So , no more Page 3

Good move ?

Bad move?

Couldn't care less?

Prefer boys anyway?

Should have stopped over 10/15 years ago.

Shame that we will never get anymore 'News in Briefs' though.

"Political correctness gone mad"

another piece of British culture erased in the name of political correctness.

I think we've just out grown it as a culture TBH. Last year they stopped making Nuts magazine because of a lack of interest. Let's face it, when you can find pictures and videos of every obscene sexual habit imaginable in 10 seconds on Google, nobody is going to pay for pictures of boobs in a magazine.

I can't say I'm really that bothered as I never buy papers any more any get most of my news from on-line articles. News in briefs was good though, I'd like to thank Danni, 23 from Middlesex for explaining the large hadron collider to me.

Doesn't affect me in the slightest, but I don't see why people had such a huge problem with it. You know it's going to be there, so how offended can you really get if you buy it and find boobs on page 3?

It makes no difference, there'll still be plenty of attractive women wearing not many clothes in the paper. Instead, now it's a cynical move to drive more people to their website.

I never read The Sun anyway. I just look at the pictures.

(from about 0:30)

If the paper was marketed as a lads-rag then I'd be fine with it, but it's supposed to be a standard national tabloid. As such, and as a guy who has a daughter, I find the page 3 naked woman's presence demeaning, and I'm sure young women who happened upon it would find it ridiculous.

It also leaves all the more room for their excellent political comment.

I bought the Sun today and there WAS a page 3

Je suis Linda Lusardi

Doesn't affect me in the slightest, but I don't see why people had such a huge problem with it. You know it's going to be there, so how offended can you really get if you buy it and find boobs on page 3?

Presumably you're not bothered by child porn then either? People who see child porn don't just stumble across it, they are looking for it. As long as it doesn't affect the rest of us, following your logic, its fine.

I think it was well overdue and had no place in a widely read paper that would have been in many homes across the country. If you want to look at photos of tits, use porn.

Sorry but you have t o be a thick cvnt to be wasting money buying the Sun. And if you can't work out how to see a pair of tits from other sources then you aren't very resourceful

Presumably you're not bothered by child porn then either? People who see child porn don't just stumble across it, they are looking for it. As long as it doesn't affect the rest of us, following your logic, its fine.

 

I think it was well overdue and had no place in a widely read paper that would have been in many homes across the country. If you want to look at photos of tits, use porn.

Sam fox with her baps out can not be compared to child porn

Sam fox with her baps out can not be compared to child porn

i wasn't comparing the two, i was saying just because something doesnt affect you that doesn't make it ok for others.

Also, many of the page 3 models used to be 16, so that's pretty much child porn as far as I'm concerned.

i wasn't comparing the two, i was saying just because something doesnt affect you that doesn't make it ok for others.

 

Also, many of the page 3 models used to be 16, so that's pretty much child porn as far as I'm concerned.

It makes it ok if it's legal. Child porn is not legal , so not being bothered about page 3 does not equate to not being bothered about child porn. They are completely different things

I bought the Sun today

you have to be a thick cvnt to be wasting money buying the Sun

i like the dear deidre + i like doing the math puzzles

It makes it ok if it's legal. Child porn is not legal , so not being bothered about page 3 does not equate to not being bothered about child porn. They are completely different things

The minimum age for page 3 girls is 18 and has been since 2003 so I'm not sure what he is getting upset about.

If it matters so little, I would ask the men, if your favourite newspaper had a young naked man on page 3, would you be alright with it, every day?

If it matters so little, I would ask the men, if your favourite newspaper had a young naked man on page 3, would you be alright with it, every day?

Perhaps it already does

If it matters so little, I would ask the men, if your favourite newspaper had a young naked man on page 3, would you be alright with it, every day?

1. They aren't naked. I wouldn't have a problem with a topless man, in fact I have seen plenty of adverts for toiletries (and yoghurt for some reason) with topless men.

