I think the solution is to put a hunk on page 2 beside her!

I am conflicted on this topic but I have to think that women are treated much worse in some countrys of the world where there is no page 3/ nudity in media and advertising at all.

I see it like this, most people complain up in the bushes about cronism, how awful it is etc etc… but when your friend of a friend joe, or your family friend fred can get you job in somewhere youd like to work, dont tell me the majority of people would decline on principle. They wouldnt. WHY? because most people are hypocrites. Poeple always neglect the gray area of life. So, i get annoyed when people try to say its only because its in the news paper. Right. so lets say the sun come out tomorrow with a press release saying that they are now going to be trading as a magazine with some alterations to the layout and content, would everyone here, including the campaignors drop the issue, either in public and/or in their own mind? no. They wouldnt. because its not about the newpaper o what it contains, its about the fact its there at all in any form. So while i dont particularly care for naked women selling and promoting things i just think you are either going to say ok or you go the whole hog and state what your beliefs are in full. be upfront about it dont hide behind the veil of it being imcompatable with “journalism” , even though we all know what the paper is. A rag.

I also believe the tables would be very much turned if womens sexuality was visual, but its not. I bet you anything if it was you would have advs where this girl has a trail of hunky sweaty men running after her cause her lashes have so much volume!
Also, it would be intresting to see whether gay men objectify other gay men in public because of what they have seen in gay porn or gay magazines.

Also, to pick up on wha the frog said, That guy is just a moron with a twisted logic. I think you would be hard pressed to find any evidence that it was because of page three or porn. page three does not blind me to social etiquate. Thats a fallacy. although i know the frog wasnt actually saying that.Its just a typical example where page three would be hopped off on here as the exact cause of that mans ignornace when the reality is its just not. Hes just a an idiot.

Also just to note about people worrying about the effects of sexuality on children, do you turn off the tv every time the lynx adv comes on? I mean that is doing the same thing. I just think you need to pick a side and sick to IT. dont complain about it being about
page three soley when its clearly not. That is all i am arguing here.

Up until recently, I thought women complaining about the objectification of women were exaggerating, and that it was really marginal, and (I’m ashamed to say) limited to the ‘kind of people who read the Sun’.
That was until the husband of a friend saw it appropriate to make a comment about the attractiveness of my breasts. In a posh restaurant. In front of his wife. Who did not react, as if it were normal. Of course most of my male friends were horrified when I related his comments to them, but the fact remains that this well-educated 30-something man saw fit to reduce me in public to the size of my breasts.
But yes, I know one story does not make a rule nor a sociological story.