Model Marina Pepper who starred on Page 3 wants the tabloid tradition to end

Former model joins campaign to end Page 3 tabloid tradition

Former Page 3 model Marina Pepper is now supporting a lobby group to stop the publication of topless women in newspapers

MP Caroline Lucas is leading a campaign against The Sun’s Page 3

First published in News
Last updated
by

A former Sun Page 3 model has joined a growing campaign to end the tabloid tradition.

Marina Pepper does not regret her time as a tabloid pin-up, but said she cannot believe the “anachronistic” tradition of topless women continues.

She hopes newspaper managers will pull the feature from as early as the end of this year, as they come under increasing pressure from campaigners.

The 47-year-old former Telscombe mayor is part of No More Page Three, which was launched by Hove writer Lucy Holmes, who started a petition calling on The Sun to “drop the bare boobs” in September 2012.

Mrs Pepper, of Meridian Road, Lewes, was a Page Three girl from 1985 to 1987 and said she first got involved in the issue in November, when she was asked to participate in a debate at the University of Sussex.

She said: “I came to the conclusion that despite my earlier career, I was quite against it.

“I was quite surprised that they still had it. I thought feminism and equality had taken care of it.”

She said there had been some changes on Page 3 compared with her time when girls as young as 16 were used and a model’s career would end when girls reached their early 20s.

Mrs Pepper said: “By the time I was growing up it was common for men to cop a feel on the underground or in the classroom. I couldn’t have known any better.

“As a 15-year-old girl, I was a victim of the system.

“Some of the photographers were dirty old letches. It was basically the frontline of the sex industry.

“When you think about this day and age and these historic sex offences. At the same time that Rolf Harris was at the height of his fame, you had a 16-year-old Samantha Fox on Page 3.”

A petition has gained almost 200,000 signatures, while 54 MPs have signed a motion sponsored by Brighton Pavilion MP Caroline Lucas calling, among other things, to stop the Houses of Parliament stocking the tabloid until it agrees to remove the feature.

To sign the petition, visit tinyurl.com/mutcqwp or for more information on the campaign group, visit tinyurl.com/m9qkcxh.

Comments (62)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

1:18pm Wed 16 Jul 14

stevo!! says...

“As a 15-year-old girl, I was a victim of the system. "

So much a victim that two years later she was showing her boobs in The Sun.

*facepalm*

I take it that she's contributing her earnings from The Sun to the campaign?

As for all those who object to Page 3, how many of them are forced to buy it?
“As a 15-year-old girl, I was a victim of the system. " So much a victim that two years later she was showing her boobs in The Sun. *facepalm* I take it that she's contributing her earnings from The Sun to the campaign? As for all those who object to Page 3, how many of them are forced to buy it? stevo!!
  • Score: -66

1:19pm Wed 16 Jul 14

fredaj says...

Well done Marina!
Well done Marina! fredaj
  • Score: 4

1:24pm Wed 16 Jul 14

stevo!! says...

This is the same Marina Pepper who posts anti-UKIP drivel and who is vehemently against democracy and the democratic process except when it works in her favour.

She fairly stupid, as my first post showed, but I have to say she had a cracking pair of boobs.....and she still looks in good shape even today.
This is the same Marina Pepper who posts anti-UKIP drivel and who is vehemently against democracy and the democratic process except when it works in her favour. She fairly stupid, as my first post showed, but I have to say she had a cracking pair of boobs.....and she still looks in good shape even today. stevo!!
  • Score: -71

1:27pm Wed 16 Jul 14

fredaj says...

stevo!! wrote:
“As a 15-year-old girl, I was a victim of the system. "

So much a victim that two years later she was showing her boobs in The Sun.

*facepalm*

I take it that she's contributing her earnings from The Sun to the campaign?

As for all those who object to Page 3, how many of them are forced to buy it?
Buying it or not buying it is a just a diversion by men who are stuck in the 70s and still think copping a feel is sonehow acceptable, if it ever was.

And if that is you, you obviously haven't been paying attention to what has revealed, and is still being revealed, regarding sexist opinions, behaviour and were it ultimately leads due to the presumption of "acceptability" furthered by the likes of Page 3 in the the Sun.

"What's a matter darling? You got no sense of humour?"

"You shouldn't have such big jugs if you don't want people looking at 'em"

If you want to look at picture of naked women, take photos of your wife and display them in the privacy of your own home!
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: “As a 15-year-old girl, I was a victim of the system. " So much a victim that two years later she was showing her boobs in The Sun. *facepalm* I take it that she's contributing her earnings from The Sun to the campaign? As for all those who object to Page 3, how many of them are forced to buy it?[/p][/quote]Buying it or not buying it is a just a diversion by men who are stuck in the 70s and still think copping a feel is sonehow acceptable, if it ever was. And if that is you, you obviously haven't been paying attention to what has revealed, and is still being revealed, regarding sexist opinions, behaviour and were it ultimately leads due to the presumption of "acceptability" furthered by the likes of Page 3 in the the Sun. "What's a matter darling? You got no sense of humour?" "You shouldn't have such big jugs if you don't want people looking at 'em" If you want to look at picture of naked women, take photos of your wife and display them in the privacy of your own home! fredaj
  • Score: 29

1:36pm Wed 16 Jul 14

stevo!! says...

"Buying it or not buying it is a just a diversion by men who are stuck in the 70s and still think copping a feel is sonehow acceptable, if it ever was."

So it's OK for you to make unfounded misandric (anti-male) comments, but God help any males who make any misogynistic ones?

Your comment has no basis in reality. You are claiming that every male who admires a topless woman thinks that grabbing the breasts of a total stranger is acceptable.

That is utter b*ll*x.

"you obviously haven't been paying attention to what has revealed, and is still being revealed, regarding sexist opinions...."

You mean like YOU just did towards males?
"Buying it or not buying it is a just a diversion by men who are stuck in the 70s and still think copping a feel is sonehow acceptable, if it ever was." So it's OK for you to make unfounded misandric (anti-male) comments, but God help any males who make any misogynistic ones? Your comment has no basis in reality. You are claiming that every male who admires a topless woman thinks that grabbing the breasts of a total stranger is acceptable. That is utter b*ll*x. "you obviously haven't been paying attention to what has revealed, and is still being revealed, regarding sexist opinions...." You mean like YOU just did towards males? stevo!!
  • Score: -41

1:56pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Bob_The_Ferret says...

The Grauniad is available for those who don't want to buy The Sun.

There will always be readers of both papers who find some of the content in the other offensive.
The Grauniad is available for those who don't want to buy The Sun. There will always be readers of both papers who find some of the content in the other offensive. Bob_The_Ferret
  • Score: -6

2:07pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Mrbrightside1 says...

stevo!! wrote:
This is the same Marina Pepper who posts anti-UKIP drivel and who is vehemently against democracy and the democratic process except when it works in her favour.

She fairly stupid, as my first post showed, but I have to say she had a cracking pair of boobs.....and she still looks in good shape even today.
I have to second that, a quick Google search and hey presto. Lubbly jubbly!!
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: This is the same Marina Pepper who posts anti-UKIP drivel and who is vehemently against democracy and the democratic process except when it works in her favour. She fairly stupid, as my first post showed, but I have to say she had a cracking pair of boobs.....and she still looks in good shape even today.[/p][/quote]I have to second that, a quick Google search and hey presto. Lubbly jubbly!! Mrbrightside1
  • Score: -38

2:10pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Maxwell's Ghost says...

I think you would be better campaigning for record companies to stop sexualising young people and campaigning against online child **** and snuff movies because few of the current generation read The Sun and it will die out in its own time.
As for Sam Fox, I've met her a few times and she is a great, business savvy lady who has made the most of what she had.
Academically she isn't bright, so I am sure she would have rather made millions out of flashing her knockers than cleaning men's urinals for minimum wage.
How do you earn your income now Marina?
I think you would be better campaigning for record companies to stop sexualising young people and campaigning against online child **** and snuff movies because few of the current generation read The Sun and it will die out in its own time. As for Sam Fox, I've met her a few times and she is a great, business savvy lady who has made the most of what she had. Academically she isn't bright, so I am sure she would have rather made millions out of flashing her knockers than cleaning men's urinals for minimum wage. How do you earn your income now Marina? Maxwell's Ghost
  • Score: 6

3:08pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Man of steel says...

stevo!! wrote:
This is the same Marina Pepper who posts anti-UKIP drivel and who is vehemently against democracy and the democratic process except when it works in her favour.

She fairly stupid, as my first post showed, but I have to say she had a cracking pair of boobs.....and she still looks in good shape even today.
Looking at the article in the mail on line about her at the Balcombe fracking demo, I would say she looks a lot older than 45, but it also tells of her affair with Daniel Craig 25 years ago.
I would never have known about her, or looked for her pictures if she had not joined this campaign.
Apparently her measurements are (or were): 34EE-23-35.
It seems that now she has earnt her money stripping off, it is a case of don't do as I do, do as I say.
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: This is the same Marina Pepper who posts anti-UKIP drivel and who is vehemently against democracy and the democratic process except when it works in her favour. She fairly stupid, as my first post showed, but I have to say she had a cracking pair of boobs.....and she still looks in good shape even today.[/p][/quote]Looking at the article in the mail on line about her at the Balcombe fracking demo, I would say she looks a lot older than 45, but it also tells of her affair with Daniel Craig 25 years ago. I would never have known about her, or looked for her pictures if she had not joined this campaign. Apparently her measurements are (or were): 34EE-23-35. It seems that now she has earnt her money stripping off, it is a case of don't do as I do, do as I say. Man of steel
  • Score: -12

3:16pm Wed 16 Jul 14

hammerfan says...

