The groundwork has been laid thoroughly by campaigners, charities, women's organisations and the like, who have worked tirelessly to change this situation, and yet there is still no means at all of holding the UK press to task for degrading, sexist or harmful reporting. Which leaves us wondering; is it time to update the Editors' Code?
The Sun, doubtless because 'Page 3' had received special reference from Ms Manjoo, hauled in Feminist Uber-Lad herself, Louise Mensch, who, under the charming headline Shut it Sister, indignantly took the 'we don't even stone our girls here' line to new ludicrous heights with this question: 'What about Bosnia, where rape was a national institution?'
Page 3 may be liberating for the models themselves, but the messages it sends out are oppressive: attractive women are thin, white, feminine and young, and women themselves are simply sexual objects. For that reason I fail to see why this feature should remain in the UK's biggest-selling newspaper where soft pornography should not even be present, unless the feature is altered to become representative of all - and I mean all - women and a male version is created.
Is it possible to have faith in a system of self-regulation when those developing that system are not even opening their discussions to public scrutiny? "Who guards the guardians?" is a question still pertinent today, well over a year after it was first posed by Lord Justice Leveson in launching his inquiry.