The No More Page 3 Campaign


Hey my lovelies and welcome to my blog!

Over the next few weeks and for reasons that will soon become apparent (mysterious) I anticipate that I will probably be mentioning the No More Page 3 campaign a lot, and of course I am a massive supporter of it. So I therefore decided that it might be a good idea for me just to explain to you guys why I am actually in favour of taking “bare breasts” out of the news.

I have lots and lots of arguments against Page 3, but as I am pretty sure that you have far better things to do than to read my rants for five hours, I am just going to pick out the one’s that I believe are most important! And again for the same reason and because everyone loves a good ol’ list, I am choosing to do them in a list form.

  1. There is a time and a place (and lets be honest nowadays that is basically anywhere) for a naked female body and a female newspaper is not exactly the time or the place. The clue, as is often forgotten, is in the name- Newspapers.
  2. Many people have argued that they should remain there simply because it is part of our “culture” and is one of our “traditions”. I am sorry but there are many cultures and many nations that have traditions that are harmless to the people involved, this is one of ours and the fact that they have been in the paper for a long time does not mean that it is a “tradition” nor that it is a good thing for the country. For example the tradition of not letting gay people marry (which is changing I know), it is a harmful attitude and is something that has to change. Also many of these same people are quick to argue against traditions that they deem harmful in other cultures, is there not a bit of hypocrisy in that?
  3. Another argument commonly used is that Page 3 is simply a showcase of beauty, but this argument is deeply flawed because it only showcases one kind of beauty. Most of the women featured on the famous page are young, slender with a certain shape of boob and this suggests there is only one kind of beauty? What about women who have had mastectomies, or five children or a maybe a size 16? What about men? Or what about people who are transgender? Surely if it was a showcase of real, genuine beauty then it would feature women and men of all shapes and sizes? The thing is whenever I ask anyone that supports Page 2 this question I never get a response.
  4. Why is it ok for women to bare they breasts in a national, family newspaper but women that breastfeed in public are still looked upon with relative disgust. Why doe we still allow this double standard to exist? If boobs are so harmless then why not allow them to feed where they need to feed their child.
  5. Lastly and here is the biggest argument for the Sun to overcome. Women are largely still not equal in society. Despite huge advances regarding women’s rights in this country, there is still a lot more that needs to be done and Page 3 only contributes to the “lad” culture. Rape is an issue that is still joked about in everyday society and women are very often overlooked when it comes to big promotions or salaries despite us out performing men in education. This obviously suggests that something is still going wrong. While Page 3 is by no means solely responsible for this, as a newspaper that is widely read, both online and in print, it has a huge a role to play in ensuring that women are portrayed in a correct and accurate manner. And frankly, we are not all slender, young or “innocent” looking as page 3 regularly portrays. Surprisingly enough, we have sex lives, brains, ambitions and opinions on things. Where is the page that shows this?

Like all my posts please feel free to comment and leave posts below regarding this post, and l let me know your own reasons. Also if you wish to sign the petition or learn a little bit more about the campaign, visit the wesbite here-

(Image was taken from the @nomorepage3 campaign)

Like this post? You might also like;

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS
  • An even more powerful argument than you’ve listed is that Page 3 (and MTV etc) is easily accessible to young children and distorts early gender socialisation; but the answer is ‘kickass’ counterculture, not censorship. The latter is like deploying elephants in warfare: they’re prone to trampling their own troops. Or as Nietzsche put it: when hunting monsters, be careful you don’t become the monster.

    Your point #3 is a powerful argument against censorship of porn on the Internet. When the material comes up from the grassroots rather than being imposed from the top down, the full diversity of beauty and sexuality breathes and grows. Of course sexual harm against people and animals must be policed; but the scapegoating of child web modelling sites, for example, resulted in a ‘Page 3 effect’. Thousands of girls who would have been rejected out of hand by mainstream modelling agencies were showcased positively, on their terms and those of their parents. The alternative is Ford Agency dictating one size fits all – that size being 6-8 (UK) and 2-4 (US) – putting us right back where we started.

    You want a revolution? Your slogan should be “power to the people”, not the State or social elites.

    • Kay Page

      Thank you for taking the time to read my post and for adding your comments. I really appreciate it and they are some good points there too.