Funny how she graduated from boob showing on page three to mens mags where she bared all! She was obviously better developed physically then mentally!
Funny how she graduated from boob showing on page three to mens mags where she bared all! She was obviously better developed physically then mentally! hammerfan
  • Score: -4

3:32pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Man of steel says...

It appears that she is now a professional protester, and a leading member of protest group Climate Rush.
In 2009 she was in the London Evening Standard, with the headlines of "Playmate, witch and now eco warrior trying to shut down Heathrow"
then Balcombe, now page three.
Just do what you are best at dear, get your kit off.
It appears that she is now a professional protester, and a leading member of protest group Climate Rush. In 2009 she was in the London Evening Standard, with the headlines of "Playmate, witch and now eco warrior trying to shut down Heathrow" then Balcombe, now page three. Just do what you are best at dear, get your kit off. Man of steel
  • Score: -24

5:43pm Wed 16 Jul 14

stevo!! says...

Man of steel wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
This is the same Marina Pepper who posts anti-UKIP drivel and who is vehemently against democracy and the democratic process except when it works in her favour.

She fairly stupid, as my first post showed, but I have to say she had a cracking pair of boobs.....and she still looks in good shape even today.
Looking at the article in the mail on line about her at the Balcombe fracking demo, I would say she looks a lot older than 45, but it also tells of her affair with Daniel Craig 25 years ago.
I would never have known about her, or looked for her pictures if she had not joined this campaign.
Apparently her measurements are (or were): 34EE-23-35.
It seems that now she has earnt her money stripping off, it is a case of don't do as I do, do as I say.
Her measurements are still the same, only the gap between the first two has narrowed ;-)
[quote][p][bold]Man of steel[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: This is the same Marina Pepper who posts anti-UKIP drivel and who is vehemently against democracy and the democratic process except when it works in her favour. She fairly stupid, as my first post showed, but I have to say she had a cracking pair of boobs.....and she still looks in good shape even today.[/p][/quote]Looking at the article in the mail on line about her at the Balcombe fracking demo, I would say she looks a lot older than 45, but it also tells of her affair with Daniel Craig 25 years ago. I would never have known about her, or looked for her pictures if she had not joined this campaign. Apparently her measurements are (or were): 34EE-23-35. It seems that now she has earnt her money stripping off, it is a case of don't do as I do, do as I say.[/p][/quote]Her measurements are still the same, only the gap between the first two has narrowed ;-) stevo!!
  • Score: -34

5:48pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Man of steel says...

Stevo, are you trying to say that her assets have gone south for the winter?
Stevo, are you trying to say that her assets have gone south for the winter? Man of steel
  • Score: -20

5:53pm Wed 16 Jul 14

stevo!! says...

Man of steel wrote:
Stevo, are you trying to say that her assets have gone south for the winter?
Moi????


:-)
[quote][p][bold]Man of steel[/bold] wrote: Stevo, are you trying to say that her assets have gone south for the winter?[/p][/quote]Moi???? :-) stevo!!
  • Score: -20

6:03pm Wed 16 Jul 14

stevo!! says...

Her modelling name was Marina Baker.

It seems she had no problem going nude for money when it suited her.
Her modelling name was Marina Baker. It seems she had no problem going nude for money when it suited her. stevo!!
  • Score: -7

6:30pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Ruthie_X says...

fredaj wrote:
Well done Marina!
Yes well done Marina . I think other comments are demonstrating just how hard it is to put your name in the spotlight as a woman. Trying not to feed the trolls. You are entitled to be young and foolish, then change your opinion and stand up for what you believe in. Well done again.
[quote][p][bold]fredaj[/bold] wrote: Well done Marina![/p][/quote]Yes well done Marina . I think other comments are demonstrating just how hard it is to put your name in the spotlight as a woman. Trying not to feed the trolls. You are entitled to be young and foolish, then change your opinion and stand up for what you believe in. Well done again. Ruthie_X
  • Score: 39

7:18pm Wed 16 Jul 14

fredaj says...

stevo!! wrote:
"Buying it or not buying it is a just a diversion by men who are stuck in the 70s and still think copping a feel is sonehow acceptable, if it ever was."

So it's OK for you to make unfounded misandric (anti-male) comments, but God help any males who make any misogynistic ones?

Your comment has no basis in reality. You are claiming that every male who admires a topless woman thinks that grabbing the breasts of a total stranger is acceptable.

That is utter b*ll*x.

"you obviously haven't been paying attention to what has revealed, and is still being revealed, regarding sexist opinions...."

You mean like YOU just did towards males?
My comment is anti-page three and anti those who support it. It is NOT anti male.

The vast majority of man, especially the young, think the days of page three should now be behind us and there are just a small handful remaining who still support it, claiming it as a right, entitlement or freedom.
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: "Buying it or not buying it is a just a diversion by men who are stuck in the 70s and still think copping a feel is sonehow acceptable, if it ever was." So it's OK for you to make unfounded misandric (anti-male) comments, but God help any males who make any misogynistic ones? Your comment has no basis in reality. You are claiming that every male who admires a topless woman thinks that grabbing the breasts of a total stranger is acceptable. That is utter b*ll*x. "you obviously haven't been paying attention to what has revealed, and is still being revealed, regarding sexist opinions...." You mean like YOU just did towards males?[/p][/quote]My comment is anti-page three and anti those who support it. It is NOT anti male. The vast majority of man, especially the young, think the days of page three should now be behind us and there are just a small handful remaining who still support it, claiming it as a right, entitlement or freedom. fredaj
  • Score: 43

7:20pm Wed 16 Jul 14

fredaj says...

stevo!! wrote:
Her modelling name was Marina Baker.

It seems she had no problem going nude for money when it suited her.
Why are you not allowing her the freedom to change her mind without beating her with a proverbial stick?
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: Her modelling name was Marina Baker. It seems she had no problem going nude for money when it suited her.[/p][/quote]Why are you not allowing her the freedom to change her mind without beating her with a proverbial stick? fredaj
  • Score: 30

7:38pm Wed 16 Jul 14

stevo!! says...

"My comment is anti-page three and anti those who support it. It is NOT anti male.

You accused all males who look at topless images of thinking that groping perfect strangers is perfectly acceptable. That was a sweeping statement based on no evidence whatsoever, and showed how anti-male you are.

"The vast majority of man, especially the young, think the days of page three should now be behind us...."

How did you discover the ratio that led you to say 'the vast majority'?

Another sign of your bigotry and prejudice?

I have no problem with those who wish to see Page 3 ended. I do have a problem with those who make unsubstantiated bigoted comments on the matter.

"Why are you not allowing her the freedom to change her mind without beating her with a proverbial stick?"

I haven't berated her for changing her mind, as I have no problem with that. What concerns me is the two-faced way she views things. She made substantial funds from her modelling career, and yet she wants to deny other women the right to do the same just because she's had some sort of epiphany. THAT is two-faced. The same goes for her membership of Climate Rush and her stand against democracy except when it suits her.
"My comment is anti-page three and anti those who support it. It is NOT anti male. You accused all males who look at topless images of thinking that groping perfect strangers is perfectly acceptable. That was a sweeping statement based on no evidence whatsoever, and showed how anti-male you are. "The vast majority of man, especially the young, think the days of page three should now be behind us...." How did you discover the ratio that led you to say 'the vast majority'? Another sign of your bigotry and prejudice? I have no problem with those who wish to see Page 3 ended. I do have a problem with those who make unsubstantiated bigoted comments on the matter. "Why are you not allowing her the freedom to change her mind without beating her with a proverbial stick?" I haven't berated her for changing her mind, as I have no problem with that. What concerns me is the two-faced way she views things. She made substantial funds from her modelling career, and yet she wants to deny other women the right to do the same just because she's had some sort of epiphany. THAT is two-faced. The same goes for her membership of Climate Rush and her stand against democracy except when it suits her. stevo!!
  • Score: -27

8:48pm Wed 16 Jul 14

David523 says...

Oh yeah, "now no one wants to see my naked body, NOW I object to page 3, COINCIDENTALLY, of course". Talk about a pathetic has been attention seeker! And some women wonder why the anti page 3 campaign is not taken seriously!
Oh yeah, "now no one wants to see my naked body, NOW I object to page 3, COINCIDENTALLY, of course". Talk about a pathetic has been attention seeker! And some women wonder why the anti page 3 campaign is not taken seriously! David523
  • Score: -20

8:49pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Falmer Wizard says...

Does she not realise that if she gets any support it will result in many people becoming un-employed ,why else would anybody buy this comic?
Does she not realise that if she gets any support it will result in many people becoming un-employed ,why else would anybody buy this comic? Falmer Wizard
  • Score: -28

9:40pm Wed 16 Jul 14

stevo!! says...

“I was quite surprised that they still had it. I thought feminism and equality had taken care of it.”

Doesn't every woman have the right to make money from people admiring her body?

No-one forces them to do it, and it's perfectly legal.

If people don't want to read The Sun, no-one makes them.
“I was quite surprised that they still had it. I thought feminism and equality had taken care of it.” Doesn't every woman have the right to make money from people admiring her body? No-one forces them to do it, and it's perfectly legal. If people don't want to read The Sun, no-one makes them. stevo!!
  • Score: -16

10:10pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Vigilia says...

What an amazing reversal of democracy has occurred in this country of ours in the last two decades.
13.2% of the adult population is estimated to read the Sun.
The online petition has been signed by 0.39% of the adult population.
The MPs supporting the Early Day Motion number a mere 8.3%
Minority rules in UK today. OK.
Little wonder the proprietors of the Sun are raising two fingers to the vociferous minority.
What an amazing reversal of democracy has occurred in this country of ours in the last two decades. 13.2% of the adult population is estimated to read the Sun. The online petition has been signed by 0.39% of the adult population. The MPs supporting the Early Day Motion number a mere 8.3% Minority rules in UK today. OK. Little wonder the proprietors of the Sun are raising two fingers to the vociferous minority. Vigilia
  • Score: -3

12:04am Thu 17 Jul 14

Motorcyclist says...

