Tuesday, 20 January 2015

So, Farewell Then Page 3

So, farewell then Page 3

Since 1970, you have been a tradition in The Sun

You had many critics and they have now won

But you had your knockers too.


I always found the feature a harmless bit of smut and a *ahem* valuable learning tool for children - especially as most six year old can read and understand The Sun. It launched the naff pop, corny comedy, B movie, lads mag, reality TV, presenting and panto careers (or just plain WAGdom) of many a glamour girl including Samantha Fox (above) Maria Whittaker, Linda Lusardi, Kathy Lloyd, Donna Ewin, Jo Guest, Jordan aka Katie Price, Katie Downes, Katie Richmond, Melinda Messenger, Zoe McConnell, Penny Irving, Jennie Linden, Keeley Hazell, Michelle Marsh, Lucy Pinder and Jayne Middlemiss (below) who perhaps more than most broke out of the page's glamour girl trappings to present numerous radio and TV programmes. 




But when all is said and done it's perhaps right that, in this day and age, they called time on it.

Though in recent years I had a soft spot (well, not that soft!) for Lucy Collett aka 'Lucy, 22 from Warwick' and Poppy Rivers - who had lovely eyes Yes, I really mean eyes!




6 comments:

  1. I've been seeing wildly divergent points of view expressed on my Facebook wall all day and have, for the most part, opted to stay out of the debate rather than risk being pilloried by either side. I will say this, though: if anyone thinks bare boobs are the most offensive part of the Sun, then their world view is very different from mine. In other words, dropping page 3 might be a step in the right direction, but they really could do with dropping pages 1, 2 and 4 onwards as well.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Its an interesting debate that, I feel largely indifferent too as well.

      I do believe it was some odd kind of national institution and used to take great pleasure in telling American friends that we had topless women in our newspapers which they often found hard to comprehend; not because it was an odd fit, but because it clearly showed how relaxed Europe was about female nudity.

      In the main I think it was very harmless and actually quite amusing too (the little alleged quotes on important matters of the day coming from the models ie Lucy 22 from Warwick says...and then something about the Hadron Collider. Not that I don't think a young girl who bares a chest cannot have an opinion on such a thing I hasten to add - it wasn't funny because I thought they were airheads incapable of thought on such matters) but I do think it had probably had its day long ago. There was a time when they'd think nothing of kitting Maria Whittaker out in a St Trinians style school uniform. Now, with the revelations regarding Savile and Yew Tree that would be extremely unsavoury and hypocritical. There is also the revealing fact that the readership of the paper is now 50/50 across genders so it makes sense that they consider that from a consumerist POV.

      A lot of aggrieved models have been on TV arguing that if feminism was about giving women the choice to do what they wanted to, then why has there choice to be a Page 3 girl been taken away from them? This is an argument I'd consider more where it not for the fact that The Sun hasn't ruled out the possibility of bikini or underwear clad models taking the place of the traditional topless shot on Page 3. As such I can't see these girls out of work. I also think they're rather missing the point about who is actually pulling the strings regarding their perceived choice and the notion of a patriarchal society that allows Page 3 to thrive for 40 odd years whilst the Page 7 (was it?) Hunk quickly faded from view.

      Ultimately though I'm inclined to agree with you. If a pretty young girl showing off her wares is the most offensive thing you can find in that paper then we're literally not on the same page. One of the things I was most bemused to hear across several TV news reports today was that The Sun was always a paper that prided itself on giving the readers/the people what they wanted and appealing to their needs. Can't see it myself, considering they're quick to alienate many viewpoints, conforming to their rigid and traditional right wing working class tory sentiment.

      Oh well, there's still a place for both mild salaciousness and thought provoking, mature and serious comment....it's here on So It Goes! ;)

      Delete
    2. Yeah, I don't think anyone should be in any doubt as to who was pulling the strings. However, as a sort of counter-argument, I found this piece written by an actual sex worker (gasp!) to be the most interesting thing I read today: https://desiredxthings.wordpress.com/2015/01/20/a-few-thoughts-on-the-demise-of-page-3/

      Delete
  2. PS, the leader of the No More Page 3 campaign calls herself an actress, yet to my knowledge I've never seen her in anything. Call me cynical but I'm sure she's enjoyed the self publicity and raised profile such a campaign has given her, regardless of its merit or value.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It's only a matter of time before everything we do will be dictated by comfy shoe wearing... No bra wearing... man haters

    ReplyDelete
  4. But as we learnt before the week was out, rumours of its demise were somewhat exaggerated...for now

    http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jan/23/page-3-sun-rupert-murdoch

    ReplyDelete