Page 3 is demeaning and regressive - Eleanor Mills of the Sunday Times.
In a radio interview yesterday, she revealed that she has raised the matter within Rupert Murdoch's News UK, the publisher of both titles:
"I'm on the record as being opposed to Page 3. I think it's demeaning to women and I'm really not a fan and I've said this in meetings at News International - sorry News UK - and that's the view I hold…
I think Page 3 feels quite regressive. I think it feels very kind of 70s. I have two daughters of my own who, when they open up the Sun and they see it, they're like, 'mum, why is this woman not wearing a top?'"
Im a bit on both sides of this argument as on one hand Page 3 can seem very lighthearted and if you keep it out of sight its out of mind, however is pornography really needed on one of britain most biggest newspapers? is it even necessary when the internet is full of these kinds of things anyway. from personal experiences from a young age it makes young boys think that women are just their to be sex objects and this is not acceptable, but at the end of the day if it isn't illegal then can it really be such a harm?
Mandy loyal says "page 3 is very demeaning to woman. In todays wold where nudity is available to anybody it is pointless, it was probably fun back in the day but whats the point now?"
"It desensitises men its mainstream and its become too common, it definitely changes mens views towards women", says Nicky Loyal.
Mandy loyal says "page 3 is very demeaning to woman. In todays wold where nudity is available to anybody it is pointless, it was probably fun back in the day but whats the point now?"
"It desensitises men its mainstream and its become too common, it definitely changes mens views towards women", says Nicky Loyal.
No comments:
Post a Comment