You really are a sad little man Stevo. Please get a life and stop being so obnoxious. Thanks.
You really are a sad little man Stevo. Please get a life and stop being so obnoxious. Thanks. Motorcyclist
  • Score: 17

1:33am Thu 17 Jul 14

stevo!! says...

Motorcyclist wrote:
You really are a sad little man Stevo. Please get a life and stop being so obnoxious. Thanks.
So you admit you have no answer to my points.

You seem very proud of your lack of intelligence.....don
't be.
[quote][p][bold]Motorcyclist[/bold] wrote: You really are a sad little man Stevo. Please get a life and stop being so obnoxious. Thanks.[/p][/quote]So you admit you have no answer to my points. You seem very proud of your lack of intelligence.....don 't be. stevo!!
  • Score: -21

1:46am Thu 17 Jul 14

stevo!! says...

David523 wrote:
Oh yeah, "now no one wants to see my naked body, NOW I object to page 3, COINCIDENTALLY, of course". Talk about a pathetic has been attention seeker! And some women wonder why the anti page 3 campaign is not taken seriously!
She's a bitter old harridan, complaining that younger prettier women are making the money.

Funny how her change of heart didn't happen whilst she was modelling, but at least we now know that her intelligence at 17 wasn't sufficient for her to have made a comparable salary.

No brains are required to get your boobs out.......
[quote][p][bold]David523[/bold] wrote: Oh yeah, "now no one wants to see my naked body, NOW I object to page 3, COINCIDENTALLY, of course". Talk about a pathetic has been attention seeker! And some women wonder why the anti page 3 campaign is not taken seriously![/p][/quote]She's a bitter old harridan, complaining that younger prettier women are making the money. Funny how her change of heart didn't happen whilst she was modelling, but at least we now know that her intelligence at 17 wasn't sufficient for her to have made a comparable salary. No brains are required to get your boobs out....... stevo!!
  • Score: -21

1:53am Thu 17 Jul 14

stevo!! says...

Ruthie_X wrote:
fredaj wrote:
Well done Marina!
Yes well done Marina . I think other comments are demonstrating just how hard it is to put your name in the spotlight as a woman. Trying not to feed the trolls. You are entitled to be young and foolish, then change your opinion and stand up for what you believe in. Well done again.
But she believed in taking her clothes off for men to 'appreciate' her body.

And who is denigrating women? Quote them....IF you can.
[quote][p][bold]Ruthie_X[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fredaj[/bold] wrote: Well done Marina![/p][/quote]Yes well done Marina . I think other comments are demonstrating just how hard it is to put your name in the spotlight as a woman. Trying not to feed the trolls. You are entitled to be young and foolish, then change your opinion and stand up for what you believe in. Well done again.[/p][/quote]But she believed in taking her clothes off for men to 'appreciate' her body. And who is denigrating women? Quote them....IF you can. stevo!!
  • Score: -22

2:36am Thu 17 Jul 14

vogon1 says...

And the award for 'double standards' goes to ...
And the award for 'double standards' goes to ... vogon1
  • Score: 10

7:56am Thu 17 Jul 14

chrismilo says...

Be careful it don't go tits up !
Be careful it don't go tits up ! chrismilo
  • Score: 0

8:46am Thu 17 Jul 14

monkeymoo says...

Stevo!!
In a story about t1ts....
You really are the BIGGEST t1t on here!
Stevo!! In a story about t1ts.... You really are the BIGGEST t1t on here! monkeymoo
  • Score: 11

8:49am Thu 17 Jul 14

monkeymoo says...

stevo!! wrote:
David523 wrote:
Oh yeah, "now no one wants to see my naked body, NOW I object to page 3, COINCIDENTALLY, of course". Talk about a pathetic has been attention seeker! And some women wonder why the anti page 3 campaign is not taken seriously!
She's a bitter old harridan, complaining that younger prettier women are making the money.

Funny how her change of heart didn't happen whilst she was modelling, but at least we now know that her intelligence at 17 wasn't sufficient for her to have made a comparable salary.

No brains are required to get your boobs out.......
Exactly....
No brains needed. Your mother obviously got 'them' out in front of HMS illustrious.
After the 2000 sailors had 'enjoyed' their shore leave....you were born!
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]David523[/bold] wrote: Oh yeah, "now no one wants to see my naked body, NOW I object to page 3, COINCIDENTALLY, of course". Talk about a pathetic has been attention seeker! And some women wonder why the anti page 3 campaign is not taken seriously![/p][/quote]She's a bitter old harridan, complaining that younger prettier women are making the money. Funny how her change of heart didn't happen whilst she was modelling, but at least we now know that her intelligence at 17 wasn't sufficient for her to have made a comparable salary. No brains are required to get your boobs out.......[/p][/quote]Exactly.... No brains needed. Your mother obviously got 'them' out in front of HMS illustrious. After the 2000 sailors had 'enjoyed' their shore leave....you were born! monkeymoo
  • Score: -10

9:16am Thu 17 Jul 14

DaRMiH says...

Well done Marina, I'd never heard of you before, but can't but respect the stance you have taken. I'm guessing just about all of the morons making cheap points against you are middle age men regretting lives they never had. As a man I would very much like to see an end to the the normalisation of sexual exploitation in the media. The Page Three girls are not the most explicit example of sexploitation in the media... they are just the smiling face of it. Keep up the good work.
Well done Marina, I'd never heard of you before, but can't but respect the stance you have taken. I'm guessing just about all of the morons making cheap points against you are middle age men regretting lives they never had. As a man I would very much like to see an end to the the normalisation of sexual exploitation in the media. The Page Three girls are not the most explicit example of sexploitation in the media... they are just the smiling face of it. Keep up the good work. DaRMiH
  • Score: 29

9:33am Thu 17 Jul 14

stevo!! says...

monkeymoo wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
David523 wrote:
Oh yeah, "now no one wants to see my naked body, NOW I object to page 3, COINCIDENTALLY, of course". Talk about a pathetic has been attention seeker! And some women wonder why the anti page 3 campaign is not taken seriously!
She's a bitter old harridan, complaining that younger prettier women are making the money.

Funny how her change of heart didn't happen whilst she was modelling, but at least we now know that her intelligence at 17 wasn't sufficient for her to have made a comparable salary.

No brains are required to get your boobs out.......
Exactly....
No brains needed. Your mother obviously got 'them' out in front of HMS illustrious.
After the 2000 sailors had 'enjoyed' their shore leave....you were born!
Still dreaming of a woman you don't know and will never meet? Thinking about her naked breasts and her having sex?

Monkeypoo, you really have issues, lol
[quote][p][bold]monkeymoo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]David523[/bold] wrote: Oh yeah, "now no one wants to see my naked body, NOW I object to page 3, COINCIDENTALLY, of course". Talk about a pathetic has been attention seeker! And some women wonder why the anti page 3 campaign is not taken seriously![/p][/quote]She's a bitter old harridan, complaining that younger prettier women are making the money. Funny how her change of heart didn't happen whilst she was modelling, but at least we now know that her intelligence at 17 wasn't sufficient for her to have made a comparable salary. No brains are required to get your boobs out.......[/p][/quote]Exactly.... No brains needed. Your mother obviously got 'them' out in front of HMS illustrious. After the 2000 sailors had 'enjoyed' their shore leave....you were born![/p][/quote]Still dreaming of a woman you don't know and will never meet? Thinking about her naked breasts and her having sex? Monkeypoo, you really have issues, lol stevo!!
  • Score: -10

9:35am Thu 17 Jul 14

stevo!! says...

DaRMiH wrote:
Well done Marina, I'd never heard of you before, but can't but respect the stance you have taken. I'm guessing just about all of the morons making cheap points against you are middle age men regretting lives they never had. As a man I would very much like to see an end to the the normalisation of sexual exploitation in the media. The Page Three girls are not the most explicit example of sexploitation in the media... they are just the smiling face of it. Keep up the good work.
What 'cheap points'?

She's been exposed as being two-faced for reasons carefully explained. If those reasons were beyond your comprehension, don't blame the writers.
[quote][p][bold]DaRMiH[/bold] wrote: Well done Marina, I'd never heard of you before, but can't but respect the stance you have taken. I'm guessing just about all of the morons making cheap points against you are middle age men regretting lives they never had. As a man I would very much like to see an end to the the normalisation of sexual exploitation in the media. The Page Three girls are not the most explicit example of sexploitation in the media... they are just the smiling face of it. Keep up the good work.[/p][/quote]What 'cheap points'? She's been exposed as being two-faced for reasons carefully explained. If those reasons were beyond your comprehension, don't blame the writers. stevo!!
  • Score: -14

10:17am Thu 17 Jul 14

thevoiceoftruth says...

Good on her. Page 3 should have been dumped years ago, but there is far worse out there these days. I am more concerned about children seeing hard core **** on the internet.
Good on her. Page 3 should have been dumped years ago, but there is far worse out there these days. I am more concerned about children seeing hard core **** on the internet. thevoiceoftruth
  • Score: 8

12:10pm Thu 17 Jul 14

Skidrow says...

HMS Illustrious has a crew inc 366 Fleet Air Arm of just over 1,000 not 2000.
HMS Illustrious has a crew inc 366 Fleet Air Arm of just over 1,000 not 2000. Skidrow
  • Score: -2

1:00pm Thu 17 Jul 14

fredaj says...

