MPs, celebrities and feminist
campaigners say ‘No More Page 3’ – but apart from making a few blokes feel a
bit miffed, just what will a ban on topless models in The Sun achieve? Zoe Thomas investigates.
In
the winter of 1970, news got sexy. It had been a tough year full of black-outs,
public sector strikes and rising costs. People needed a good reason to spend
hard-earned cash on newspapers full of doom and gloom. Larry Lamb, then-editor
of The Sun newspaper, had an idea up his sleeve. How do you get the hard-up public
to buy something? Simple: naked flesh.
Bikini-clad
women had been a staple of the paper since its re-launch the previous year, but
Lamb decided it was time to step things up a notch. The first topless model to
go to print was German bombshell Stephanie Rahn, in what the paper called ‘her
birthday suit’. Some called it degrading, others called it cheap – but for Rupert
Murdoch and the gang, Page Three was pure gold. Within one year of making bare
breasts a regular feature, The Sun’s circulation figures grew by a hefty 40% to
2.1 million.
![]() |
First Page Three girl Stephanie Rahn |
The
public’s desire for nudity in the news hasn’t waned a bit over the last four
decades, despite rising pressures from feminists. In 1986 MP Clare Short, or ‘Killjoy
Clare’ (The Sun’s words, not mine) tried to introduce a House of Commons Bill
banning topless models from national newspapers, clearly to no effect. In this
year’s National Readership Survey, the infamous redtop was found to have more
readers than any other newspaper, at 17.8 million a year. It beat The Times by
more than 12 million readers, The Guardian by 8.9 million and The Daily Mail by
1.3 million.
Despite
the paper’s popularity, Ms Short was not the only person to take offence to
what she believed was the sexual objectification of women. Today the campaign
is heating up again and this time there’s a significant following. A few weeks
ago I found myself at the heart of the debate when I went to see ‘No More Page Three’ campaigner Lucy Anne Holmes speak at The Brighton Dome’s Feminism 3.0, part of the Brighton
Digital Festival.
![]() |
Lucy Anne Holmes |
The former actress and author's argument has clearly resonated with a lot of people;
it’s already gained an impressive following of celebrities, teaching unions,
feminists and even 143 cross-party MPs. So far, almost 120,000 people have signed
the e-petition, which asks Sun editor David Dinsmore to: “Stop showing topless
pictures of young women in Britain’s most widely read newspaper, stop
conditioning your readers to view women as sex objects.”
![]() |
Katie Price AKA Jordan |
One
big-name signatory is Glamour Magazine – which is, incidentally, currently
running a feature called ‘Sexiest Man 2013’ where readers are asked to rate the
physical attractiveness of male celebrities. I can’t help but feel that this is
a bit hypocritical, given that the campaign it supports says: “In a society
where so many women a day are sexually assaulted, perpetuating a belief that
women are there for men’s sexual pleasure doesn’t seem right.” If the Page
Three ban were to go ahead on the grounds that objectifying women is wrong,
should competitions like these be banned too?
I also couldn’t help but wonder how the models
themselves would feel about Ms Holmes’ desire to ‘speak up for them’. Page Three
models can earn up to £100,000 a year with potential to amass multi-million
pound fortunes if they’re business minded like former Page Three girl Katie
Price. Many of these women have assets, confidence and money. What’s
disempowering about that?
![]() |
Kate Moss |
In
a recent Guardian interview, former Page Three model Hannah Pool said: “If a man is going to see a woman
as a piece of meat, they are going to anyway. It's the way people perceive the
industry. I've always been comfortable with taking my clothes off. I don't see
why it's different when Kate Moss gets her top off. It's just that I have big
boobs, so it's a different image.”
This
is an interesting point: would Page Three be acceptable if the images were more
‘artsy’ and technically interesting? Keen to explore this argument further, I arranged
a brief interview with an artist and former life drawing model from Surrey to
see what she thought about the potential ban.
