MP sparks debate over views on Page 3 girls

Dorset Echo: MP sparks debate over views on Page 3 girls MP sparks debate over views on Page 3 girls

SOUTH Dorset MP Richard Drax has sparked a heated debate over his views on Page 3 girls.

A letter allegedly written in response to a South Dorset constituent by Mr Drax sparked the issue to be raised in Prime Minister's Question Time this week.

The constituent had written to Mr Drax asking him to add his name to the list of those supporting the 'No More Page 3 Campaign', which is calling on The Sun to remove the page.

The letter of response said: “Thank you for your email of today regarding Page 3 girls in the Sun.

“While I understand that some people are offended at seeing naked breasts, this particular page is something of a national institution, providing the girls with a job and Sun readers with some light and harmless entertainment.

“It certainly pales into insignificance compared to what you can see with ease on the internet and in the more graphic pornographic publications.

“And, in most parts of the UK on a summer's day, finding ladies with their tops off is not a difficult task.

“I certainly do not mean to underestimate you concern, but I think on balance Page 3 girls do no harm and the practice will no doubt die out on its own anyway.”

Speaking to the Dorset Echo Mr Drax said he did not wish to comment on correspondence with constituents as he felt it would be a breach of confidentiality.

He said: “I'm not prepared to comment on private correspondence of any sort because it would be a breach of confidence.”

He added: “I don't comment at all on any correspondence with constituents, because it's confidential.”

The subject was raised in Prime Minister's Question Time by Labour MP Stella Creasy.

She asked: “I am sure that the Prime Minister is as concerned as Labour members are about the 42 per cent increase in long-term unemployment among young women that has taken place on his watch.

“Will he confirm that the reason he does not support the No More Page 3 campaign is that, like his Honourable Friend the member for South Dorset (Richard Drax), he believes that at least Page 3 provides jobs for the girls?”

Mr Cameron did not mention the Page 3 issue in his response but said that there had been a rapid reduction in unemployment in recent months with a million more people back in work.

Tell us what you think- Do you think Page 3 is a 'national institution?' Or would you like to see the end of it? Please comment below.

Comments (18)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:12pm Thu 12 Dec 13

common cence says...

IF you dont like it dont look at it , and dont buy the paper ( simple )
IF you dont like it dont look at it , and dont buy the paper ( simple ) common cence

12:30pm Thu 12 Dec 13

FredAstaire says...

Is that what you'd say about child **** common cence? Or might there be a bit more to it all than that?
Is that what you'd say about child **** common cence? Or might there be a bit more to it all than that? FredAstaire

12:32pm Thu 12 Dec 13

FredAstaire says...

I did write child pawn (but used the correct spelling). Obviously only Echo writers are allowed to use the correct version
I did write child pawn (but used the correct spelling). Obviously only Echo writers are allowed to use the correct version FredAstaire

12:52pm Thu 12 Dec 13

David_divenghy2 says...

It is the woman's right to do it if she wants, isn't it? Or maybe these feminists only want those women's, "empowerment" exercised as long as it is in line with what they want?

Nobody is forcing them and they earn very good money, but as always the whiny shrews like Stella Creasy, are constantly looking for some more made up victimology or imaginary Misogyny to screech about for attention, while wearing her bright blue PVC skirt in Parliament of course.

I will remind both Mz Creasy and the constituent who wrote to Drax of one of the well known feminist expressions..... "Her Body, Her choice" ! Now, you want that choice taken away because it does not suit YOU?

I am, "offended" at seeing men draped everywhere in ads and being sexualised in magazines and TV, as well as being portrayed as stupid and useless all the time, what are the likes of Mz Creasy doing to stop that? Why are you not complaining about that too?
It is the woman's right to do it if she wants, isn't it? Or maybe these feminists only want those women's, "empowerment" exercised as long as it is in line with what they want? Nobody is forcing them and they earn very good money, but as always the whiny shrews like Stella Creasy, are constantly looking for some more made up victimology or imaginary Misogyny to screech about for attention, while wearing her bright blue PVC skirt in Parliament of course. I will remind both Mz Creasy and the constituent who wrote to Drax of one of the well known feminist expressions..... "Her Body, Her choice" ! Now, you want that choice taken away because it does not suit YOU? I am, "offended" at seeing men draped everywhere in ads and being sexualised in magazines and TV, as well as being portrayed as stupid and useless all the time, what are the likes of Mz Creasy doing to stop that? Why are you not complaining about that too? David_divenghy2

12:56pm Thu 12 Dec 13

IslandJim1 says...