Vigilia wrote:
What an amazing reversal of democracy has occurred in this country of ours in the last two decades.
13.2% of the adult population is estimated to read the Sun.
The online petition has been signed by 0.39% of the adult population.
The MPs supporting the Early Day Motion number a mere 8.3%
Minority rules in UK today. OK.
Little wonder the proprietors of the Sun are raising two fingers to the vociferous minority.
How have you jumped from 2 million copies sold to a readership of 13.2%?

The UK adult population is around 50 million which would mean a readership of 4%.
[quote][p][bold]Vigilia[/bold] wrote: What an amazing reversal of democracy has occurred in this country of ours in the last two decades. 13.2% of the adult population is estimated to read the Sun. The online petition has been signed by 0.39% of the adult population. The MPs supporting the Early Day Motion number a mere 8.3% Minority rules in UK today. OK. Little wonder the proprietors of the Sun are raising two fingers to the vociferous minority.[/p][/quote]How have you jumped from 2 million copies sold to a readership of 13.2%? The UK adult population is around 50 million which would mean a readership of 4%. fredaj
  • Score: 2

3:22pm Thu 17 Jul 14

John Steed says...

the only exploitation was of the poor men who had to look at these bodies 6 days a week whilst working toward the sports section,
the only exploitation was of the poor men who had to look at these bodies 6 days a week whilst working toward the sports section, John Steed
  • Score: -3

4:16pm Thu 17 Jul 14

NickBrt says...

Do they still have the page 7 fella? Bet the feminists used to look at them!
Do they still have the page 7 fella? Bet the feminists used to look at them! NickBrt
  • Score: -2

6:05pm Thu 17 Jul 14

MammaBear says...

I don't know anything about Marina Pepper, her former career, politics or the rest of it. And I am not a "man-hater", uber-feminist, or against freedom of the press.
But one thing I do believe in strongly is that simple respect is the foundation for strong people, strong families, and a strong, prosperous society. Page 3 undermines respect, and makes hypocrites of us all in front of our children. It is not suitable material for a "family newspaper" (which I believe is how the Sun refers to itself). We tell our young people how demeaning, damaging, and dangerous it would be for them to take pictures of themselves without clothing on and publish it on social media. We tell them that no decent person who truly respected or cared about them would try to get them to do that. It makes me really sad and ashamed when I take my little 4 year old girl into a newsagent to get a CBeebies magazine, and she has to reach over the pictures on the front of the Sunday Sport to get it. It tells her that either 1. I am a liar, and it's fine to get attention and money from sharing around pictures of those bits, or 2. our society is full of people who are not decent and have no respect or care for her and others, or 3. both. And I feel really sad and angry when I am volunteering with the Rainbow Guides (5-7 year old girls), and when we line the tables with newspaper for messy painting activities, there are the Page 3 girls pouting out at us and showing their pants and bare breasts off, when we have warned our daughters and sons they must never let anyone look at them or touch them in those places. It makes such a mockery of honesty and responsibility. These newspapers are donated by people that these little girls trust and look up to as the source of the truth about themselves and the world! Please, can we stop confusing our children?! Sometimes they cannot hear what we say because our actions are shouting too loudly in their ears.
Where mutual respect abounds, you get honesty, responsibility, civility, productivity, loyalty, understanding, tolerance and strength. Sadly, we seem to be lacking a lot of those qualities in our homes and society right now, because our commitment to respect has become feeble. Showing some unity and courage as a people in relegating Page 3 to the dustbin of history would be a nice step in the right direction.
Rant over, but please think about it. You may be mature enough to put Page 3 models into perspective,to know that it's not really "news", it's just a cheap marketing ploy of a powerful media mogul, another way to try to win our custom and part with our money. And that it's not really normal or typical social behaviour for young people to walk around in public in just pants, or to get paid money to pose for photos that way. In fact, you are probably mature and experienced enough in life to know that very few women even have that kind of physique without surgery. It's all a bit of make-believe, a nod to the baseness of the human spirit, a bit of greed and avarice.
But are the young children around you mature enough to get that? The children who see the Page 3 you left behind on buses and trains, in cafes, at the newsagents, at Cub Scouts, or Rainbow Guides, or in your home?
There are plenty of publications with photos in them of nude or semi-nude people in sexually provocative poses for adults to buy, why do we need it on the lower shelves or in "family newpapers"?
I don't know anything about Marina Pepper, her former career, politics or the rest of it. And I am not a "man-hater", uber-feminist, or against freedom of the press. But one thing I do believe in strongly is that simple respect is the foundation for strong people, strong families, and a strong, prosperous society. Page 3 undermines respect, and makes hypocrites of us all in front of our children. It is not suitable material for a "family newspaper" (which I believe is how the Sun refers to itself). We tell our young people how demeaning, damaging, and dangerous it would be for them to take pictures of themselves without clothing on and publish it on social media. We tell them that no decent person who truly respected or cared about them would try to get them to do that. It makes me really sad and ashamed when I take my little 4 year old girl into a newsagent to get a CBeebies magazine, and she has to reach over the pictures on the front of the Sunday Sport to get it. It tells her that either 1. I am a liar, and it's fine to get attention and money from sharing around pictures of those bits, or 2. our society is full of people who are not decent and have no respect or care for her and others, or 3. both. And I feel really sad and angry when I am volunteering with the Rainbow Guides (5-7 year old girls), and when we line the tables with newspaper for messy painting activities, there are the Page 3 girls pouting out at us and showing their pants and bare breasts off, when we have warned our daughters and sons they must never let anyone look at them or touch them in those places. It makes such a mockery of honesty and responsibility. These newspapers are donated by people that these little girls trust and look up to as the source of the truth about themselves and the world! Please, can we stop confusing our children?! Sometimes they cannot hear what we say because our actions are shouting too loudly in their ears. Where mutual respect abounds, you get honesty, responsibility, civility, productivity, loyalty, understanding, tolerance and strength. Sadly, we seem to be lacking a lot of those qualities in our homes and society right now, because our commitment to respect has become feeble. Showing some unity and courage as a people in relegating Page 3 to the dustbin of history would be a nice step in the right direction. Rant over, but please think about it. You may be mature enough to put Page 3 models into perspective,to know that it's not really "news", it's just a cheap marketing ploy of a powerful media mogul, another way to try to win our custom and part with our money. And that it's not really normal or typical social behaviour for young people to walk around in public in just pants, or to get paid money to pose for photos that way. In fact, you are probably mature and experienced enough in life to know that very few women even have that kind of physique without surgery. It's all a bit of make-believe, a nod to the baseness of the human spirit, a bit of greed and avarice. But are the young children around you mature enough to get that? The children who see the Page 3 you left behind on buses and trains, in cafes, at the newsagents, at Cub Scouts, or Rainbow Guides, or in your home? There are plenty of publications with photos in them of nude or semi-nude people in sexually provocative poses for adults to buy, why do we need it on the lower shelves or in "family newpapers"? MammaBear
  • Score: 9

6:16pm Thu 17 Jul 14

NickBrt says...

She modelled for Playboy, is she campaigning against that too?
She modelled for Playboy, is she campaigning against that too? NickBrt
  • Score: 0

7:12pm Thu 17 Jul 14

Vigilia says...

fredaj wrote:
Vigilia wrote:
What an amazing reversal of democracy has occurred in this country of ours in the last two decades.
13.2% of the adult population is estimated to read the Sun.
The online petition has been signed by 0.39% of the adult population.
The MPs supporting the Early Day Motion number a mere 8.3%
Minority rules in UK today. OK.
Little wonder the proprietors of the Sun are raising two fingers to the vociferous minority.
How have you jumped from 2 million copies sold to a readership of 13.2%?

The UK adult population is around 50 million which would mean a readership of 4%.
Please read my post again and note the precise wording
[quote][p][bold]fredaj[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Vigilia[/bold] wrote: What an amazing reversal of democracy has occurred in this country of ours in the last two decades. 13.2% of the adult population is estimated to read the Sun. The online petition has been signed by 0.39% of the adult population. The MPs supporting the Early Day Motion number a mere 8.3% Minority rules in UK today. OK. Little wonder the proprietors of the Sun are raising two fingers to the vociferous minority.[/p][/quote]How have you jumped from 2 million copies sold to a readership of 13.2%? The UK adult population is around 50 million which would mean a readership of 4%.[/p][/quote]Please read my post again and note the precise wording Vigilia
  • Score: 0

7:23pm Thu 17 Jul 14

fredaj says...

Vigilia wrote:
fredaj wrote:
Vigilia wrote:
What an amazing reversal of democracy has occurred in this country of ours in the last two decades.
13.2% of the adult population is estimated to read the Sun.
The online petition has been signed by 0.39% of the adult population.
The MPs supporting the Early Day Motion number a mere 8.3%
Minority rules in UK today. OK.
Little wonder the proprietors of the Sun are raising two fingers to the vociferous minority.
How have you jumped from 2 million copies sold to a readership of 13.2%?

The UK adult population is around 50 million which would mean a readership of 4%.
Please read my post again and note the precise wording
Your use of the word estimate?

