The Student Room Group

No more breasts :'(

Scroll to see replies

Original post by datpiff
I'm seeing many male arguments but not many female arguments. It would be good if the men on this board would get lost for a few hours so we can have an equal number of females have a say on the subject. TBH the male perspective isn't what i'm interested in. I rarely can see what women have to say on these boards about issues like this because it's usually guys who shout the most.


of course you don't. Only around 20% of women on this forum lose out enough from the patriarchy to empathise with the disenfranchised men in anymore than a hypothetical condescending 'aww look at all those men crying we don't want to sleep with them' way.

People=**** attraction is amoral
(edited 9 years ago)
men **** off and let's see what the women have to say :smile:

current tally

3 'women have it worse' feminazis

2 'who cares let's objectify everyone'

2 flippant dismissive remarks

2 of the above who acknowledge male objectification in media is also a problem-1 of which still says 'women have it worse', the other says 'it's overlooked-therefore let's objectify everyone'
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Smash Bandicoot
of course you don't. Only around 20% of women on this forum lose out enough from the patriarchy to empathise with the disenfranchised men in anymore than a hypothetical condescending 'aww look at all those men crying we don't want to sleep with them' way.

People=**** attraction is amoral


Please don't throw random statistics at me unless you got them from somewhere or did a study yourself. You are really just expressing an opinion. Nothing what you said is fact and pulling out a random number won't make it one.
(edited 9 years ago)
Reply 143
Avatar for lucaf
lucaf
13
Original post by Smash Bandicoot
'damn, I need abs like those or I'm never gonna get laid with that girl I fancy'

same reason different rationalisation

let us retreat to the Crash Bandicoot thread where we are allies :smile:


Not quite, that is more akin to the pictures of women you find in womens magazines. Of course those magazines have pictures of men that have the same purpose as page 3...

really it just comes down to context. Which is retarded, since I don't see how a picture of a hot woman is somehow more acceptable in a ladies mag than a guys mag.
Original post by datpiff
Please don't throw random statistics at me unless you got them from somewhere or did a study yourself. You are really just expressing an opinion. Nothing what you said is fact and pulling out a random number won't make it one.


that's fair enough, you can dismiss the statistics
Original post by lucaf
Not quite, that is more akin to the pictures of women you find in womens magazines. Of course those magazines have pictures of men that have the same purpose as page 3...

really it just comes down to context. Which is retarded, since I don't see how a picture of a hot woman is somehow more acceptable in a ladies mag than a guys mag.


Who reads women's mags? WOMEN. Pictures of hot women will be there the same way a good looking guy on the cover of Men's Health is.

A picture of a hot woman inside Men's Health however is something different.

***I can't be arsed with this anymore. I have uni work to do.
(edited 9 years ago)
Reply 146
Avatar for lucaf
lucaf
13
Original post by datpiff
Who reads women's mags? WOMEN. Pictures of hot women will be there the same way a good looking guy on the cover of Men's Health is.


Yes, obviously. Thats what I was saying?

edit:

Original post by datpiff


A picture of a hot woman inside Men's Health however is something different.

***I can't be arsed with this anymore. I have uni work to do.


But womens mags will equally have pictures of hot men, for the same reason mens ones have hot women. And? Both sexes clearly have demand to see attractive members of the other, and I don't see why that is wrong.

The point is that it is simply ludicrous that the same picture can be seen as immoral when printed for the enjoyment of men and moral when printed for the enjoyment of women, as if there is something inherently wrong with men deriving enjoyment from the female form.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by datpiff
Who reads women's mags? WOMEN. Pictures of hot women will be there the same way a good looking guy on the cover of Men's Health is.

A picture of a hot woman inside Men's Health however is something different.

***I can't be arsed with this anymore. I have uni work to do.


You've been admitted to a university?
Original post by A5ko
I wonder how many anti-Page 3 girls have rugby calenders with borderline naked guys, hung up at homes or in offices.

NEWS FLASH

Some women like to get their kit off. Shall we start banning other things you don't like? If you think anyone bought The Sun for page 3, you're a tool. When you have the interwebs, the least of your concerns should be one page in a newspaper.

All those aspiring glamour models who will no doubt go on to star in such greats as TOWIE. You have ruined them...

This isn't equality


Page 3 hasn't been banned, though.

All those aspiring glamour models can apply to be on the Page 3 website, if they so wish.

I doubt they will actually stop publishing it anyway, it was probably a publicity stunt to drive up sales. I expect them to do a U-turn pretty soon.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Blazar
Well, as a woman I'm quite happy about this. Hopefully men will stop objectifying us so much in future.


Oh come off it. Women objectify men too, and tbh, women can be way harsher on themselves, than guys are....
Reply 150
Avatar for Josb
Josb
6
Original post by The_Internet
Oh come off it. Women objectify men too, and tbh, women can be way harsher on themselves, than guys are....

Yeah the celebrity shaming is principally done by women.
Who reads The Sun expecting quality news coverage and enlightening articles? Page 3 is part of its identity and they shouldn't have been pressurised by the mob (although I'm inclined to believe they've done this to boost their online subscriptions).

This isn't what feminism should stand for at all. They have actually damaged the livelihoods of some young females by stigmatising this industry.
Original post by datpiff
Completely disagree with that. I do not like your mentality at all tbh. "The authorities are doing stuff to stop it so all is good". From my experience not enough is being done.

Also women can't discuss an issue in which effects a lot of women around the globe? It wouldn't be a waste of time. Sex trafficking is very hidden in British society and it would be great to have discussion about it.


I wasn't talking about hypothetical discussions. Discuss it by all means, increase awareness of the problem tenfold, and make everyone keep a watchful eye on potential sex traffickers as well as up-to-date information about local paedophiles. That can only be a good thing as far as the safety of future generations is concerned.
I was talking about the practical implications of feminists getting involved in it, because it wouldn't be long at all before the hardliners starting shouting the loudest about how all porn is evil, etc. And so the issue gets side-tracked, people starting losing faith in the feminist movement because "dey wantz all are pr0n" based on the vocalities of a few, and the whole thing quietly goes away. It would be counter-productive and divide the movement up even more.

You show me a campaign whose goal is to end the sex trafficking of underage girls and I'll be there at the protests to say that the government should be doing more about it, you show me a petition that people are writing to send to parliament so that they can make the police do more about it and I'll sign it, but like **** will I let the above all go to waste just because a few jumped up idiots started getting people on the "porn is exploitation" bandwagon because that's a different ballpark in the same area of what we're talking about.

I agree with the basis of what you're trying to say, I just think that the way we go about it needs to be handled tactfully so that the rad-fems and anti-porn lot are kept out of it.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by datpiff
What year do you live in? This isn't 1985. The internet has made page 3 irrelevant and a relic of the past. I can just type in boobs in Google now and you'll have an endless supply of tits. You even have tits on Tumblr.


Again I stand by my view held that TSR is full of kiddies in their 1st and 2nd years of uni who haven't even bothered to look at any feminist material and haven't a clue about feminism. I'm no expert myself, but I do know a lot of people in here have no business telling people that they're the main authority on what feminism is about. Of course the movement like any movement has problems, but a lot of people simply haven't a clue. Get to your university library and do some research kids. You're paying for the use of your library. Might as well use it.


Thank you for thinking I am young :biggrin:
Do women not look at photos of "desirable" women and want to be like that? I mean, that's what I do when I see images of guys built like Adonis. I understand that a woman can't magically get bigger breasts while a man can grind away at the gym to get nice abs, but in terms of general physique and stuff, do most women see any images as aspirational? Or is most of it disregarded as "muh patriarchy"?
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
Page three is going to stop showing topless models :frown:

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jan/19/has-the-sun-axed-page-3-topless-pictures

As someone who can't for the life of them get a girlfriend this is the only way I can possibly see them.

But I hear there is this thing called Google images. Apparently there is a huge supply of boobs on there.

I will report my findings.


Edit: Disclaimer, I feel the need to point out that I have never bought a copy of the Sun. I'm not actually personally upset there is no more page 3. :redface:


You a Physics graduate. TSRians will love/stalk/date anyone who studies a STEM. If you studied at a RG, your inbox will soon overflow with the emails of your suitors
Original post by Blazar
Well, as a woman I'm quite happy about this. Hopefully men will stop objectifying us so much in future.


Yes hopefully we will all forget women have breasts
Original post by midnightice
Who reads The Sun expecting quality news coverage and enlightening articles? Page 3 is part of its identity and they shouldn't have been pressurised by the mob (although I'm inclined to believe they've done this to boost their online subscriptions).

This isn't what feminism should stand for at all. They have actually damaged the livelihoods of some young females by stigmatising this industry.


"damaged the livelihoods of some young females". You can't be serious. Lol I guess they won't be putting their career as a page 3 model in their CVs then.
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
Page three is going to stop showing topless models :frown:

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jan/19/has-the-sun-axed-page-3-topless-pictures

As someone who can't for the life of them get a girlfriend this is the only way I can possibly see them.

But I hear there is this thing called Google images. Apparently there is a huge supply of boobs on there.

I will report my findings.


Edit: Disclaimer, I feel the need to point out that I have never bought a copy of the Sun. I'm not actually personally upset there is no more page 3. :redface:



Honestly, i think its a good thing that they are stopping it. Why? because its wrong to objectify women in such a way, just like its wrong to objectify men. I always get objectified.
The only time I ever read the sun is at the barbers, I can never read what's on page two because there are always kids there and I don't want them to have to see naked women.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you