2. The Sun isn't my favourite newspaper with topless women and it wouldn't be with topless men either. There are plenty of other papers to chose from if it bothers you. The girls aren't on the front page, so you wouldn't even see the pictures unless you chose to read it.

i wasn't comparing the two, i was saying just because something doesnt affect you that doesn't make it ok for others.

 

Also, many of the page 3 models used to be 16, so that's pretty much child porn as far as I'm concerned.

That's a pretty crap line of thought there. Should we ban everything someone has a problem with? My misses has a problem with football should it be banned?

If it matters so little, I would ask the men, if your favourite newspaper had a young naked man on page 3, would you be alright with it, every day?

Funnily enough topless men don't seem to bother people. It's alright to sell Diet coke with this on day time telly

If you replaced that image with a topless woman all hell would break loose

Same with Tadic stripping off to celebrate a goal at old Trafford if a woman footballer did that they're would be outrage.

In the name of equality page three should continue until such time as woman have the right to walk around topless like men without anyone getting upset about it............

Yeah but men get erections and can't walk properly when baps are out everywhere. Plus the Dave Lee Travis's of this world won't be able to help themselves with all that jiggling going on.

Funnily enough topless men don't seem to bother people. It's alright to sell Diet coke with this on day time telly

 

 

Not to mention images like this, which are actively marketed towards men.

Doesn't affect me in the slightest, but I don't see why people had such a huge problem with it. You know it's going to be there, so how offended can you really get if you buy it and find boobs on page 3?

Presumably you're not bothered by child porn then either? People who see child porn don't just stumble across it, they are looking for it. As long as it doesn't affect the rest of us, following your logic, its fine.

 

I think it was well overdue and had no place in a widely read paper that would have been in many homes across the country. If you want to look at photos of tits, use porn.

That's a pretty crap line of thought there. Should we ban everything someone has a problem with? My misses has a problem with football should it be banned?

Pretty exceptional levels of empty headed what-about-ery on both sides on this thread. Well done everyone.

All we need is someone to mention Hitler and we're done here.

Yeah but men get erections and can't walk properly when baps are out everywhere. Plus the Dave Lee Travis's of this world won't be able to help themselves with all that jiggling going on.

That will wear off once topless woman become a daily sight everywhere. Once the initial erection crisis has passed men would get bored off it......

That will wear off once topless woman become a daily sight everywhere. Once the initial erection crisis has passed men would get bored off it......

Very common in Denmark to see naked women everywhere, especially in the summer. They get used to it, but I don't think I ever would, or would ever want to.

Funnily enough topless men don't seem to bother people. It's alright to sell Diet coke with this on day time telly

Topless men are not equivalent to topless women, that's pretty obvious. A male arse is equivalent to a woman's boobs in terms of risqueness I'd say, hence the arse photo I posted.

Topless men are not equivalent to topless women, that's pretty obvious. A male arse is equivalent to a woman's boobs in terms of risqueness I'd say, hence the arse photo I posted.

Which is the point why should it be different? In todays society why can't a woman walk around topless like a man without people getting upset. People see it as different but should it be really?

Very common in Denmark to see naked women everywhere, especially in the summer. They get used to it, but I don't think I ever would, or would ever want to.

Why? They're just boobs, I don't see what the big deal is personally.

Which is the point why should it be different? In todays society why can't a woman walk around topless like a man without people getting upset. People see it as different but should it be really?

Because women's boobs are objectified (by men) and women are judged on their boobage, unlike men. This is why some teenage girls see a career path in paying to having implants so that they can flaunt them and attract footballers / become 'models'. If they were judged on their humour, intelligence etc as men are in the main, then boobage wouldn't be an issue.

Which is the point why should it be different? In todays society why can't a woman walk around topless like a man without people getting upset. People see it as different but should it be really?

Well no, I suppose not. But every society in the world has differing views about what should be seen in public and what shouldn't. I agree that the 'rules' on this should constantly be questioned. Why are we ashamed of certain parts of our bodies? Where did these taboos come from?

As it is though we live in a society where boobs on display are seen as porn, yet we are happy to print it in national newspapers, whereas equivalent man porn isn't. And that's a poor signal to send to young people, boys and girls. A double standard.

Because women's boobs are objectified (by men) and women are judged on their boobage, unlike men. This is why some teenage girls see a career path in paying to having implants so that they can flaunt them and attract footballers / become 'models'. If they were judged on their humour, intelligence etc as men are in the main, then boobage wouldn't be an issue.

Surely then there is a case for removing the taboo surrounding a woman's breasts. After-all women didn't evolve with clothing covering their breasts. At some point homo-sapiens quite happily walked around topless before somebody somewhere decided we should all cover up.

Boobs are only objectified because we are brought up to believe they should be hidden and kept covered. If we were brought up believing there are nothing but another body part, nobody would give a sh*t about them.

females do not equality. Just watch loose women

That will wear off once topless woman become a daily sight everywhere. Once the initial erection crisis has passed men would get bored off it......

I dunno, Jimmy Savile didnt seem to get bored of there being kids everywhere...

Surely then there is a case for removing the taboo surrounding a woman's breasts. After-all women didn't evolve with clothing covering their breasts. At some point homo-sapiens quite happily walked around topless before somebody somewhere decided we should all cover up.

 

Boobs are only objectified because we are brought up to believe they should be hidden and kept covered. If we were brought up believing there are nothing but another body part, nobody would give a sh*t about them.

e

You're probably right but all the time women are met with 'phwoar' then their attributes remain objectified. I speak with a forked tongue here because, when I was a dancer, we used our bodies to get noticed. Not that I ever stripped, I hasten to add! If women weren't noticed because, and only because, of their bodies, they would be on an even footing with men. But it won't happen.

Strange isn't it that some of these 'models' dress up as little girls but child abuse is rife. Strange too that many people object to mothers breastfeeding in public (even discretely) but think nothing of girls baring all in a newspaper.

It even filters down to some rags judging female politicians, for example, on their appearance or their shoes. They'd never do that to a male politician. So yeah, double standards all the way.

females do not equality. Just watch loose women

You should host your own panel show: Dim Men.

e

You're probably right but all the time women are met with 'phwoar' then their attributes remain objectified. I speak with a forked tongue here because, when I was a dancer, we used our bodies to get noticed. Not that I ever stripped, I hasten to add! If women weren't noticed because, and only because, of their bodies, they would be on an even footing with men. But it won't happen.

 

Strange isn't it that some of these 'models' dress up as little girls but child abuse is rife. Strange too that many people object to mothers breastfeeding in public (even discretely) but think nothing of girls baring all in a newspaper.

 

It even filters down to some rags judging female politicians, for example, on their appearance or their shoes. They'd never do that to a male politician. So yeah, double standards all the way.

Ed Miliband has his appearance criticised all the time.

But yes women are constantly objectified, unfortunately men love it. Take me for example, it is indelibly imprinted on my brain that you can do the splits.

Ed Miliband has his appearance criticised all the time.

 

But yes women are constantly objectified, unfortunately men love it. Take me for example, it is indelibly imprinted on my brain that you can do the splits.

Sorry to disabuse you but I can't anymore, since I buggered my knee about a year ago (not literally buggered!) I haven't been brave enough to try the splits since then.

e

You're probably right but all the time women are met with 'phwoar' then their attributes remain objectified. I speak with a forked tongue here because, when I was a dancer, we used our bodies to get noticed. Not that I ever stripped, I hasten to add! If women weren't noticed because, and only because, of their bodies, they would be on an even footing with men. But it won't happen.

 

Strange isn't it that some of these 'models' dress up as little girls but child abuse is rife. Strange too that many people object to mothers breastfeeding in public (even discretely) but think nothing of girls baring all in a newspaper.

 

It even filters down to some rags judging female politicians, for example, on their appearance or their shoes. They'd never do that to a male politician. So yeah, double standards all the way.

Yet you were frothing at the gash over graziano Pelle the other day, must have been his humour, right?

Yet you were frothing at the gash over graziano Pelle the other day, must have been his humour, right?

Most women are too busy laughing at my tiny penis to notice my humour and intelligence.