Out of interest, how have you estimated a 13.2% (note the .2 there!) readership?
[quote][p][bold]Vigilia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fredaj[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Vigilia[/bold] wrote: What an amazing reversal of democracy has occurred in this country of ours in the last two decades. 13.2% of the adult population is estimated to read the Sun. The online petition has been signed by 0.39% of the adult population. The MPs supporting the Early Day Motion number a mere 8.3% Minority rules in UK today. OK. Little wonder the proprietors of the Sun are raising two fingers to the vociferous minority.[/p][/quote]How have you jumped from 2 million copies sold to a readership of 13.2%? The UK adult population is around 50 million which would mean a readership of 4%.[/p][/quote]Please read my post again and note the precise wording[/p][/quote]Your use of the word estimate? Out of interest, how have you estimated a 13.2% (note the .2 there!) readership? fredaj
  • Score: -2

7:26pm Thu 17 Jul 14

fredaj says...

thevoiceoftruth wrote:
Good on her. Page 3 should have been dumped years ago, but there is far worse out there these days. I am more concerned about children seeing hard core **** on the internet.
Page three is as, if not more, damaging as it is day-to-day sexism which affects the lives of all women in the UK, everyday.
[quote][p][bold]thevoiceoftruth[/bold] wrote: Good on her. Page 3 should have been dumped years ago, but there is far worse out there these days. I am more concerned about children seeing hard core **** on the internet.[/p][/quote]Page three is as, if not more, damaging as it is day-to-day sexism which affects the lives of all women in the UK, everyday. fredaj
  • Score: -1

8:01pm Thu 17 Jul 14

Vigilia says...

fredaj wrote:
Vigilia wrote:
fredaj wrote:
Vigilia wrote:
What an amazing reversal of democracy has occurred in this country of ours in the last two decades.
13.2% of the adult population is estimated to read the Sun.
The online petition has been signed by 0.39% of the adult population.
The MPs supporting the Early Day Motion number a mere 8.3%
Minority rules in UK today. OK.
Little wonder the proprietors of the Sun are raising two fingers to the vociferous minority.
How have you jumped from 2 million copies sold to a readership of 13.2%?

The UK adult population is around 50 million which would mean a readership of 4%.
Please read my post again and note the precise wording
Your use of the word estimate?

Out of interest, how have you estimated a 13.2% (note the .2 there!) readership?
No, "read by" not "bought by." I'm quoting the industry's own independent analyst figures.
I read headlines & features in the New York Times, Times, Telegraph and Independent most days and never buy a paper.
[quote][p][bold]fredaj[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Vigilia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fredaj[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Vigilia[/bold] wrote: What an amazing reversal of democracy has occurred in this country of ours in the last two decades. 13.2% of the adult population is estimated to read the Sun. The online petition has been signed by 0.39% of the adult population. The MPs supporting the Early Day Motion number a mere 8.3% Minority rules in UK today. OK. Little wonder the proprietors of the Sun are raising two fingers to the vociferous minority.[/p][/quote]How have you jumped from 2 million copies sold to a readership of 13.2%? The UK adult population is around 50 million which would mean a readership of 4%.[/p][/quote]Please read my post again and note the precise wording[/p][/quote]Your use of the word estimate? Out of interest, how have you estimated a 13.2% (note the .2 there!) readership?[/p][/quote]No, "read by" not "bought by." I'm quoting the industry's own independent analyst figures. I read headlines & features in the New York Times, Times, Telegraph and Independent most days and never buy a paper. Vigilia
  • Score: 2

8:58pm Thu 17 Jul 14

stevo!! says...

fredaj wrote:
thevoiceoftruth wrote:
Good on her. Page 3 should have been dumped years ago, but there is far worse out there these days. I am more concerned about children seeing hard core **** on the internet.
Page three is as, if not more, damaging as it is day-to-day sexism which affects the lives of all women in the UK, everyday.
In what way is Page 3 'damaging'?

"day-to-day sexism"

And how is this 'damaging' women?

Are men 'damaged' by sexism which they encounter?
[quote][p][bold]fredaj[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thevoiceoftruth[/bold] wrote: Good on her. Page 3 should have been dumped years ago, but there is far worse out there these days. I am more concerned about children seeing hard core **** on the internet.[/p][/quote]Page three is as, if not more, damaging as it is day-to-day sexism which affects the lives of all women in the UK, everyday.[/p][/quote]In what way is Page 3 'damaging'? "day-to-day sexism" And how is this 'damaging' women? Are men 'damaged' by sexism which they encounter? stevo!!
  • Score: -2

9:52pm Thu 17 Jul 14

Broadwater Juice says...

Sentiments are fine but maybe Ms Pepper ought to get her own house in order first and deal with her family member who is a shameless bully who has tormented many.
Sentiments are fine but maybe Ms Pepper ought to get her own house in order first and deal with her family member who is a shameless bully who has tormented many. Broadwater Juice
  • Score: 1

12:21am Fri 18 Jul 14

MammaBear says...

stevo!! wrote:
fredaj wrote:
thevoiceoftruth wrote:
Good on her. Page 3 should have been dumped years ago, but there is far worse out there these days. I am more concerned about children seeing hard core **** on the internet.
Page three is as, if not more, damaging as it is day-to-day sexism which affects the lives of all women in the UK, everyday.
In what way is Page 3 'damaging'?

"day-to-day sexism"

And how is this 'damaging' women?

Are men 'damaged' by sexism which they encounter?
Stevo!! I think you've asked a really good question. I hope you don't mind if I share an answer from my point of view. In my opinion, men are seriously effected and harmed by day-to-day sexism, both sexism directed towards men and sexism directed towards women. It is challenging as a parent of sons to see men so devalued and unappreciated in society, constantly portrayed in film and television as being morally weak, brutish, untrustworthy, selfish, surplus to requirement, or just plain stupid or ridiculous. It hurts me that my young sons see this, and absorb these messages directed towards them. It's as if they are supposed to be ashamed or apologetic for being born boys, or that they must bear a burden of personal responsibility of all the evil of maleness ever perpetrated upon the history of the world. And then there are the unfair pressures and expectations that are sometimes placed on boys to fit a certain image; they are "supposed" to be good at science, like cars and football, be driven by voracious sexual appetites, never show their feelings, and be tough and not admit that anything effects them emotionally or causes them insecurity or pain. I find it sad that in order to address inequality, some people seem to feel justified in taking things to an extreme in actually denigrating and dismissing men just because they are men, and therefore their opinions and feelings must be invalid and flawed by virtue of their masculinity. If it weren't so damaging to our families and communities, it would be almost funny that they can't seem to see that this is just as unequal a social dynamic as the one they seek to correct. It's especially tragic to see husbands and wives starved for validation, so busy defending themselves against unfairness that they never get around to gaining some understanding, compassion, and respect for one another. Yes, at the bottom of it all, this is a respect issue. Our young men are also damaged by the day-to-day sexism directed toward women. They are given very confusing messages that they can't possibly live up to or make sense of, such as "you are responsible to protect your sisters from harm", and "your sisters are silly, useless, and there to be dominated". Or how about "mum knows best", but then "look at that fat, old hag, what a cow". "Never let anyone touch you in an inappropriate way, or accept money or gifts from someone who wants to take pictures of you with your clothes off" and "Cor, look at this one! It's ok, she got paid for it". Basically, it all causes them shame, doubt, confusion and a lot of the time, anger. They can see that things aren't fair, that they are unappreciated and unaccepted as they are, that a lot of things they are being told simply don't match the way grown-ups are behaving, and they just want to know how to be good men, but our culture of blaming, materialism, self-promotion, entitlement, and disrespect is not helping them do that. Just a final note... Page 3 may seem to some like such a small thing, a bit risqué maybe, but no big deal. But **** addiction is becoming a huge problem in our society, for boys and girls alike, but the young men especially. Just like people get addicted to the rush of gambling, people can get addicted to the chemical high of seeing a sexually exciting image. I know someone who nearly destroyed every relationship in his life, his career, everything - because of a **** addiction. And no, it didn't start because of something on a computer screen... it started when he was a schoolboy doing a paper round. Guess which paper? Page 3 and the "day to day sexism" it perpetuates, and the cultural apathy that allows it to carry on unquestioned is harming people; boys and girls, men and women. You can be sure of that.
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fredaj[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thevoiceoftruth[/bold] wrote: Good on her. Page 3 should have been dumped years ago, but there is far worse out there these days. I am more concerned about children seeing hard core **** on the internet.[/p][/quote]Page three is as, if not more, damaging as it is day-to-day sexism which affects the lives of all women in the UK, everyday.[/p][/quote]In what way is Page 3 'damaging'? "day-to-day sexism" And how is this 'damaging' women? Are men 'damaged' by sexism which they encounter?[/p][/quote]Stevo!! I think you've asked a really good question. I hope you don't mind if I share an answer from my point of view. In my opinion, men are seriously effected and harmed by day-to-day sexism, both sexism directed towards men and sexism directed towards women. It is challenging as a parent of sons to see men so devalued and unappreciated in society, constantly portrayed in film and television as being morally weak, brutish, untrustworthy, selfish, surplus to requirement, or just plain stupid or ridiculous. It hurts me that my young sons see this, and absorb these messages directed towards them. It's as if they are supposed to be ashamed or apologetic for being born boys, or that they must bear a burden of personal responsibility of all the evil of maleness ever perpetrated upon the history of the world. And then there are the unfair pressures and expectations that are sometimes placed on boys to fit a certain image; they are "supposed" to be good at science, like cars and football, be driven by voracious sexual appetites, never show their feelings, and be tough and not admit that anything effects them emotionally or causes them insecurity or pain. I find it sad that in order to address inequality, some people seem to feel justified in taking things to an extreme in actually denigrating and dismissing men just because they are men, and therefore their opinions and feelings must be invalid and flawed by virtue of their masculinity. If it weren't so damaging to our families and communities, it would be almost funny that they can't seem to see that this is just as unequal a social dynamic as the one they seek to correct. It's especially tragic to see husbands and wives starved for validation, so busy defending themselves against unfairness that they never get around to gaining some understanding, compassion, and respect for one another. Yes, at the bottom of it all, this is a respect issue. Our young men are also damaged by the day-to-day sexism directed toward women. They are given very confusing messages that they can't possibly live up to or make sense of, such as "you are responsible to protect your sisters from harm", and "your sisters are silly, useless, and there to be dominated". Or how about "mum knows best", but then "look at that fat, old hag, what a cow". "Never let anyone touch you in an inappropriate way, or accept money or gifts from someone who wants to take pictures of you with your clothes off" and "Cor, look at this one! It's ok, she got paid for it". Basically, it all causes them shame, doubt, confusion and a lot of the time, anger. They can see that things aren't fair, that they are unappreciated and unaccepted as they are, that a lot of things they are being told simply don't match the way grown-ups are behaving, and they just want to know how to be good men, but our culture of blaming, materialism, self-promotion, entitlement, and disrespect is not helping them do that. Just a final note... Page 3 may seem to some like such a small thing, a bit risqué maybe, but no big deal. But **** addiction is becoming a huge problem in our society, for boys and girls alike, but the young men especially. Just like people get addicted to the rush of gambling, people can get addicted to the chemical high of seeing a sexually exciting image. I know someone who nearly destroyed every relationship in his life, his career, everything - because of a **** addiction. And no, it didn't start because of something on a computer screen... it started when he was a schoolboy doing a paper round. Guess which paper? Page 3 and the "day to day sexism" it perpetuates, and the cultural apathy that allows it to carry on unquestioned is harming people; boys and girls, men and women. You can be sure of that. MammaBear
  • Score: -1

7:51am Fri 18 Jul 14

hoveguyactually says...

