The end of the Sun's page 3
- Thread starter H block
- Start date
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
The_Viper
Well-known member
It was justified by the head of the No More Page 3 Campaign as women should be in the newspaper for what they accomplish, not what they look like.
Two things to say about that:
1. Banning page 3 will free up, at best, one extra page, which is almost certainly not going to be devoted to a celebration of women's achievements (and the ban therefore does not do this); and
2. Being naturally good looking (and willing to capitalise upon that) is every bit as legitimate a means of earning a living being naturally intelligent and capitalising upon that instead. In fact, I suspect dim but good-looking people are responsible for a lot less inequality than ugly but intelligent people.
Page 3 is generally inconsequential; it's removal is no real loss, but neither is its continuation. I'd rather it stayed, if only as two fingers up to the censorious new wave 'liberals'.
However, I think the important thing to recognise is that The Sun have played an absolute blinder here.
Two things to say about that:
1. Banning page 3 will free up, at best, one extra page, which is almost certainly not going to be devoted to a celebration of women's achievements (and the ban therefore does not do this); and
2. Being naturally good looking (and willing to capitalise upon that) is every bit as legitimate a means of earning a living being naturally intelligent and capitalising upon that instead. In fact, I suspect dim but good-looking people are responsible for a lot less inequality than ugly but intelligent people.
Page 3 is generally inconsequential; it's removal is no real loss, but neither is its continuation. I'd rather it stayed, if only as two fingers up to the censorious new wave 'liberals'.
However, I think the important thing to recognise is that The Sun have played an absolute blinder here.