Young Reporter: Help new generation to value themselves
SOCIETY has a problem.
Children are waking up to newspapers open on the table baring breasts.
-
The All Seeing Eye is certainly seeing all. Children and teenagers are growing up surrounded by "the perfect body". It is degrading and generally just unnecessary.
I was thrilled recently to hear of the No More Page Three campaign regarding and surrounding a large national newspaper. The portrayed use of the female body is wrong. Women are not objects, and we certainly do not wish to be regarded in such a way.
Urgently seeking two / four bedroom properties for our lengthy list of possible suitable tenants with the lowest fees in town and excellent turn around rate for sourcing and managing.
Terms: Terms and Conditions Apply.
Contact: 01472 355 553
Valid until: Friday, June 21 2013
Newspapers have been producing texts for as long as we can remember. They circulate news and provide us with necessary information. Though why, I wonder, do perfectly wonderful admirable newspapers and magazines find the need to cheapen their product with "free breasts and eye candy"? A newspaper is for providing news, not for bringing children up in a world obsessed with the human body.
The body is personal. We cannot avoid sharing our beliefs, opinions, interests and even our private data with the general public. Yet there is one thing that truly belongs a secret, if we so allow it. Our body.
We were all born different. We love independently, uniquely. Therefore the images we see on our papers should not be clones of one another. No two bodies are the same, so why use photo editing techniques to produce this outcome? It is misleading. Offensive. It is degrading to the rest of society with a sense of privacy. The editing software produces a robot reconstruction – take the images away completely and we not only erase public humiliation, but size 0 obsession.
We find ourselves complaining about young adults posting images onto social networking sites, or the new pastime of "sexting". Yet what kind of example is being set when their parents have been openly peeking at breasts in the newspaper since before they were crawling? Hypocritical nonsense. There is so much open access to images in this modern day society, there just simply is no need for it to be among news articles.
Dead is the day when the gentleman would hold open the door for the lady. Why? There is a lack of ladies. I am troubled to see an increase in foul-mouthed, short-skirted young women, flaunting themselves on our streets. The meat is being thrown to the lion. Bad messages are being taught. The gentleman no longer expects a lady to cross his path and the lady no longer expects a gentleman. What a disappointment.
What harm can come from covering up? People are failing to see the links in this truly challenging world between young people and old ways. I find it uncanny that the public are quick to judge a young person of which they have helped to create.
I am a young person protesting against bare breasts so that the generation to come will be of a high class ranking, considering only attitude. You may be of another generation, wishing to argue against me. So I ask you this; shall I place you within a stereotypical category too?
Rapists have claimed that their victims "asked for it", by wearing short skirts. Abusers have claimed that women and men were "flaunting themselves, so why should they be treated any differently?" Murderers have claimed that they are "ridding the world of bad people". Extreme cases in an extreme world.
One bad name leads to another. She did it, so he certainly will. We need to go back to the start. Begin teaching the new generation that we are not the same. Unless you want us to be …
Times are changing, and so are we.
It is a wonderful surprise to see 82,798 signatures on the petition for No More Page Three. Perhaps, I hope, we have a chance of a classical society, bringing with it a following line of less rapes and abuse. Followed then by less drug abuse and violence. In a nutshell of course, but everything has a beginning.
Page three is unnecessary. Help the new generation to value themselves, and maybe they will value you. Join the campaign on http://nomorepage3.org/
4 Comments
by nietzche
Monday, March 04 2013, 12:34PM
“your comment regarding how a womans attire is a reason for a sexual assault is a dangerous statement and also unvalied, how is it nuns , muslim ladies wearing burkkas , o.a.ps become rape victims the excuse of provocative clothing inviting attacks is the last bastion of validity of the perpertrator and your statement gives credence to there argument ....”
by nietzche
Sunday, March 03 2013, 7:50PM
“Tom. I understand your concern but the way this paper over adorn a mundane trivial matter is moving into the realms of fantasy the reporting is poor, and a few relavant facts instead of hearsay and imagination would not go amiss. As regard this "young reporter" she should have some respect for others morals and dress sense and most of all there freedom of choice..”
by tomspence
Sunday, March 03 2013, 7:33PM
“Nietzsche: By definition it stands to reason that the 'young reporter' is lacking experience of 'scaling adult issues', but even though I also disagree with the prognosis of a desirable solution to a perceived problem, I feel the core of her argument is somewhat valid.
I at least see where she's coming from with regards to the 'objectification/dehumanisation' she describes as an ongoing concern. In fact I would take it further and say that the promotion of the 'perfect image/lifestyle' et al, via advertising/media has made us increasingly susceptible to the economics of envy and the allure of self-improvement/self-harm from which the archetypical 'big business' profits.
Like you, I strongly disagree that any form of state enforced censorship is an appropriate or effective way of managing what children are exposed to; nor do I believe there is any major correlation between breasts in a newspaper and how people behave, though I think I understand the writers' concerns. 'Nude imagery' isn't the issue in my opinion, but how a person views their fellow human beings is and being churlish, embrarrassed and/or indimidated about or by sex and sexuality is actually the start of it.
To give extra credence to this and in support of the 'negative effect prohibition' angle you mentioned I probably need only say one word: 'Vatican'! In the simplest terms I can muster; if it wasn't for sex none of us would be here to feel ashamed and not talk about it. We need to be able to talk to our children, to be open and honest with them, not ignore them in favour of careers, social lives or selfish whims while expecting somebody else will take responsibility for their wellbeing and learning
I would argue that rather than 'covering up' and censuring images as if the human body is somehow the cause of rape, sexual abuse, etc, it would be far more effective to teach children respect and responsibility toward one another as a method of controlling impulsive, lecherous cruel, etc behaviours. I feel the reason we have not already acheived this is because it is not profitable (and subsequently not portrayed as desirable) to care or be none conformist in a society built on the ruthless capilisation of manufactured desire and exploitation of 'outsiders' as the means of production to supply the demand.
Before we can even hope for any sense of decency and fairness we need to give up on this 'me-me-me, keep up with the Jones, dog-eat-dog, rat race' we've found ourselves living in. Every 'thing' is viewed as a possession and every one has obsessions which are encouraged through the mediums used to sell us an endless stream of needless things that help us feel good (temporarily) at the expense of the poorest people in the world.
As adults we cannot expect that children or young people have some sort of inert knowledge of issues beyond their experience. Surely it's up to us to share what we know to perpetuate juman development? In this context I feel you were a little bit harsh and unforgiving in your comment, unless you were trying to put her off writing for life?”
by nietzche
Sunday, March 03 2013, 10:20AM
“Who do you think you are chooseing what the public can and cannot see , hitler had these rulings and men women and children laid down ther lives to gain freedom to view what they choose , these type of laws have limitless boundries . I take it you are not experienced of scaling adult issues and don't see that censorship only fuels illegal trade (USA 1920s prohibition) leave your child like ideals in the school magazine and realise you need to mature your opinions and stop over sensatinaliseing such trivial subject matter....”