Yet another boring old pro-feminist harpy opens her trap. Was she forced or coerced into posing? Of course not. Was she happy to take the money? of course she was, just as all those other young girls are who are featured on Page 3 are. If you don't like it, don't read it. But stop dictating, along with the other interfering "do gooders", with nothing more important to think about, on how we should be leading our lives. The UK is sinking under the weight of political correctness and repression, not helped by such idiots as Marina Pepper and La Lucas.

How typical to equate the ghastly Jimmy Savile with the page 3 models, and how ludicrous.
Yet another boring old pro-feminist harpy opens her trap. Was she forced or coerced into posing? Of course not. Was she happy to take the money? of course she was, just as all those other young girls are who are featured on Page 3 are. If you don't like it, don't read it. But stop dictating, along with the other interfering "do gooders", with nothing more important to think about, on how we should be leading our lives. The UK is sinking under the weight of political correctness and repression, not helped by such idiots as Marina Pepper and La Lucas. How typical to equate the ghastly Jimmy Savile with the page 3 models, and how ludicrous. hoveguyactually
  • Score: 1

12:41pm Fri 18 Jul 14

MammaBear says...

hoveguyactually wrote:
Yet another boring old pro-feminist harpy opens her trap. Was she forced or coerced into posing? Of course not. Was she happy to take the money? of course she was, just as all those other young girls are who are featured on Page 3 are. If you don't like it, don't read it. But stop dictating, along with the other interfering "do gooders", with nothing more important to think about, on how we should be leading our lives. The UK is sinking under the weight of political correctness and repression, not helped by such idiots as Marina Pepper and La Lucas.

How typical to equate the ghastly Jimmy Savile with the page 3 models, and how ludicrous.
hoveguyactually, I wanted to address some of your remarks because I found them to be thought-provoking. But I want you to know that I'm not trying to persuade you to agree with me; it sounds like you're pretty confident in your opinion and have your mind made up. You're entitled to your opinion, and I assume you've got some pretty good reasons for feeling the way you do. I'm not very good at keeping my comments brief, so feel free to just skip it if you're not interested in my point of view. I guess I'm sharing my thoughts here because there might be someone reading this who wants to look into all angles and hear all sides. I've got a really different perspective than you, because of the things I've experienced in life. Can't comment on any of your remarks regarding Marina Pepper; I have no idea who she is or what she's like. Never heard of her before I saw this article. On the topic of the loss of individual freedoms because of micro-managing legislation and political correctness, I'm more or less in agreement with you there. Most of the time, I feel like people should just be given all the information they need, and then be allowed to govern themselves. So why do I feel like the classification of Page 3 as "suitable for all ages", and its availability on the lower shelves needs to be re-examined? There are a few reasons, but you've hit upon one of the big ones in your comment. I don't feel like we have been given all the information of the dangers of how these sexually provocative photos can effect people. You said, "How typical to equate the ghastly Jimmy Savile with the page 3 models, and how ludicrous." I'm sure this statement is reasonable to you, and one based on your experiences in life. You have probably never experienced a insatiable need to have a "better high", or felt a compulsion to harm someone else just because of admiring a Page 3 photo. But that doesn't mean that other people don't. And you might not have been attacked by someone under the influences of a **** problem, but I have. If you don't want to know the details, don't read on. I grew up in the 70s. When I was about 10 or 11 I was doing my brother's paper round for him, when a car pulled up to the kerb and a man rolled down the window to ask directions to a house. Being a child brought up to be polite, helpful, and respectful, I approached the driver's side to assist him. I might have even called him "sir". He then exposed himself to me and asked me to perform a sexual act. On the seat next to him was a magazine open to a page of pictures of naked women. Just to make things clear, there was no way he could have mistaken me for an older girl. I was a short chubby kid, had wild hair and freckles, and was wearing my brother's hand-me-down jeans and it was winter so I was in a jacket, hat and scarf. There was nothing about ME that would inspire his sexual excitement. It was all in the PICTURES he was looking at. I was able to shout "No!" and run away from the car, despite my legs shaking so much I felt I could hardly stand. I did have to sit down and cry on the step of the next house, and was so terrified and sick with shock that I don't know how I found the strength to finish the round and get myself home. I was too ashamed to tell my parents what had happened, too embarrassed to repeat the words that that man had spoken to me and describe what I had seen, and felt it would be a disgrace upon my family if police were seen coming to the house. So I never said anything. To my horror, a few days later my friend was attacked and nearly dragged into a car on her way to school by the same man in the same car. I wonder if he had the same sexy pictures, of young, nude women on the seat next to him? You might be able to bet on a horse, or enjoy a pint without it destroying your life, but you probably know some people who couldn't. You probably know some people, as I do, who have nearly destroyed their health, their livelihood, and the lives of all their loved ones, because of an addictive response to the "high" of drink or gambling. Scientists who are studying **** addicts are telling us that viewing sexually provocative images causes a chemical response and brain activity in some people that is as powerful, and just as addictive, as a hit of crack cocaine. We recognise the potential risks to a person's safety, well-being, and ability to be productive in society in connection with gambling and alcohol consumption, and have put age restrictions in place to allow young people to mature and have sufficient time to learn of the potential consequences before they make the decision to partake. Page 3 should fall into the same category of materials, and has no place on the lower shelves, on buses, trains, cafe tables, or in a "family newspaper". If anyone has read this to the end, thanks for your time; I hope this has given you another side of the issue to consider.
[quote][p][bold]hoveguyactually[/bold] wrote: Yet another boring old pro-feminist harpy opens her trap. Was she forced or coerced into posing? Of course not. Was she happy to take the money? of course she was, just as all those other young girls are who are featured on Page 3 are. If you don't like it, don't read it. But stop dictating, along with the other interfering "do gooders", with nothing more important to think about, on how we should be leading our lives. The UK is sinking under the weight of political correctness and repression, not helped by such idiots as Marina Pepper and La Lucas. How typical to equate the ghastly Jimmy Savile with the page 3 models, and how ludicrous.[/p][/quote]hoveguyactually, I wanted to address some of your remarks because I found them to be thought-provoking. But I want you to know that I'm not trying to persuade you to agree with me; it sounds like you're pretty confident in your opinion and have your mind made up. You're entitled to your opinion, and I assume you've got some pretty good reasons for feeling the way you do. I'm not very good at keeping my comments brief, so feel free to just skip it if you're not interested in my point of view. I guess I'm sharing my thoughts here because there might be someone reading this who wants to look into all angles and hear all sides. I've got a really different perspective than you, because of the things I've experienced in life. Can't comment on any of your remarks regarding Marina Pepper; I have no idea who she is or what she's like. Never heard of her before I saw this article. On the topic of the loss of individual freedoms because of micro-managing legislation and political correctness, I'm more or less in agreement with you there. Most of the time, I feel like people should just be given all the information they need, and then be allowed to govern themselves. So why do I feel like the classification of Page 3 as "suitable for all ages", and its availability on the lower shelves needs to be re-examined? There are a few reasons, but you've hit upon one of the big ones in your comment. I don't feel like we have been given all the information of the dangers of how these sexually provocative photos can effect people. You said, "How typical to equate the ghastly Jimmy Savile with the page 3 models, and how ludicrous." I'm sure this statement is reasonable to you, and one based on your experiences in life. You have probably never experienced a insatiable need to have a "better high", or felt a compulsion to harm someone else just because of admiring a Page 3 photo. But that doesn't mean that other people don't. And you might not have been attacked by someone under the influences of a **** problem, but I have. If you don't want to know the details, don't read on. I grew up in the 70s. When I was about 10 or 11 I was doing my brother's paper round for him, when a car pulled up to the kerb and a man rolled down the window to ask directions to a house. Being a child brought up to be polite, helpful, and respectful, I approached the driver's side to assist him. I might have even called him "sir". He then exposed himself to me and asked me to perform a sexual act. On the seat next to him was a magazine open to a page of pictures of naked women. Just to make things clear, there was no way he could have mistaken me for an older girl. I was a short chubby kid, had wild hair and freckles, and was wearing my brother's hand-me-down jeans and it was winter so I was in a jacket, hat and scarf. There was nothing about ME that would inspire his sexual excitement. It was all in the PICTURES he was looking at. I was able to shout "No!" and run away from the car, despite my legs shaking so much I felt I could hardly stand. I did have to sit down and cry on the step of the next house, and was so terrified and sick with shock that I don't know how I found the strength to finish the round and get myself home. I was too ashamed to tell my parents what had happened, too embarrassed to repeat the words that that man had spoken to me and describe what I had seen, and felt it would be a disgrace upon my family if police were seen coming to the house. So I never said anything. To my horror, a few days later my friend was attacked and nearly dragged into a car on her way to school by the same man in the same car. I wonder if he had the same sexy pictures, of young, nude women on the seat next to him? You might be able to bet on a horse, or enjoy a pint without it destroying your life, but you probably know some people who couldn't. You probably know some people, as I do, who have nearly destroyed their health, their livelihood, and the lives of all their loved ones, because of an addictive response to the "high" of drink or gambling. Scientists who are studying **** addicts are telling us that viewing sexually provocative images causes a chemical response and brain activity in some people that is as powerful, and just as addictive, as a hit of crack cocaine. We recognise the potential risks to a person's safety, well-being, and ability to be productive in society in connection with gambling and alcohol consumption, and have put age restrictions in place to allow young people to mature and have sufficient time to learn of the potential consequences before they make the decision to partake. Page 3 should fall into the same category of materials, and has no place on the lower shelves, on buses, trains, cafe tables, or in a "family newspaper". If anyone has read this to the end, thanks for your time; I hope this has given you another side of the issue to consider. MammaBear
  • Score: 3