Most women are too busy laughing at my tiny penis to notice my humour and intelligence.

So they get a laugh either way, your a hit!

Surely then there is a case for removing the taboo surrounding a woman's breasts. After-all women didn't evolve with clothing covering their breasts. At some point homo-sapiens quite happily walked around topless before somebody somewhere decided we should all cover up.

 

Boobs are only objectified because we are brought up to believe they should be hidden and kept covered. If we were brought up believing there are nothing but another body part, nobody would give a sh*t about them.

Should we all crp on the streets when we feel like it?

Tbh though even males walking around with no top should be banned. Classless fckers

e

You're probably right but all the time women are met with 'phwoar' then their attributes remain objectified. I speak with a forked tongue here because, when I was a dancer, we used our bodies to get noticed. Not that I ever stripped, I hasten to add! If women weren't noticed because, and only because, of their bodies, they would be on an even footing with men. But it won't happen.

 

Strange isn't it that some of these 'models' dress up as little girls but child abuse is rife. Strange too that many people object to mothers breastfeeding in public (even discretely) but think nothing of girls baring all in a newspaper.

 

It even filters down to some rags judging female politicians, for example, on their appearance or their shoes. They'd never do that to a male politician. So yeah, double standards all the way.

You seem to dismiss the male species as a bunch of ogling perverts out of hand.

Women aren't met with 'phwoar' and they aren't noticed only for there bodies. Whenever I meet a female friend or co-working I tend to greet them with something like, "good morning, how are you today?" As do pretty much all the men I know. I've yet to sit in my office, have a female co-worker walk in and shout, "phwoar, your tits look good today!"

I'm not sure what world you are living in but it seems to be more like a Carry On film than the one I'm in. I think some women hear one sexist comment from a teenaged virgin or pervy builder and think this represents the entire population.

I've read a few magazines like Nuts and Zoo, not to mention the Sun and the Daily Star from time to time. If there are comments judging female politicians on their appearance they aren't coming from those magazines. They are infact coming from magazines aimed largely at women, such as Hello or Heat. 99% of men couldn't give the tiniest sh*t about Angela Merkel's shoes or Rebecca Brooks' handbag.

There are no double standards. Women ***** about the appearance of other women WAAAAAAY more than men do.

Should we all crp on the streets when we feel like it?

 

Tbh though even males walking around with no top should be banned. Classless fckers

Where the f**k did that come from? Go on I'm dying to hear the logic behind that.

Regarding your second point - yes there is a question of common decency that applies to both genders. I wouldn't walk into a restaurant in a pair of budgie smugglers and expect to be seated, even though it wouldn't constitute indecent exposure. I'm walking about places like beaches, swimming pools, sunbathers, advertising, media etc.

Your reasoning about women not evolving with covered breast as a reason for why it shouldn't be a taboo.

Very simplistic. Don't think Neanderthal man sat on a toilet so about time we did away with this nonsense of not being able to sh1t where we want. Bloody taboos

Your reasoning about women not evolving with covered breast as a reason for why it shouldn't be a taboo.

Very simplistic. Don't think Neanderthal man sat on a toilet so about time we did away with this nonsense of not being able to sh1t where we want. Bloody taboos

So your counter argument as to why women's boobs shouldn't be seen as a taboo is, 'lets all sh*t in the streets'. That's a solid argument whelk, I can't fault your logic

Yeah, we tried that about 700 years ago. Half of Europe got wiped out by the plague. Tell me, what diseases will exposed nipples unleash upon the population?

So your counter argument as to why women's boobs shouldn't be seen as a taboo is, 'lets all sh*t in the streets'. That's a solid argument whelk, I can't fault your logic

 

Yeah, we tried that about 700 years ago. Half of Europe got wiped out by the plague. Tell me, what diseases will exposed nipples unleash upon the population?

I can see pros and cons of both.

I think you are taking this a tad more seriously than me. Happy to accept society's taboos myself without feeling like I have to be the liberator.

What about knocking one out at a bus stop? Will that cause any diseases?