Wither Page 3: Right Campaign, Wrong Target?
Media reports today suggest that following a high profile campaign The Sun might be quietly dropping the Page 3 photo of a topless (female) model in its print edition. The 'Page 3 Girl' has been a daily feature of the paper for forty-four years and as a symbol of leery misogyny and media sexism it has been rightly criticised.
Page 3 is a powerful symbol but there are more important feminist battlegrounds today. Indeed, it can be argued that it is something of an 'Aunt Sally' - an obvious target and that victory over it will make little real difference. I would argue that while the Stop Page 3 campaign is right protesting against the objectification of women, they picked the wrong target.
As I was planning to do some Feminism revision with my A2 students next week, I thought it might be a good idea to pose some questions to explore the issue, based broadly around the following arguments (obviously stated in a rather more neutral manner!):
The 'Victory for the neoConservative Mary Whitehouse Brigade' Argument.
Growing up in the 1970s and 80s I made it a rule to be wary of anything that Mary Whitehouse would have approved of. Her religiously inspired moral crusade was enthusiastically taken up by the anti-Libertarian right who wanted to tell everybody what they were and were not allowed to do or say or even think when it came to sexuality. Prime Minister John Major famously espoused a 'Back to Basics' approach to morals which included a heavy dose of 'Victorian Values' for the masses while concealing his extramarital affair; different rules apply to those wielding power it seems. This argument posits that by limiting women’s ability to express themselves the campaign has actually played into the hands of those who for political, ideological or religious reasons want to exercise control over women's freedoms.
The Elitist Argument
The readership of the Sun is broadly working class, and it is reasonable to assume most of the models are too. Critics could portray the campaign against Page 3 as an elitist Middle and Upper class attack on working class culture, this time the attack coming from the Liberal left as well as the right.
The Body Ownership Argument
Prudish sentiment is on the rise. In general culture, bodies are being covered up (again, consider who benefits from this and who loses out). Nudity is less common on mainstream television than a couple of decades ago although a huge range of pornography is available on digital tv if you want to pay a subscription and free online if you don't mind or don't care about your browsing and sexual tastes being tracked by advertisers and probably the government too. The models on Page 3 might be relatively poorly paid and used to sell newspapers, but why should they be denied the right to model topless if that is their choice? It is, after all, their body. Displaying a nipple (unless you are male of course) is frowned upon, even if it is to feed a baby. It is almost as if the 1970's didn't happen.
The Body Fascism Argument
With Page 3 (seemingly) gone are the pressures on women generally and young girls in particular reduced? Music videos routinely show thin, scantily clad female singers and dancers in a sexualised (and often submissive) manner, performing for the ‘male gaze’. What message is that sending to young women about how to succeed in life?
Now I have to hold my hand up here, I have not seen a copy of The Sun for some time but my recollection is that the typical Page 3 model is not a size zero supermodel. While perhaps not the average body shape the Page 3 model offered a somewhat more realistic portrayal of an aspirational body shape to her peers than those found in the fashion magazines.
The Bigger Problem, and the Better Target?
Which leaves us with the newspaper that had taken over from The Sun in influence: the Daily Mail. With its 'Sidebar of Shame' criticising women who transgress its ideas of proper behaviour or appearance; its leering over the 'womanly curves' of teenage celebrities and defining women by their body shape rather than their brains or abilities, the Daily Mail is arguably much more pernicious in its undermining of the self image and self confidence of women than 'Leggy Linda from Luton' ever was.
Maybe it should have been the campaigners' target.
References