1:30pm Fri 18 Jul 14

FatherTed11 says...

lol boobs
lol boobs FatherTed11
  • Score: 0

4:51pm Fri 18 Jul 14

tug509 says...

Did it ever occur to those who are anti page 3 to ask the models what they want ? .There are far too many people who think they know whats best for others .
Did it ever occur to those who are anti page 3 to ask the models what they want ? .There are far too many people who think they know whats best for others . tug509
  • Score: 0

6:38pm Fri 18 Jul 14

stevo!! says...

" Scientists who are studying **** addicts are telling us that viewing sexually provocative images causes a chemical response and brain activity in some people that is as powerful, and just as addictive, as a hit of crack cocaine. "

Wasn't that common knowledge already?

Some people only look at such images in order to trigger those chemicals.......or so I'm told.
" Scientists who are studying **** addicts are telling us that viewing sexually provocative images causes a chemical response and brain activity in some people that is as powerful, and just as addictive, as a hit of crack cocaine. " Wasn't that common knowledge already? Some people only look at such images in order to trigger those chemicals.......or so I'm told. stevo!!
  • Score: -1

10:06pm Fri 18 Jul 14

Levent says...

fredaj wrote:
Well done Marina!
I know how you easily offended "libs" fight for equality, so does the same therefore apply to gay magazines? Or would that be too anti-pc for you lot?
[quote][p][bold]fredaj[/bold] wrote: Well done Marina![/p][/quote]I know how you easily offended "libs" fight for equality, so does the same therefore apply to gay magazines? Or would that be too anti-pc for you lot? Levent
  • Score: 0

10:27am Sat 19 Jul 14

MammaBear says...

stevo!! wrote:
" Scientists who are studying **** addicts are telling us that viewing sexually provocative images causes a chemical response and brain activity in some people that is as powerful, and just as addictive, as a hit of crack cocaine. "

Wasn't that common knowledge already?

Some people only look at such images in order to trigger those chemicals.......or so I'm told.
I guess that's my point, Stevo!! . If it is commonly known that these images are so powerful that they are potentially addictive, then how can we justify it being on the lower shelves by saying "Oh, it's just a harmless bit of fun". Which is it? Crack cocaine or fruit pastilles? The scientific evidence shows that it's a Class A drug, and not a children's sweet. It should be on the higher shelves, with all the other adult material, and not in a newspaper that advertises Disneyland and gives away toy store vouchers.
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: " Scientists who are studying **** addicts are telling us that viewing sexually provocative images causes a chemical response and brain activity in some people that is as powerful, and just as addictive, as a hit of crack cocaine. " Wasn't that common knowledge already? Some people only look at such images in order to trigger those chemicals.......or so I'm told.[/p][/quote]I guess that's my point, Stevo!! . If it is commonly known that these images are so powerful that they are potentially addictive, then how can we justify it being on the lower shelves by saying "Oh, it's just a harmless bit of fun". Which is it? Crack cocaine or fruit pastilles? The scientific evidence shows that it's a Class A drug, and not a children's sweet. It should be on the higher shelves, with all the other adult material, and not in a newspaper that advertises Disneyland and gives away toy store vouchers. MammaBear
  • Score: -1

10:46am Sat 19 Jul 14

MammaBear says...

The petition is not to call in the government to take action, it's a grass-roots petition directly to the bosses of the Sun. We're just asking them to re-consider who their target market is. If it's the average householder with children and grandchildren, and they are looking to be in daily circulation at hospitals, cafes, schools, etc then could they please consider the appropriateness of their content, and its suitability to those venues. And as a mother, I am personally asking the bosses at the Sun to consider the harm those pictures do in our society, and to behave in a responsible way. When the topless photos started in 1970, there were a lot of things we didn't know about, that we do know now. We didn't have seatbelts back then, no lung cancer warnings on cigarettes, children played slot machines in the arcade on the prom, there were no mandatory motorbike helmets, and that nice Jimmy Savile was playing Rolf Harris' "Two Little Boys"on Radio 1. I know some people feel nostalgic about that era, a golden age when we were all carefree and unhindered by responsibility. Perhaps they see the tradition of the "Page 3 girl" as the last vestige of that earlier, simpler time, when a man could smoke his pipe on the train and enjoy looking at a picture of a beautiful, topless 16-year-old girl in peace. But we've learned a lot since then, and not all of it has been pretty or comfortable. There was a dark underbelly of that time which in many cases is only now coming into the light of day. One huge part of the problem was all of us refusing to acknowledge the harm that was being done, we just didn't want to see it, didn't want to hear the voices of those who were telling us that things were not as innocent or carefree as we wanted to believe. I not trying to criticise anyone, or force anyone to do anything. I'm just letting people know that pictures like the ones on Page 3 and the culture they create has personally harmed me in a real way. I'm not talking about offending my sensibilities or principles, I'm talking about actually placing me in mortal danger, destroying my confidence, and killing off my childhood. I'm letting people know that I am one of many, the very, very many that have been or are now being harmed in this way. I am just asking people to think about their sons and daughters, their grandchildren, their kid sisters... and ask ourselves what is more important to us: is it making a small compromise so that we can have a society that is a great place for our loved ones to live, a place where they have a chance of doing a paper round without being attacked; or is it being able to maintain a familiar habit of reaching down to the bottom shelf instead of up to the top shelf to look at a topless model? Because I don't think that people who like the Page 3 are bad people, I think they are good, decent people who just honestly don't realise that it hurts anyone, and can't imagine how it could. So I'm trying to let them know how it has hurt me and others, and I am asking if we can please agree to make a little change, given what we know now. We've improved a whole lot of things in the way we live since 1970, can't this be another one of those things?
The petition is not to call in the government to take action, it's a grass-roots petition directly to the bosses of the Sun. We're just asking them to re-consider who their target market is. If it's the average householder with children and grandchildren, and they are looking to be in daily circulation at hospitals, cafes, schools, etc then could they please consider the appropriateness of their content, and its suitability to those venues. And as a mother, I am personally asking the bosses at the Sun to consider the harm those pictures do in our society, and to behave in a responsible way. When the topless photos started in 1970, there were a lot of things we didn't know about, that we do know now. We didn't have seatbelts back then, no lung cancer warnings on cigarettes, children played slot machines in the arcade on the prom, there were no mandatory motorbike helmets, and that nice Jimmy Savile was playing Rolf Harris' "Two Little Boys"on Radio 1. I know some people feel nostalgic about that era, a golden age when we were all carefree and unhindered by responsibility. Perhaps they see the tradition of the "Page 3 girl" as the last vestige of that earlier, simpler time, when a man could smoke his pipe on the train and enjoy looking at a picture of a beautiful, topless 16-year-old girl in peace. But we've learned a lot since then, and not all of it has been pretty or comfortable. There was a dark underbelly of that time which in many cases is only now coming into the light of day. One huge part of the problem was all of us refusing to acknowledge the harm that was being done, we just didn't want to see it, didn't want to hear the voices of those who were telling us that things were not as innocent or carefree as we wanted to believe. I not trying to criticise anyone, or force anyone to do anything. I'm just letting people know that pictures like the ones on Page 3 and the culture they create has personally harmed me in a real way. I'm not talking about offending my sensibilities or principles, I'm talking about actually placing me in mortal danger, destroying my confidence, and killing off my childhood. I'm letting people know that I am one of many, the very, very many that have been or are now being harmed in this way. I am just asking people to think about their sons and daughters, their grandchildren, their kid sisters... and ask ourselves what is more important to us: is it making a small compromise so that we can have a society that is a great place for our loved ones to live, a place where they have a chance of doing a paper round without being attacked; or is it being able to maintain a familiar habit of reaching down to the bottom shelf instead of up to the top shelf to look at a topless model? Because I don't think that people who like the Page 3 are bad people, I think they are good, decent people who just honestly don't realise that it hurts anyone, and can't imagine how it could. So I'm trying to let them know how it has hurt me and others, and I am asking if we can please agree to make a little change, given what we know now. We've improved a whole lot of things in the way we live since 1970, can't this be another one of those things? MammaBear
  • Score: 0

11:12am Sat 19 Jul 14

fredaj says...

