man was looking at Page Three while his three-and-a-half year-old daughter was having a hair cut, didn't buy it.
10) The teacher who asks the class to bring in newspapers for painting and has to explain why there's a naked woman in the 'news'paper, doesn't buy it.
And, as writer Lauren Bravo says, "if you can't communicate the logic of something in simple terms a kid can grasp, there's a good chance it might be completely stupid."
We are all affected by Page Three whether we buy it or not, because we all live in a society where the most widely read paper in the country makes 'normal' the idea that women are there primarily for men's sexual pleasure.
As one woman noted on our Facebook page, "if I lived in times of slavery, I wouldn't be content not to buy a slave, I'd protest against it because I believe it to be wrong".
'If you don't like it, don't buy it' doesn't work, believe me, I wish it did.
Follow Lucy-Anne Holmes on Twitter: www.twitter.com/LucyAnneHolmes
Petition | Dominic Mohan: Take The Bare Boobs Out Of The Sun ...
No More Page 3 | Dominic Mohan: Take The Bare Boobs Out Of The ...
NoMorePage3 (NoMorePage3) on Twitter
No More Page 3 campaigner Lucy-Anne Holmes on her battle with the Sun
Totalitarian Nazi style.
You must feel so proud of yourself.
I have an advice for you. Just live your life the best way you can. If you have a problem supperate it, even if that requires to ask for help. But don't even try to forbid others of doing what you don't like, that is simply wrong.
And chloeg, maybe it's down to being in a relationship, but I don't feel ''drawn'' to attractive people, and I don't think sexually about them either. There has to be more about a person than just their looks to hook me in, which is why I'm not one of those girlfriends who are constantly gawping at other men, I honestly feel nothing for others. I can see if someone is attractive, but that doesn't mean I'm attracted to them, there is a difference.
I just felt that you needed correcting, because you generalize all people into one category. The only person I look at in a sexual manner is my boyfriend. You imply that all humans feel drawn towards ''attractive'' people, we are scientifically programmed to, and there are no two ways about it. Well, if I feel the complete opposite to what you describe, how many other people are there that feel differently, too? We are not 'scientifically programmed' to do anything when it comes to attraction.
The other argument that always comes out is that some women feel insecure because they don't match up to the girls in the newspaper.In that case, why not stop intelligent people's achievements from being reported in the news lest it upsets other, less academically endowed people? Why not ban all pictures of attractive women while we're at it, just in case less pretty girls feel bad? We'd be heading for a society of total censorship, fuelled by paranoid insecurity.
Imagine a woman; not blessed with academic ability or any particular talent. However, she is beautiful, and has a fantastic figure. This woman has street smarts; she knows that she can make a lot of money by modelling on Page 3 and in lads' mags. She has no problem with showing her body - she always goes topless on holiday. So she decides she wants to do Page 3 to make her fortune and attain the better things in life. In saying that she can't do Page 3, when she actually wants to do it, we would be taking power away from her rather than empowering her. And, in fact, we would be oppressing her and preventing her doing what she wants to do.
That's my only problem with banning Page 3. I personally would gladly see The Sun go the way of the NOTW, but at the same time, I don't want to tell someone that they can't do what they want to do.
In all honesty, I really have no idea how to solve the problem of how women are objectified - and it is a genuine problem. But as long as even one woman is happy to take her clothes off for money, there will be a market for it. It's kind of like Canut trying to hold back the tide.
It's wrong; it's immoral; but it's also a matter of civil rights.
While I want nothing to do with a rag like The Sun, Page 3 is a symptom, not a cause. Banning this "paper" from printing what it wants (incidentally, such censorship is also abhorrent), will not change to root of the problem in terms of society's perceptions surrounding women.
For example, I read just the other day about the woeful standard of sex education in many schools. Why not educate young people regarding body image, regarding porn, regarding gender in society? How about teaching people the right way of dealing with this material when they're faced with it, instead of trying to make it go away, which won't happen while these attitudes exist.
The momentum you've gained for this cause is awesome and could do some real good, but I fear it's tragically misdirected. It's like bailing water out of a boat before trying to plug the hole.