Hmm, strange, I am actually in agreement with a politician. Page 3 has been around for as long as I can remember, and as far as I can remember its never caused a war, a riot, people to collapse in the street disgusted and horrified, So what's the problem? I would not go as far to say it is national institution or that its necessary employment for the ladies involved, but it is harmless. Problem is people want to be offended to give them something to moan about, so this will always be in the media in some form. And its a good awkward question to put politicians on the spot because there is no right answer!

Fred Astaire, Your comment in completely off topic and personally I would find it very offensive if directed towards me. Its outside of any rational person line of though with this story, please do not try and steer a conversation to place it does not need to go.
Hmm, strange, I am actually in agreement with a politician. Page 3 has been around for as long as I can remember, and as far as I can remember its never caused a war, a riot, people to collapse in the street disgusted and horrified, So what's the problem? I would not go as far to say it is national institution or that its necessary employment for the ladies involved, but it is harmless. Problem is people want to be offended to give them something to moan about, so this will always be in the media in some form. And its a good awkward question to put politicians on the spot because there is no right answer! Fred Astaire, Your comment in completely off topic and personally I would find it very offensive if directed towards me. Its outside of any rational person line of though with this story, please do not try and steer a conversation to place it does not need to go. IslandJim1

2:14pm Thu 12 Dec 13

shy talk says...

Will, lets all go round all the Art Galleries, Museums and Public areas. And cover up all the exposed females. Art is in the eye of the beholder. We can all think of more pressing agenda’s towards the running of the country, then the Sun’s page three.
Will, lets all go round all the Art Galleries, Museums and Public areas. And cover up all the exposed females. Art is in the eye of the beholder. We can all think of more pressing agenda’s towards the running of the country, then the Sun’s page three. shy talk

2:15pm Thu 12 Dec 13

Not_A_Moronic_Thug says...

Boobies make me smile
Boobies make me smile Not_A_Moronic_Thug

3:17pm Thu 12 Dec 13

slayerofsacredcows says...

I am getting more respect for Richard Drax for expressing common sense views every day.
There was an article in the New England Journal of Medicine, reporting on a 5 year German study, which found that ogling the breasts of a well endowed woman for 10 minutes a day on a regular basis would increase the lifespan of an average man by 4 to 5 years.
So banning page 3 is discriminatory as it is disadvantageous to men's health.
I am getting more respect for Richard Drax for expressing common sense views every day. There was an article in the New England Journal of Medicine, reporting on a 5 year German study, which found that ogling the breasts of a well endowed woman for 10 minutes a day on a regular basis would increase the lifespan of an average man by 4 to 5 years. So banning page 3 is discriminatory as it is disadvantageous to men's health. slayerofsacredcows

3:33pm Thu 12 Dec 13

biggestoaf says...