Levent wrote:
fredaj wrote:
Well done Marina!
I know how you easily offended "libs" fight for equality, so does the same therefore apply to gay magazines? Or would that be too anti-pc for you lot?
Isn't that a question for gays?
[quote][p][bold]Levent[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fredaj[/bold] wrote: Well done Marina![/p][/quote]I know how you easily offended "libs" fight for equality, so does the same therefore apply to gay magazines? Or would that be too anti-pc for you lot?[/p][/quote]Isn't that a question for gays? fredaj
  • Score: -1

11:14am Sat 19 Jul 14

fredaj says...

tug509 wrote:
Did it ever occur to those who are anti page 3 to ask the models what they want ? .There are far too many people who think they know whats best for others .
The campaign against page three is not about protecting the models (although that is a very nice bonus).

It is about protecting ALL women.
[quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: Did it ever occur to those who are anti page 3 to ask the models what they want ? .There are far too many people who think they know whats best for others .[/p][/quote]The campaign against page three is not about protecting the models (although that is a very nice bonus). It is about protecting ALL women. fredaj
  • Score: 3

11:17am Sat 19 Jul 14

fredaj says...

stevo!! wrote:
fredaj wrote:
thevoiceoftruth wrote:
Good on her. Page 3 should have been dumped years ago, but there is far worse out there these days. I am more concerned about children seeing hard core **** on the internet.
Page three is as, if not more, damaging as it is day-to-day sexism which affects the lives of all women in the UK, everyday.
In what way is Page 3 'damaging'?

"day-to-day sexism"

And how is this 'damaging' women?

Are men 'damaged' by sexism which they encounter?
I cannot speak for men who are subjected to sexism and I am puzzled that you think I can or should.

They need to state their case and explain what they consider unacceptable and why.
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fredaj[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thevoiceoftruth[/bold] wrote: Good on her. Page 3 should have been dumped years ago, but there is far worse out there these days. I am more concerned about children seeing hard core **** on the internet.[/p][/quote]Page three is as, if not more, damaging as it is day-to-day sexism which affects the lives of all women in the UK, everyday.[/p][/quote]In what way is Page 3 'damaging'? "day-to-day sexism" And how is this 'damaging' women? Are men 'damaged' by sexism which they encounter?[/p][/quote]I cannot speak for men who are subjected to sexism and I am puzzled that you think I can or should. They need to state their case and explain what they consider unacceptable and why. fredaj
  • Score: 1

11:19am Sat 19 Jul 14

fredaj says...

MammaBear wrote:
The petition is not to call in the government to take action, it's a grass-roots petition directly to the bosses of the Sun. We're just asking them to re-consider who their target market is. If it's the average householder with children and grandchildren, and they are looking to be in daily circulation at hospitals, cafes, schools, etc then could they please consider the appropriateness of their content, and its suitability to those venues. And as a mother, I am personally asking the bosses at the Sun to consider the harm those pictures do in our society, and to behave in a responsible way. When the topless photos started in 1970, there were a lot of things we didn't know about, that we do know now. We didn't have seatbelts back then, no lung cancer warnings on cigarettes, children played slot machines in the arcade on the prom, there were no mandatory motorbike helmets, and that nice Jimmy Savile was playing Rolf Harris' "Two Little Boys"on Radio 1. I know some people feel nostalgic about that era, a golden age when we were all carefree and unhindered by responsibility. Perhaps they see the tradition of the "Page 3 girl" as the last vestige of that earlier, simpler time, when a man could smoke his pipe on the train and enjoy looking at a picture of a beautiful, topless 16-year-old girl in peace. But we've learned a lot since then, and not all of it has been pretty or comfortable. There was a dark underbelly of that time which in many cases is only now coming into the light of day. One huge part of the problem was all of us refusing to acknowledge the harm that was being done, we just didn't want to see it, didn't want to hear the voices of those who were telling us that things were not as innocent or carefree as we wanted to believe. I not trying to criticise anyone, or force anyone to do anything. I'm just letting people know that pictures like the ones on Page 3 and the culture they create has personally harmed me in a real way. I'm not talking about offending my sensibilities or principles, I'm talking about actually placing me in mortal danger, destroying my confidence, and killing off my childhood. I'm letting people know that I am one of many, the very, very many that have been or are now being harmed in this way. I am just asking people to think about their sons and daughters, their grandchildren, their kid sisters... and ask ourselves what is more important to us: is it making a small compromise so that we can have a society that is a great place for our loved ones to live, a place where they have a chance of doing a paper round without being attacked; or is it being able to maintain a familiar habit of reaching down to the bottom shelf instead of up to the top shelf to look at a topless model? Because I don't think that people who like the Page 3 are bad people, I think they are good, decent people who just honestly don't realise that it hurts anyone, and can't imagine how it could. So I'm trying to let them know how it has hurt me and others, and I am asking if we can please agree to make a little change, given what we know now. We've improved a whole lot of things in the way we live since 1970, can't this be another one of those things?
Can you break you stuff up when you write please - into paragraphs.

You are really interesting but really hard to read.
[quote][p][bold]MammaBear[/bold] wrote: The petition is not to call in the government to take action, it's a grass-roots petition directly to the bosses of the Sun. We're just asking them to re-consider who their target market is. If it's the average householder with children and grandchildren, and they are looking to be in daily circulation at hospitals, cafes, schools, etc then could they please consider the appropriateness of their content, and its suitability to those venues. And as a mother, I am personally asking the bosses at the Sun to consider the harm those pictures do in our society, and to behave in a responsible way. When the topless photos started in 1970, there were a lot of things we didn't know about, that we do know now. We didn't have seatbelts back then, no lung cancer warnings on cigarettes, children played slot machines in the arcade on the prom, there were no mandatory motorbike helmets, and that nice Jimmy Savile was playing Rolf Harris' "Two Little Boys"on Radio 1. I know some people feel nostalgic about that era, a golden age when we were all carefree and unhindered by responsibility. Perhaps they see the tradition of the "Page 3 girl" as the last vestige of that earlier, simpler time, when a man could smoke his pipe on the train and enjoy looking at a picture of a beautiful, topless 16-year-old girl in peace. But we've learned a lot since then, and not all of it has been pretty or comfortable. There was a dark underbelly of that time which in many cases is only now coming into the light of day. One huge part of the problem was all of us refusing to acknowledge the harm that was being done, we just didn't want to see it, didn't want to hear the voices of those who were telling us that things were not as innocent or carefree as we wanted to believe. I not trying to criticise anyone, or force anyone to do anything. I'm just letting people know that pictures like the ones on Page 3 and the culture they create has personally harmed me in a real way. I'm not talking about offending my sensibilities or principles, I'm talking about actually placing me in mortal danger, destroying my confidence, and killing off my childhood. I'm letting people know that I am one of many, the very, very many that have been or are now being harmed in this way. I am just asking people to think about their sons and daughters, their grandchildren, their kid sisters... and ask ourselves what is more important to us: is it making a small compromise so that we can have a society that is a great place for our loved ones to live, a place where they have a chance of doing a paper round without being attacked; or is it being able to maintain a familiar habit of reaching down to the bottom shelf instead of up to the top shelf to look at a topless model? Because I don't think that people who like the Page 3 are bad people, I think they are good, decent people who just honestly don't realise that it hurts anyone, and can't imagine how it could. So I'm trying to let them know how it has hurt me and others, and I am asking if we can please agree to make a little change, given what we know now. We've improved a whole lot of things in the way we live since 1970, can't this be another one of those things?[/p][/quote]Can you break you stuff up when you write please - into paragraphs. You are really interesting but really hard to read. fredaj
  • Score: 1

11:47am Sat 19 Jul 14

MammaBear says...

Sorry, fredaj. Thanks for the compliment, and the advice. I'm not tech savvy, as you can see. I did use the enter key to break things up into paragraphs as I |was writing, but when it posted it was all in one big block anyway. I guess I just need to learn to use fewer words... I appreciate everything people have had to contribute to the discussion, it has been interesting to consider different viewpoints. Cheers.
Sorry, fredaj. Thanks for the compliment, and the advice. I'm not tech savvy, as you can see. I did use the enter key to break things up into paragraphs as I |was writing, but when it posted it was all in one big block anyway. I guess I just need to learn to use fewer words... I appreciate everything people have had to contribute to the discussion, it has been interesting to consider different viewpoints. Cheers. MammaBear
  • Score: 2

5:12pm Sat 19 Jul 14

stevo!! says...

fredaj wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
fredaj wrote:
thevoiceoftruth wrote:
Good on her. Page 3 should have been dumped years ago, but there is far worse out there these days. I am more concerned about children seeing hard core **** on the internet.
Page three is as, if not more, damaging as it is day-to-day sexism which affects the lives of all women in the UK, everyday.
In what way is Page 3 'damaging'?

"day-to-day sexism"

And how is this 'damaging' women?

Are men 'damaged' by sexism which they encounter?
I cannot speak for men who are subjected to sexism and I am puzzled that you think I can or should.

They need to state their case and explain what they consider unacceptable and why.
You claimed that 'sexism' is 'damaging'.

I merely asked you to explain how.
[quote][p][bold]fredaj[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fredaj[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thevoiceoftruth[/bold] wrote: Good on her. Page 3 should have been dumped years ago, but there is far worse out there these days. I am more concerned about children seeing hard core **** on the internet.[/p][/quote]Page three is as, if not more, damaging as it is day-to-day sexism which affects the lives of all women in the UK, everyday.[/p][/quote]In what way is Page 3 'damaging'? "day-to-day sexism" And how is this 'damaging' women? Are men 'damaged' by sexism which they encounter?[/p][/quote]I cannot speak for men who are subjected to sexism and I am puzzled that you think I can or should. They need to state their case and explain what they consider unacceptable and why.[/p][/quote]You claimed that 'sexism' is 'damaging'. I merely asked you to explain how. stevo!!
  • Score: -1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree