KelvinsRightGlove

Eating disorders also affect men. I said above, eating disorders are far more complex than looking at skinny/attractive people and thinking that is how they should look.

Yes, that is clutching. If you cannot understand that Page 3 is sexualised images of women intended to titillate is different women modelling a product, there is literally no point in continuing this conversation. Though, the rest of your post demonstrates this again. I'm not saying but there's worse things, whilst simultaneously saying there are worse things. You have again failed to understand that nobody is saying we should remove page 3, as then no body will be able to see naked women. If anything, I argues to the complete opposite. The very fact that there is such a huge amount of sexualised content, mostly far more graphic in nature than page 3 renders it utterly pointless. The problem with page 3 is not the graphic nature of it, but the placement of it and the message it portrays. You are still bizarrely fixated on the eating disorder issue, which you clearly know less than nothing about. It's been said numerous times that this is not the only issue, or even the main reason many dislike page 3.

I also enjoy it's Always Sunny. Didn't realise there was a new series, so thanks for bringing this to my attention

Only just noticed this, I really like that show. Samberg is really good in it. Nothing big or heavy, just a nice light hearted show.

JRod & Clyne's contracts finish at the same time.

Next for the banner?

Ta.

Did broadcast journalism (I think) at Leeds Uni. I had some friends on that course when I was there (not on that course), and she often came up - being one of the more well know students to have completed the course. Apparently she was always big on sports, and excelled on the course. This is of course all through the grapevine**. I don't doubt all the lady presenters on Sky Sports are very intelligent and competent, I imagine they get inundated with a huge amount of extremely qualified and talented people that could do a great job. I guess at this point, the more attractive of those have an extra edge. **EDIT: Just to clarify I wasn't there at the same time as GT.

Aye, option to buy included. Think it was £10m(ish), appreciate if anyone can confirm this.

That's really clutching at straws now. Comparing page 3 to underwear/lingerie modelling. Do you really need to be told why that is different. I see you are still stuck on the anorexia thing. As I said, I don't actually think that is the biggest argument for getting rid of page 3. There are far bigger issues with it, most related to boys/men instead of girls. Despite your protestations otherwise, you are still very much drumming the 'well there's worse stuff out there' argument.

You work at a model agency Jeffers?

It's not an option. It's a PL rule, loan players cannot face their parent club.

Hmmmm. Anyway, I've not said anorexia is solely blamed on page 3. I've also never said anorexia is the main reason to get rid of page 3. Removing page 3 is obviously not a silver bullet that will cure insecurity or inadequacy (in men or women), but it is a relatively small measure to take that may have beneficial impacts on society. Also, page 3 girls are normal looking? That's just flat out untrue.

That's nice, all of this we've been through already. 1) I did not blame anorexia on page 3, I explicitly stated it is a complex issue. Caused by many things, I said page 3 can be one of many things that can contribute to it, and yes there are worse things. 2) "Well this is worse, so you should go after that" is a bullsh*t argument. There is almost always something else worse out there. As I said before, disliking one thing, and thinking it should stop is not an admission you don't care about anything else. This is a delaying tactic to preserve the status quo.

Don't think I posted on there. Have to admit I was a little 'meh' about it, neither massively excited nor massively disappointed. Fair play to the lad though, has been a really good signing. He has played really well all season, and I'd certainly hope he stays on permanently.

It's 'news' at least. It's not comparable to Page 3, as it is reporting on what is happening at a fashion show. I'm no expert on fashion (anyone who sees me IRL will attest to that), but I imagine male models with their penis hanging out is slightly out of the norm. I am aware Trousers was taking the mick a bit, just wanted to show why it is different though.

Lol at UKIP not being establishment. Of all their ********, this is the biggest load. 2MPs, both former Tory MPs. A leader who was a former Tory activist. And a stock broker in the city. The majority of their funding comes from former Tory backers. Not to mention the countless other Tories, such as Neil Hamilton who play a prominent role in the party. Oh and his entire ideal is pretty much delivering the uk back to some mythical 1950(ish) ideal of Britain that only really exists in fantasy where straight white men have all power and are utterly beyond reproach. Are you capable of not swallowing a single word that comes out of Farages mouth without question?

Anorexia is a form of body dismorphia. It is not simply a case of looking at someone skinny and thinking I should look like that. In many cases it is related to insecurity and inadequacy. So yes, seeing photoshopped images of unrealistic women on a daily basis can absolutely feed into this. Please do not denigrate an extremely serious mental illness into such simplistic terms. Like all mental illnesses it is not nearly as simple as looking at a skinny girl and thinking I should be skinny too. Sufferers have a completely warped image of how they themselves look, and how those around them look. So yes, seeing women with unnatural body shapes on a daily basis in a national newspaper (not to mention the myriad other places the ideal is drummed into the head of men, women, boys and girls) absolutely has an impact on suffers of eating disorders and body dismorphia.

Here he is, Gothams finest with his one sentence answers to everything.

I'm starting to seriously entertain it's a parody account.

Ok, a few points here. 1) I said on another thread. Freedom of Speech defences for things are rubbish. If your only defence of something is, freedom of speech, innit. That suggests the content you are defending is barely worth defending. 2) I've not called for anything to be out right banned. 3) I've already said I have no problem with models, or even pornography. In fact I have a friend who does porn. The point is the placement of this. 4) Not having page 3 does not make us anything like Saudi Arabia. That's a nonsense argument. We don't put hardcore porn on TV, does that mean we are like SA? We have a Watershed, where certain things aren't shown before a certain time, does that make us like SA? No, of course it doesn't. Just because something is technically legitimate, does not make it worthwhile.

I doubt it's particularly lucrative.

Aye, mentioned above somewhere how effing annoying it is they are cancelling this to carry out churning out tweet-bait bullshít. Apparently it's been picked up by HBO though, with David Fincher possibly getting involved. That could be great, or a total trainwreck. Hard to call really.

Given the other meanings of decent, I almost immediately thought that was a poor choice of phrase. I should say a good reason. As in, a strong argument as to why it's worth sexualising young women, reducing them to little more than fap-fodder on the 3rd page of one of (I thought it was THE most, may be incorrect) the most popular newspapers in the country. Why should we keep it? What purpose does it serve? And yes, that is a poor analogy really. We have little choice in the existence of the universe, putting photos of topless women in a newspaper is very much a deliberate action