No Island Jim it's not harmless. And part of it's harm is due to the fact that we accept it as harmless. It is insidious. Because it's in our biggest selling national newspaper and has been for a long time we just accept it without questioning. But the problem is that girls are conditioned into accepting that it's OK for them to be judged primarily on their physical appearance and attractiveness to men. Also boys are conditioned into thinking that it's OK to judge women in this way and to pass comments in public. It simply reinforces the stereotype that one of the main functions of women is to act as dumb (in both senses) objects that bring pleasure to men.
However this story is just as important because it suggests our MP is comfortable referring to women as "girls" as well as suggesting that posing topless for mens gratification is an appropriate career aspiration for them (with perhaps the unstated implication that they're not capable of much more.) If I had a daughter who decided this was an appropriate career choice would I accept her right to make her own choice? Yes of course. Would I be deeply uncomfortable about the implications for her self - esteem and her view of a woman's role in society? Massively.
No Island Jim it's not harmless. And part of it's harm is due to the fact that we accept it as harmless. It is insidious. Because it's in our biggest selling national newspaper and has been for a long time we just accept it without questioning. But the problem is that girls are conditioned into accepting that it's OK for them to be judged primarily on their physical appearance and attractiveness to men. Also boys are conditioned into thinking that it's OK to judge women in this way and to pass comments in public. It simply reinforces the stereotype that one of the main functions of women is to act as dumb (in both senses) objects that bring pleasure to men. However this story is just as important because it suggests our MP is comfortable referring to women as "girls" as well as suggesting that posing topless for mens gratification is an appropriate career aspiration for them (with perhaps the unstated implication that they're not capable of much more.) If I had a daughter who decided this was an appropriate career choice would I accept her right to make her own choice? Yes of course. Would I be deeply uncomfortable about the implications for her self - esteem and her view of a woman's role in society? Massively. biggestoaf

4:26pm Thu 12 Dec 13

David_divenghy2 says...

biggestoaf wrote:
No Island Jim it's not harmless. And part of it's harm is due to the fact that we accept it as harmless. It is insidious. Because it's in our biggest selling national newspaper and has been for a long time we just accept it without questioning. But the problem is that girls are conditioned into accepting that it's OK for them to be judged primarily on their physical appearance and attractiveness to men. Also boys are conditioned into thinking that it's OK to judge women in this way and to pass comments in public. It simply reinforces the stereotype that one of the main functions of women is to act as dumb (in both senses) objects that bring pleasure to men.
However this story is just as important because it suggests our MP is comfortable referring to women as "girls" as well as suggesting that posing topless for mens gratification is an appropriate career aspiration for them (with perhaps the unstated implication that they're not capable of much more.) If I had a daughter who decided this was an appropriate career choice would I accept her right to make her own choice? Yes of course. Would I be deeply uncomfortable about the implications for her self - esteem and her view of a woman's role in society? Massively.
They are "conditioned"? Oh c'mon !

Ironically the people and groups I see referring to young women as "girls" the most are feminists. This is usually a tactic they use to heighten the perception of, "victimhood" in an otherwise non-victim situation.

Are you seriously saying that females do not look at men and judge them by appearance, money and sex objects or as steps in their hypergamy? One trawl through mumsnet or other women's forums will soon dispel that myth.

What of images like this in the media and men as objects?

http://www.freewebs.
com/candaceharper/vi
olencemen1.jpg
http://www.ltcconlin
e.net/lukas/gender/o
bjectify/males/pics/
objectifymale14.jpg

To go on about the negative portrayal of women while not even whispering about the far worse negative portrayal of me, is nothing less than bigotry and hypocrisy.

This video gives us a glaring example of why the portrayal and objectification of men in the media is a hundred times worse then it is for women. Do you think that none of this above effects men's self esteem or their place in society massively?

http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=6ZAuqkqxk
9A
[quote][p][bold]biggestoaf[/bold] wrote: No Island Jim it's not harmless. And part of it's harm is due to the fact that we accept it as harmless. It is insidious. Because it's in our biggest selling national newspaper and has been for a long time we just accept it without questioning. But the problem is that girls are conditioned into accepting that it's OK for them to be judged primarily on their physical appearance and attractiveness to men. Also boys are conditioned into thinking that it's OK to judge women in this way and to pass comments in public. It simply reinforces the stereotype that one of the main functions of women is to act as dumb (in both senses) objects that bring pleasure to men. However this story is just as important because it suggests our MP is comfortable referring to women as "girls" as well as suggesting that posing topless for mens gratification is an appropriate career aspiration for them (with perhaps the unstated implication that they're not capable of much more.) If I had a daughter who decided this was an appropriate career choice would I accept her right to make her own choice? Yes of course. Would I be deeply uncomfortable about the implications for her self - esteem and her view of a woman's role in society? Massively.[/p][/quote]They are "conditioned"? Oh c'mon ! Ironically the people and groups I see referring to young women as "girls" the most are feminists. This is usually a tactic they use to heighten the perception of, "victimhood" in an otherwise non-victim situation. Are you seriously saying that females do not look at men and judge them by appearance, money and sex objects or as steps in their hypergamy? One trawl through mumsnet or other women's forums will soon dispel that myth. What of images like this in the media and men as objects? http://www.freewebs. com/candaceharper/vi olencemen1.jpg http://www.ltcconlin e.net/lukas/gender/o bjectify/males/pics/ objectifymale14.jpg To go on about the negative portrayal of women while not even whispering about the far worse negative portrayal of me, is nothing less than bigotry and hypocrisy. This video gives us a glaring example of why the portrayal and objectification of men in the media is a hundred times worse then it is for women. Do you think that none of this above effects men's self esteem or their place in society massively? http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=6ZAuqkqxk 9A David_divenghy2