“I think give people what they want. But then again
you don't get a Page Three full of naked men, not that I know of anyway,” the
26-year-old said.
When I asked how she felt posing naked in front of an
audience, she said:
“I felt scared at first but I did feel it was just for
art’s sake, I guess the fact that both women and men were drawing me made it
easier too. I definitely felt sort of empowered and a sense of freedom as well,
because you kind of have to shift your way of thinking. It’s kind of weird to
explain. A lot of people actually thanked me after saying they loved drawing
me. I was a bit curvier back then.”
![]() |
Stock image |
She
went on to explain how audience and context made a big difference. In life
drawing, the model is appreciated for his or her aesthetics – the quality of
light, the contours and the scope for experimentation. Is Page Three art? I’ll
save that question for another article, but in the words of Larry Lamb himself,
it may offer: “An image of beauty in a world where there is much
unpleasantness.” In terms of who’s seeing the images, The Sun actually boasts
an impressive female readership, with 43.6% at the most recent count (unless
they’re all feminists buying it to burn it).
I’ve
heard a lot from the campaigners, but I also wanted to know what fans of The
Sun thought. Matt, a 27-year-old police officer and body builder from Sussex
said: “Personally I like to keep fit and healthy and can see how being
confident in your own body can make you feel happy as a whole. Page Three
models look proud and happy with their appearance. It would seem more wrong to
take it away from them. For me it’s no different to the body building
magazines.”
Phillip,
from West Wales, said: “A discrete ogle makes
for a perfect start to the morning. May the institution never end. It’s part of
British culture like top shelf mags!”
Swindon-based
physiotherapist Emma, 28, said: “I say keep
Page Three, but only size 12+ models. None of these skinny barely there lasses.
Wouldn’t last a winter.”
This
in itself opens up another debate. As a number of critics have already asked,
what about the unattainably skinny figures of the models in women’s magazines?
Surely they foster more body insecurities than the curvier women featured in
The Sun?
Susan
from London said: “Much as I despise The Sun,
I don't think taking Page Three out of it would change things. Time and effort
would be better spent addressing the seriously sick ideas portrayed in other
media.”
![]() |
No More Page Three Campaigner |
Earlier
this year Rupert Murdoch Tweeted that he might replace the controversial page
with “A halfway house of glamorous fashionistas,” i.e. models in clothes. Now I
don’t know about you, but I’m far less offended by ‘Emily from Warrington’ in
her knickers than ‘glamorous fashionistas’ parading around in outfits I can’t
afford, joining the overflow of media messages saying a woman’s worth is in
what she buys.
While
I do believe that Lucy Holmes is admirable for starting such a prolific
campaign, I also think it’s a shame she’s chosen Page Three to target. Sex
appeal isn’t the antithesis of intelligence, and The Sun, whilst popular, isn’t
exactly reliable (it was recently voted the least trusted newspaper in the UK).
People enjoy it for its puns, its gaudiness, its lack of political correctness and
its 40p price tag. The writing is accessible, emotive and sensationalised. Nobody
in history ever bought it for a sensible view of current affairs. So shouldn’t Page Three be viewed in the same
light? Is it not a bit of fun, like a Chippendale show on a hen night?
![]() |
I wonder what he's thinking? |
Sexual
objectification is not a sexist issue: it’s human nature. When pictures of actor
Joe Manganiello emerging from the sea (all arms and abs) were published, I don’t
think anyone was fantasising about his views on the population crisis. Women
don’t read Glamour Magazine to vote on the ‘Kindest man of 2013’ award and I’m
willing to bet not all women who tune in to watch Toby Buckland on Gardener’s
World are in it for the potting tips. Both sexes have a propensity to objectify,
and it’s certainly not just a ‘man thing’. I’m worried that ‘No More Page Three’
could open up a debate that’s bigger than Emily from Warrington's bare breasts.
If Page Three gets banned, what’s next?
If Page Three gets banned, what’s next?