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

GET UPDATES FROM Rebecca Gill
 

Unusual Suspects Want to Ban Page 3

Posted: 10/02/2012 00:00

On Monday Dominic Mohan was recalled to the Leveson inquiry where he defended Page 3 as a "British institution". Unfortunately he missed the all important word 'was'- it was a British institution - and not a particularly good one at that.

Platform 51 commissioned a nationally representative poll over the weekend which showed that almost twice as many women would support a ban on topless pictures of female models appearing in daily newspapers as would oppose it. In a country where many people feel uneasy with the word 'ban', these results are certainly striking.

The word and the question can conjure up ideas of banning all pictures of naked women in national newspapers even when they may be justified in the context of an article such as a feature on how to check for breast cancer. Those who oppose Page 3 are unlikely to be concerned with this - what people are concerned about are images presenting women as nothing more than sex objects.

It is easy to assume that it's just women who feel uncomfortable with Page 3, but that isn't the case - almost a third of men said they would support a ban too.

One of the charges levelled against those who oppose Page 3 is that they are being prudish or don't get that's it's just a bit of harmless fun. Strikingly, when Clare Short dared to first raised the issue of a ban on Page 3, 25 years ago, The Sun's response to her concerns was to accuse her of being "fat and jealous."

Thankfully these results suggest that things have moved on since then. It is in fact the group in society that is usually considered to be the least prudish and uptight that shows strong opposition to Page 3 and would go as far as banning it; the research shows that many more young people, both men and women in the 18-24 age group are in favour of a ban than 45-54 year olds.

From our work with women and girls in Platform 51 centres, we know that provocative, titillating images of women like those on Page 3 can make them uncomfortable, negatively affect their self-esteem, limit their aspirations and expectations and can have an impact on how some men treat them. We know from working with younger girls and women that these images can have a big impact on them growing up.

There is also a concern that children have access to these images unfiltered and unmediated and the impact this has on how girls view themselves, and how boys view girls. Whilst there are organisations like Platform 51 who support girls and women to build their confidence and self-esteem, it would be easier if these images were not there in the first place.

These serious objections to Page 3 are perhaps well rehearsed. But what our polling shows is that many people, far from viewing 'institutions' like Page 3 as harmless fun, in fact see Page 3 as an outdated 'institution' which is, frankly, a bit embarrassing and needs to be consigned to the dustbin of history.

 

Follow Rebecca Gill on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Platform51

On Monday Dominic Mohan was recalled to the Leveson inquiry where he defended Page 3 as a "British institution". Unfortunately he missed the all important word 'was'- it was a British institution - an...
On Monday Dominic Mohan was recalled to the Leveson inquiry where he defended Page 3 as a "British institution". Unfortunately he missed the all important word 'was'- it was a British institution - an...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 28
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
03:02 PM on 03/11/2012
It has been 25 years now since this issue started. 25 flippin years! A whole generation of little girls has grown up internalising the Page3 ethos one way or the other. Meantime, there is much much worse, more readily available on the internet, so why can't the Sun get rid of page 3 and all it' represents? Just this one little thing?
05:39 PM on 02/10/2012
How exactly would you ban it? Most female magazines have more bare flesh on display than the Sun newspaper. Would that include models wearing their tops? what about see thru tops? Would there be a 'nipple' tzar investigation complaints (that would make a great Guardian job advert wouldn't it)

Why is the left so obsessed with claiming it loves freedom of speech yet spends more time trying to ban things it doesn't like?

Would images of topless men also be banned? The legislation would not be gender specific would it, so they wouldn't be able to put pictures of male swimmers in the paper.

Perhaps a better debate might be why so many 14 year old Muslim girls go missing in Bradford only to turn up back in England 3 years later married to a goat herder from Kabul, funny the left don't seem to bothered about that.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Peggy Kendrick
Edited micro-bio. Happy now!?
12:14 PM on 02/10/2012
Keep topless women on page 3 but ban "reading" these "newspapers" in public places.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Paul Wagland
Resistance is fertile
01:50 PM on 02/10/2012
You'd also have to ban sales to under-16s, and put the papers on the top shelf. That would be fine in my view. I bet Murdoch would drop Page 3 in a flash!
10:43 AM on 02/10/2012
Even if some people find it objectionable, Page 3 and other similar things should NOT be banned through legislation.

Supporting free speech and freedom of the press means also supporting the right of those views you don't approve of to be freely expressed.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Peggy Kendrick
Edited micro-bio. Happy now!?
12:15 PM on 02/10/2012
What views are being expressed with pictures of topless women?
12:55 PM on 02/10/2012
Two breasts!
04:02 PM on 02/10/2012
I don't mean to bestow Page 3 with any more dignity than it is due, it is after all a pornographic image.

Still, just because some of us don't like it I don't think that we should legislate what other people can and can't print or buy, so long as it between consenting adults.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Paul Wagland
Resistance is fertile
01:48 PM on 02/10/2012
What is more important to you - Rupert Murdoch's right to make a profit, or the rights of young girls to grow up without being seen (and indeed seeing themselves) as sex objects?

We have legislation to stop graffiti, tax avoidance, sex crimes, speeding - yet there are people who would like the right to do all of these things. It's about making society better.
03:59 PM on 02/10/2012
Your examples are all rather poor ones I think, given that graffiti, tax avoidance, sex crimes and speeding are all actions that can negatively impact on others and their freedoms.

If you want to live in a society that allows freedom of speech, it also means that you can't use the "this is offensive" argument to legislate your own views. It doesn't matter whether you like it or not.

You also present me with a false dichotomy, allowing Mr Murdoch to make a profit and not treating women as objects are not mutually exclusive positions.

The Sun, even if we don't like it (and for the record, I DON'T), can print whatever they want in their paper. You and I don't have to buy it, and I for one never have or will.
09:44 AM on 02/10/2012
40-odd% of women and fewer than a third of men support a ban? - doesn't really sound like good grounds for implementing one. And do we ban Torso of the Week in Heat magazine at the same time? And of course the Coke and Levi TV adverts would have to go - in fact many TV adverts use sex to sell ...

There will come a time when page 3 no longer sells newspapers and isn't supported by the readership - and at that time it will fade into oblivion. A 'ban' is ridiculous.
07:53 AM on 02/10/2012
Good article and I totaly agree, (I'm an old man of 63 so it's proberble that my comments dont matter to young women).
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
TeeLolly
03:46 AM on 02/10/2012
Do they have a page devoted to penises?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Paul Wagland
Resistance is fertile
01:42 PM on 02/10/2012
As I recall, these papers do have an extensive homoerotic section at the back.
photo
Reality always bites
Sometimes just a bit peckish
11:20 PM on 02/10/2012
Sport? Really Paul I have read all your later comments and could not fault them; but please don't class the sport pages as homoerotic. (I have not recently read the Sun newspaper) but clearly you do and I know the back pages are still devoted to soccer!
05:43 PM on 02/10/2012
Well they used to support the Labour party and Gordon Brown, so yes they have had a lot of pricks in the paper.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
TeeLolly
06:01 PM on 02/10/2012
LOL
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:53 AM on 02/10/2012
"In a country where many people feel uneasy with the word 'ban', these results are certainly striking."

Tell that to British gun owners.
10:03 AM on 02/10/2012
Ok. "British gun owners, all your weapons should be banned and you should be sterilized and your children adopted"

Is that all right?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
deluk
disgusted.
10:43 PM on 02/10/2012
Are you American?...they are very few British gun owners, and very few wannabe gun owners, guns aren't in our DNA, we don't think about them. and it's hardly an issue, Americans spend more time commenting on the gun laws in the UK than Brits do.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:14 AM on 02/11/2012
I think you're quite right, my point is that the United Kingdom is certainly not "a country where people feel uneasy with the word ban"