4:29pm Thu 12 Dec 13

IslandJim1 says...

biggestoaf wrote:
No Island Jim it's not harmless. And part of it's harm is due to the fact that we accept it as harmless. It is insidious. Because it's in our biggest selling national newspaper and has been for a long time we just accept it without questioning. But the problem is that girls are conditioned into accepting that it's OK for them to be judged primarily on their physical appearance and attractiveness to men. Also boys are conditioned into thinking that it's OK to judge women in this way and to pass comments in public. It simply reinforces the stereotype that one of the main functions of women is to act as dumb (in both senses) objects that bring pleasure to men.
However this story is just as important because it suggests our MP is comfortable referring to women as "girls" as well as suggesting that posing topless for mens gratification is an appropriate career aspiration for them (with perhaps the unstated implication that they're not capable of much more.) If I had a daughter who decided this was an appropriate career choice would I accept her right to make her own choice? Yes of course. Would I be deeply uncomfortable about the implications for her self - esteem and her view of a woman's role in society? Massively.
I'm sorry to say I disagree/don't believe in any of the above. I think your views on how people are affected by social imaginary, affecting there judgement, may be right in some cases, but on the whole the generally populous (dare I say) have half a decent amount of grey matter, and resist being sucked into a world of fake perfection. I also don't agree that a stereotypical female is dumb, only if that is the stereo type YOU choose to see.
Girl is the correct term for most of the young ladies in questionr (check the Oxford dictionary if you don't agree). And maybe, just maybe, they do it not because they have no choice, or there being objectified. But because it is there choice, it makes them feel good, and more importantly because they can, because its 2014 and society has moved on a little since the Victorian age.
[quote][p][bold]biggestoaf[/bold] wrote: No Island Jim it's not harmless. And part of it's harm is due to the fact that we accept it as harmless. It is insidious. Because it's in our biggest selling national newspaper and has been for a long time we just accept it without questioning. But the problem is that girls are conditioned into accepting that it's OK for them to be judged primarily on their physical appearance and attractiveness to men. Also boys are conditioned into thinking that it's OK to judge women in this way and to pass comments in public. It simply reinforces the stereotype that one of the main functions of women is to act as dumb (in both senses) objects that bring pleasure to men. However this story is just as important because it suggests our MP is comfortable referring to women as "girls" as well as suggesting that posing topless for mens gratification is an appropriate career aspiration for them (with perhaps the unstated implication that they're not capable of much more.) If I had a daughter who decided this was an appropriate career choice would I accept her right to make her own choice? Yes of course. Would I be deeply uncomfortable about the implications for her self - esteem and her view of a woman's role in society? Massively.[/p][/quote]I'm sorry to say I disagree/don't believe in any of the above. I think your views on how people are affected by social imaginary, affecting there judgement, may be right in some cases, but on the whole the generally populous (dare I say) have half a decent amount of grey matter, and resist being sucked into a world of fake perfection. I also don't agree that a stereotypical female is dumb, only if that is the stereo type YOU choose to see. Girl is the correct term for most of the young ladies in questionr (check the Oxford dictionary if you don't agree). And maybe, just maybe, they do it not because they have no choice, or there being objectified. But because it is there choice, it makes them feel good, and more importantly because they can, because its 2014 and society has moved on a little since the Victorian age. IslandJim1

5:08pm Thu 12 Dec 13

slayerofsacredcows says...

On second thoughts - The whole thing is a bit of a Storm in a D cup!
On second thoughts - The whole thing is a bit of a Storm in a D cup! slayerofsacredcows

5:11pm Thu 12 Dec 13

weymouthfox says...

I'm not offended by seeing bare boobis in The Sun. I don't buy it!
Read the Dorset Echo instead.
I'm not offended by seeing bare boobis in The Sun. I don't buy it! Read the Dorset Echo instead. weymouthfox

9:19pm Thu 12 Dec 13

common cence says...

FredAstaire wrote:
Is that what you'd say about child **** common cence? Or might there be a bit more to it all than that?
This is not child **** its adults posing , Why did you bring children into it ? Maybe with a name like FredAstaire you could be Jimmy .......?
[quote][p][bold]FredAstaire[/bold] wrote: Is that what you'd say about child **** common cence? Or might there be a bit more to it all than that?[/p][/quote]This is not child **** its adults posing , Why did you bring children into it ? Maybe with a name like FredAstaire you could be Jimmy .......? common cence

6:37am Fri 13 Dec 13

Howlin Wolf says...

How long before we get the hypothetical situation;

What if a motorist was driving past a school at home time and they happened to be distracted by the boobies in the paper that was open at page three on the passenger seat. There would be carnage.
How long before we get the hypothetical situation; What if a motorist was driving past a school at home time and they happened to be distracted by the boobies in the paper that was open at page three on the passenger seat. There would be carnage. Howlin Wolf

1:35pm Fri 13 Dec 13

RifRafDac says...

I agree. If you don't like it then don't look at it! It provides young people with jobs and others with entertainment. Well said Mr Drax.
I agree. If you don't like it then don't look at it! It provides young people with jobs and others with entertainment. Well said Mr Drax. RifRafDac

3:16pm Fri 13 Dec 13

Toon boy says...

Dammed if he does dammed if he doesn't Is Richard drax not allowed his own opinion ? There is more important things to bother about if this is important to this person then pursue it by all means but ,just because somebody doesn't have the same idea doesn't mean he is wrong ! Then to try to make an issue out off his beliefs is wrong Richard has kept this persons confidential then been stabbed this person has been basically vindictive It's because of people like this why we have all the problems in the world. Shame Richard couldn't say what he really felt
Dammed if he does dammed if he doesn't Is Richard drax not allowed his own opinion ? There is more important things to bother about if this is important to this person then pursue it by all means but ,just because somebody doesn't have the same idea doesn't mean he is wrong ! Then to try to make an issue out off his beliefs is wrong Richard has kept this persons confidential then been stabbed this person has been basically vindictive It's because of people like this why we have all the problems in the world. Shame Richard couldn't say what he really felt Toon boy

6:08am Tue 17 Dec 13

JamesYoung says...

I'm fed up hearing about this so called misogyny. Personally I don't buy the Sun and I don't particularly like seeing the pages flap open as you walk through the supermarket with your kids.
However, nobody is forcing these girls to pose, and if we want to talk about the pressures on them to conform (body size and looks) then we need to look at where those pressures are coming from. It's certainly not (most) men that tell them they need to spend hours in front of the mirror everyday, or spend thousands on clothes. It's fashion magazines and the media. And what gender are the editors?
I'm fed up hearing about this so called misogyny. Personally I don't buy the Sun and I don't particularly like seeing the pages flap open as you walk through the supermarket with your kids. However, nobody is forcing these girls to pose, and if we want to talk about the pressures on them to conform (body size and looks) then we need to look at where those pressures are coming from. It's certainly not (most) men that tell them they need to spend hours in front of the mirror everyday, or spend thousands on clothes. It's fashion magazines and the media. And what gender are the editors? JamesYoung

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree