The Sun executives aren't just sexist pieces of shit, they're also deceitful, manipulative teenagers

A number of news outlets reported that The Sun would no longer be running images of topless women on “Page Three” and the BBC reported that, “The Times, which has the same publisher as the Sun, said it understood Friday’s edition of the Sun was the last that would carry images of topless women, although they would continue online.”

Since Monday, there have been no topless models on Page Three, further supporting the widespread understanding that the feature, first introduced in 1970, had been dropped. What the topless models were replaced with was not much better — on Monday, Rosie Huntington-Whiteley was shown wearing Marks & Spencer underwear and Tuesday’s Page Three featured two bikini-wearing actresses running on a beach.

This sent a clear message that The Sun’s editors gave no shits about treating women with respect but did give the impression they’d made a decision to can the porn. This was no accident. Like a bunch of sociopathic teenagers, they were playing a game with us — not only did they not wish to treat women as human beings, but they were willing to manipulate and toy with the media and with feminists in order to convey their staunch misogyny.

Today, The Sun tweeted an image of a topless woman with this caption:

Further to recent reports in all other media outlets, we would like to clarify that this is Page 3 and this is a picture of Nicole, 22, from Bournemouth.

“We would like to apologise on behalf of the print and broadcast journalists who have spent the last two days talking and writing about us.

S

Anti-feminist nitwit and former Page Three model, Jodie Marsh, who complained on Twitter yesterday that women who campaigned against the objectification of women were “just jealous and insecure” (Jodie is 36 in year-age, but 16 in brain-age) said today that she was happy the feminists have apparently lost the battle for “human” status and helpfully suggested we start paying attention to things that “really matter,” like violence against women and girls over there (no really, look over there!).

I guess the only way women women can “be proud of their bodies” is if men approve of them and want to touch them with their penises.

Whatever, The Sun. Pissing us off only makes us stronger and more determined. Also, as noted by No More Page Three, your childish shenanigans have only brought further publicity to the campaign to bring you down. There are more of us, and we aren’t giving up. Good luck, bros.

 

Consider supporting our work with a donation!

Meghan Murphy
Meghan Murphy

Founder & Editor

Meghan Murphy is a freelance writer and journalist. She has been podcasting and writing about feminism since 2010 and has published work in numerous national and international publications, including New Statesman, Vice, Al Jazeera, The Globe and Mail, I-D, Truthdig, and more. Meghan completed a Masters degree in the department of Gender, Sexuality and Women’s Studies at Simon Fraser University in 2012 and lives in Vancouver, B.C. with her dog.

Like this article? Tip Feminist Current!

$
Personal Info

Donation Total: $1

  • Meh

    Sociopathic teenagers is the perfect way to describe them.

    Never underestimate the wrath of the tiny penised ones.

    • susan

      Seriously sociopaths. The way they said: “This is page 3, and this a picture of 22 year old Nicole.” To rub it into people’s faces. SO FUCKED UP!!!

      • susan

        I’m sorry, not “people’s” faces, “WOMEN’S” faces. To say, “fuck you, women, who think you might have some power or deserving of dignity and respect. WE OWN YOU!”

        • Meh

          Yeah, exactly.

          Women have been laughed at by men for ages, and it really hasn’t stopped us from marching on – as annoying as it may be in that moment.

          Our complaining seems to be bothering them/amping up their trolly-ness. E.g., the PR guy trolling folks on twitter. He wouldn’t be doing this if he wasn’t feeling a bit annoyed at us.

          Oh well. KEEP POINTING AND LAUGHING AT THEIR DOODLES, SISTERS! IT’S WOOOORRRRKKKIIIINNNNNGGGGGGGGG!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Paper is a such an adaptable material, so easy to carry, fold, write on, mâché, tear, burn…

    • Sabine

      …wipe one’s backside with…

  • Meh

    Marsh: “Women CAN do it all!”

    WOW I totally forgot that we run the world!!! THANKS FOR REMINDING ME JODIE!!! BOOBS!!!!!!!!!

    • Meghan Murphy

      Jodie says we can, now get to it! And by “it,” of course, I mean selling protein powder on Twitter.

      • derrington

        Jodie says we should all be proud of our bodies, and should campaign against FGM, which is why she rushed off to get a boob job and has had several other bits of her body altered by surgery. Maybe we should point out that cosmetic surgery is very often not vastly different from FGM apart from a bit of aenasthetic and a medical certificate.

  • I should have seen this coming, damn it! Never trust right wing bastards. Hopefully this will indeed strengthen the anti-sexualisation cause.

    Didn’t Jodi Marsh claim to be a feminist? Not that there’s much difference between fake feminists and anti-feminists, but for the sake of accuracy I am going to refer to her as a liberal feminist. Funnily enough, “sex-negative” feminists are the ones fighting female genital mutilation. Liberals do not fight it because cultural relativism says you cannot criticise other people’s cultures (not that they let people criticise their own, either).

    Even more ironic is the fact that female genital mutilation is aimed at making females into more appealing sexual partners, so it is actually a result of the same kind of reasoning that leads to breast implants, high heeled shoes, surgically altered vaginas and, of course, the page 3 images, all of which Marsh probably supports. I guess she thinks messing up women’s body is okay if you do it the Western way and yet I doubt any liberal is going to accuse her of being racists. They reserve that accusation for people who fight against misogyny consistantly.

    • Meghan Murphy

      She is not a liberal feminist, though… She is simply not a feminist at all…

      • I don’t think liberal feminists are feminists, LOL. They put far more effort into trying to “liberate sex” than into liberating women. But this woman did say that she is “very much a feminist”, while preaching anti-feminist, pro-sexualisation nonsense, so she fits my definition for liberal feminist. Of course, she is very nasty to anti-sexualisation feminists, but so are most liberals.

        To Shauna, yeah you are right breast implants could easily be called “breast mutilation”. Maybe we should start a trend of refering to extreme Western beauty practices as mutilations of female (and in a few cases, male) body. That is what they are, after all.

        Let’s fight FBM (female breast mutilation) together!

        • Meh

          Naomi Wolf is a libfem, so was Friedan. As much as both women have pissed me off, I wouldn’t put them in the same boat as Marsh…

          • Morag

            Thanks, Meh. I do think it’s important to remember that serious liberal feminists do fight for women’s reproductive rights, education, equal pay, etc. They work with the system to reform it (and, unlike radicals, have faith in our systems and institutions).

            Fun-feminism is an off-shoot, I suppose, and not feminist at all — which is to say, the form of “feminism” that men tend to like best and approve of. In fact, it’s kind of a male-media creation, isn’t it?

          • Morag

            P.S.: when I say “men” here, I mean liberal men.

          • Meh

            Yes, I agree Morag.

            Naomi Wolf was one of the writers who was important in my eating disorder recovery. She has said some ridiculously stupid things, but she has also said some good stuff, too.

            Unfortunately, she panders to men at the end of the day. Still don’t think she’s anywhere nearly as bad as Marsh. Marsh is another ball park.

          • Morag

            I’m glad that Wolf had something valuable to offer to you and to other women. I don’t follow her work that closely, but I have read a couple of her books and I think of her as, primarily, a diarist. She writes very well, I think, on an emotional level, about her personal experiences of girlhood, adolescence and womanhood. Her point-of-view is quite particular, but there’s something for some women to glean and use from that particularity. Pandering to men is something we can and should criticize, but a fun-fem she is not. She speaks clearly about the ways in which patriarchal culture does real harm to women’s bodies and minds.

    • Shauna

      Very lucid points – well said. On that note, then, Jodie chose to undergo FBM (breast) and FNM (nasal), among other surgeries, for the reasons you’ve highlighted above. Funny that. All boob jobs are FBM, actually. God, I love this site and the clever wimmin on it. Thanks.

  • jin

    how precious for a woman who has had countless plastic surgeries to better fit a cartoonized version of female sexiness to admonish women to be proud of their bodies no matter what shape or size. what a misogynist shill.

    • Sabine

      Bloody right, jin. Listening to what she so clearly believes is so desperately sad. Jodi Marsh is simply a product of patriarchy served up for the delectation of men, defending her “choices” and never questioning what influenced those choices in the first place. She was bullied as a child for her looks, (hence the cartoonish surgeries; first was a nose job at 15) has admitted to body dysmorphia (she is not happy unless she is a 7st size zero) has been nearly raped and was stalked and harassed by a “fan” who wanted to fuck her for real rather than just wank over her nude images….and yet she is foghorning the loudest about degrading, demeaning and virulently sexist pictures of women as part of a “family” newspaper being somehow feminist and totally harmless? WHAAAAAAAT?!!!

      • jin

        the context you offer is very disturbing! if she wasn’t so righteous i’d feel sad for her.

        we’re all doing what we can to survive in patriarchy, and we all notice how we’re rewarded for playing by its rules. but to try to play both sides while admonishing women who are fighting to be seen as fully human places her firmly in the friends of patriarchy camp IMO.

        • Sabine

          You won’t hear any argument from me, the woman is 100% a F.O.P!

  • Shauna

    Ooooh, them’s fighting words from the oh-so-evolved inadequates at The Sun. Did the shareholders smack your bums for losing punters?
    Anyway, on a different tack/tic, today (& henceforth), I will mostly be
    1) scribbling on any nipples I see on display or over the page with a big fat marker pen and
    2) doing a Je Suis style Page 3 pastiche but with topless or full nude pix of our beautiful, muscley & hung-like-a-fuppin-donkey ally Craig Parker (Haldir, Gleber etc). Surely tbere are lots of other famous hunky allies who would oblige, too.
    If enough people plastered the internet with “inappropriate” male flesh for once/for a change, then maybe …..
    And even if no dialogue or reduction in female flesh is achieved, at least it’ll make the inadequates, with their saggy man boobs, saggy ballbags, beer bellies, flacid muscles and bald heads, feel, well, the way they think feminists do when we see Tracy, just turned 18, from Coventry 🙂 Gotta make their skinny little Wotsit dicks sad, somehow.
    Feel free to delete this before the men get here & rumble my ruse LOL

    • Wow, ninja’d! I agree with you so much.

    • Missfit

      You have a good point. I wish images of men’s bodies (young, muscular, photoshopped bodies) were as widely displayed as women’s, in every context and for any purpose (also altering women’s expectations of men’s bodies in the process). You know how men will say ‘I’m not a feminist, I’m an egalitarian’, well here’s your equality.

  • I’ve had this idea for a while and maybe I can get some feedback from my sisters. First off, I’m a radical feminist which most people who comment here don’t need an education on that.

    Maybe we can start a publication where we impose the same kind of objectification on men. See how they like it.

    I swear I’m tired of poor women getting laughed at, spending years campaigning, and then get proverbially told to fuck off back into their place.

    • Sabine

      Sometimes I do wonder if that’s what it’s going to take in order for it to finally sink in. Imagine if we replaced the women on page 3 with conventionally attractive male models with huge dicks smiling at the camera for us women to phwooooar over at breakfast or on the train on the way to work or as we told our friends in the office that we wouldn’t mind a “bit of that” whilst winking at male colleagues paid less than us for doing the same job….

    • Meh

      Lol interesting idea! The only way I could see that working (and REEEEEAAALLLLYY annoying men) is if all pics of women were gone and replaced by men being objectified – EVERYWHERE.

      I’ve seen situations where men claim reverse-sexism (LMFAO). Eg., women ogling male dancers in g-strings, etc but it’s not the same thing. Men don’t have this shit forced in their faces all the time, so it doesn’t bother them as much.

      The way that women truly get to men is to continue reminding them just how inadequate they are (in the bedroom, physically, financially, etc).

      • RadFemPornBasher

        They must be posed properly. Most “hunk” pix show strong, tough looking men with that tough guy stare into the camera. I want them to feel degraded, not tough looking. And holding a mop or doing the dishes, smiling and friendly looking.

    • Shauna

      Not feasible, costwise? But a Hunk Of The Day blog/site/emailing list anyone can access free?
      Yes, Hunks Holding Kittens or Puppies* = total viral clickbait.
      And status symbols or boytoys that chavy Sun readers can’t afford.
      Uniforms, black tie, all bulging open, of course.
      Time to up our game, massively, have fun doing it whilst proving we neither hate men per se nor our own bodies.

    • FrustratedRadFem

      Have you seen the Hawkeye Initiative? Many female comic book fans were sick of the hypersexualised depictions of female characters so they started drawing male characters in the same poses it’s hilarious and it pissed off many men. It shows the original image with new and improved male version to show the contrast. Unlike men’s idea of satire it actually a. qualifies as satire and b. actually is funny. Go look it up.

      When men say women/feminists don’t have a sense of humour they mean we don’t laugh at their misogyny, racism and other bigotries. Men get testerical about women having a go at them. They mean that we won’t humour them women are socialised to be polite and allow others to save face. Men however won’t bother with politeness and try to out do others even when there is no competition. Men say that it’s banter but don’t allow women to bash them back, they prefer things one-sided funny that. When we do snark back we are admonished and told that’s not the correct way of going about things and how unfair we are being. They know there’s a powerplay because women are held to much higher standards of good behaviour than men. Basically they call us whores then expect us to act like saints.

      It reminds me of that article by Time telling feminists that ‘pretending to hate men’ is wrong and we should stop because we are ‘hurting our cause’. Yet there is no call to men to stop hating on women. Why is irony and satire lost on them when it’s at their expense? I thought they wanted a good laugh men should be laughing at women being ‘misandrists’ (my spellcheck doesn’t recognise that word). Can’t men take a joke?

      They want us to be their audience but will undermine the hell out of female comedians. Whenever I see the comment section of female comedians they are always complaining how unfunny women are no matter how good she was just trying to shit stir. I know humour is subjective but it’s pretty obvious it’s on purpose, they don’t make an issue when male comedians are shit they just say this is shit and move on.

      • Shauna

        Will look up Hawkeye Initiative – thank you 🙂

      • Morag

        “When men say women/feminists don’t have a sense of humour they mean we don’t laugh at their misogyny, racism and other bigotries.”

        Exactly.

        Or, as Atwood said: “Men are afraid that women will laugh at them. Women are afraid that men will kill them.”

      • FormerLurker

        FrustratedRadFem,

        Some female comedians are funny, some aren’t. Like a lot of other folks, i don’t find the ones entertaining who rely on a lot of filth and profanity.

        Lily Tomlin, Elayne Boosler, Rita Rudner = funny

        Sarah Silverman, Margaret Cho, Lisa Lampanelli, Kathy Griffin = not funny

        Ellen DeGeneres, Janeane Garofalo = kinda, sometimes funny

        • FrustratedRadFem

          If we’re talking about what’s funny

          Not funny: Dane Cook Tosh 2.0, Lois CK, way too many male comedians, dudes who say ‘lighten up’ they sound like alcoholic who are having an a intervention. The ‘crave that mineral’ meme (it’s over let it die)

          Family guy- they try too hard to be ‘offensive’ that it’s not really offensive anymore. Their cutaways take too long.

          I’ve given up on stand up unless I find a good video. Vines and people on tumblr make me laugh. So so such stupid shit there. Spiders Georg meme always gets me no matter how old it is.

          PS I bet the guys who work at the sun went to all boys schools with prentious Latin mottos and have bad Brittish teeth.

      • Sabine

        Thanks for the Hawkeye recommendation, just brilliant! The photos in particular made me roar!

      • susan

        I put the Hawkeye Initiative in What’s Current. Thanks for the recommendation!

      • ptittle

        Just looked it up. BRILLIANT!!!!!!!!! Thanks so much for the information. (We have got to make this site known far and wide!!!)

  • FormerLurker

    No such thing as bad publicity, isn’t that the old saying? Looks like The Sun knew what they were doing all along. Machiavelli would be proud…so would Karl Rove!

  • Sabine

    I am SO fucking angry about this!!! How dare they taunt us like this? FUCKING ARSEHOLES!!!!!!! I just hope and pray that their blatant piss-taking stunt will backfire badly on them, riling people who weren’t bothered enough to protest before but, after these juvenile “We’ve got all the power and we’re laughing at you” antics will rise up and say NO. Honestly, I am absolutely seething….I need to go somewhere and scream very loudly! Time to really step up this campaign.

  • FrustratedRadFem

    When women piss off men they send death and rape threats and stalk women sometimes they attack women in response. There are no real consequences for men annoying women. Bad publicity? notice how when women get bad reputations it follows them but men can have their bad and criminal behaviour expunged if other men like him (male celebrities are the biggest offenders). Seeing as men own pretty much everything including public discourse it’s not a fight on equal footing. If there one fault of feminists it’s that we are too reasonable we always have to go through the proper course of action and expect overgrown man-children to be decent. This whole stunt is reminiscent of the hustler meat grinder cover. Women always have to be gracious but men can burp in your face and think it’s the height of logic.

    About the comfy shoes comment isn’t that shaming women for their choice of attire? No bra?…. um you weren’t wearing one for your photo shoots so what are you getting at there? I though not wearing a bra would be sexy isn’t that what everything a woman does be? Hypocrite. Also I think she’s confusing libertarianism with feminism. This choosey choice shit needs to die beside I’m pretty sure the having it all myth was created by the media not feminists. It’s really gross she’s trying to frame the discussion around ‘being proud of your body’ women want to preserve our human dignity and not have our bodies treated as public property. Is anyone else tired of being told that we need to be proud of our bodies?

    Her contempt for other women is so blatant so why does she care if any given woman hates men. She’s obviously being used as pawn against other women, she’s their mouthpiece if she was feminist she’d tell them to cut the shit and let women work out our differences without male interference. Has she used her platform to support women’s rights or donated any money to women’s causes? What are her politics apart from ‘I do what I want’. This woman is 36, I’m 23 and I’m embarrassed by her, grow the fuck up. The ‘you’re just jealous’ trope was childish in high school and beyond pathetic now.

    This shit doesn’t stay in the western world it spreads everywhere. She basically pointed her finger saying “look misogyny over in those black and brown people’s countries not here” it’s a racist distraction. Does she have a anti-feminist handbook she says everything your typical misogynist fuck wit says. You can care about more than one thing at a time and women’s representation matters and affects women’s status this shit is all connected. For example porny representation of women’s body dehumanises women which in turn justifies mistreatment and disrespect towards women. It also distorts the way women see their bodies and encourages them to have their bodies surgically mutilated (cosmetic surgery). Breast implants are dodgy as hell many of them leak which can cause cancer and other health problems. There are plenty of dodgy cosmetic surgeons (they can’t make it as real doctors) and the surgeries that go wrong are devastating.

  • Meh

    News just in: Morons associated no more page 3 with the introduction of sharia law in Britain… http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/01/20/twitter-the-sun-page-three-islam-sharia-muslims-_n_6505456.html?1421748345

    You couldn’t make this shit up.

    • Meghan Murphy

      OH MY GOD.

    • Shauna

      I actually can’t bring myself to open that link tonight, Meh (9.30pm Ireland) after a whole day of taking and reading pure hatred, all-encompassing
      pig-ignorance, deliberate strawmanning and putrid bile on comments sections and twitter since very early this morning.
      Most of the targets stuck to the usual tactic of “not feeding the trolls” but the trolls were not lone sharks today, they were pack animals and absolutely incensed.
      Prudery & censorship was one of the main accusations ~ hilarious!!! UK TV has a 9pm watershed which is universally honoured and rightly so while *The Sun itself* anaesthetizes the word tit by asterixing the vowel “i”. How very coy of them!!! So they picture pinky perky t*ts but won’t call them that, even on the same page!!! Ditto a*se and some other naughty rudey vocab. Hypocrisy much?
      Another parry was “Well just don’t buy/look then you ‘;’-****jbjhhj$&%^£” For the love of Christ, how can they NOT GET THAT IT’S NOT JUST ABOUT THE NIPPLES OR THE KNICKERS?
      But hey, we’re all just driven radfem-mad with jealousy and have spaniel ears tits.
      I did actually answer some of the nastiest and obviously adolescent ones with some choice language of my own and facetious theories as to why THEY hated women and tits so much …. and then blocked them before they could insult me back.
      I’m exhausted.
      But it was reassuring to see just how many male allies took on the trolls and gave as good as they got in our defence and on our behalf today. Silver lining (sort of). And maybe why there were none on here today.

      • Meh

        “For the love of Christ, how can they NOT GET THAT IT’S NOT JUST ABOUT THE NIPPLES OR THE KNICKERS?”

        EXACTLY!

        I go to great lengths trying to explain to people that this isn’t about nipples. It’s like ppl are out there thinking, “THE MEN AT THE SUN JUST REEEEEAAALLLLY LOVE BOOBS! IT’S ALL ABOUT THE BOOBS!” This is clearly about something else.

        • Shauna

          This debate would be redundant if there were a Page 5 featuring naked male torsos. There isn’t, never has been and never will be. Therefore, this is a case of sexism pure and simple, as Meghan rightly pointed out in her original piece; not personal choice, not censorship, not nudity, not prudishness .
          Women (along with gay men or even straight aesthetes) appreciate a fit, toned, handsome hunk, too. What’s not to like? Whether women would pay cash money every morning to ogle one or turn apoplectic if deprived of one on a daily basis – I doubt it given that women are not slaves to their vaginas or to visual stimuli or non-status-related aphrodisiacs.
          I know nobody who reads any of the red-top, tit-fest tabloids but from the grammar and proliferation of football paraphernalia, I think the troll/commenters’ demographic is pretty obvious ie not people who can grasp anything that isn’t lowest common denominator, dumbed-down, 2D portrayals of a certain “style” of woman.
          Incidentally, there seems to be a bizarre consensus among Sun readers (as I intimated above, not the brightest buttons in the box, admittedly) that women are a minority! Half the population is a minority interest group? Beggars belief.
          And I so won’t be reading any comments from Mr Men sniffing around here and talking out of their inadequate “peen peens”.

          • Shauna

            Sorry, dimensions are not my forte!!! Sun, etc stills are 1D; anime & gamer vids are 2.

            And I am a “3D pig whore”. Allegedly.

      • Last night the CBC national radio program As It Happens covered the Sun’s reneging and I was very pleased that they only spoke to Ceris Aston from No More Page 3. The tone of the piece indicated that the “mammary lapse” headline was more than enough to encapsulate the Sun’s “side of the debate”.

    • Sabine

      Seriously cannot face reading this, I’ll end up with an aneurysm….

  • jin

    i can’t get over how much of a slap in the face this is. it’s time for direct action from our sisters in the UK.

    picket the Sun? picket and boycott newsagents who sell it?

    this blatant disrespect needs to be met with escalated action.

  • This is a minor matter, but is the Sun apologizing on behalf of or to the journalists who covered this story? Makes me concerned about the editorial quality of this paper.

    How do people here feel about the Sunshine Girls in Canada? I never liked them, but least they’ve got tops on.

    • Meghan Murphy

      What’s a Sunshine Girl?

      • Morag

        Photo of a young woman, provocatively and/or scantily-clad (but not bare-breasted), accompanied by a little playboy-esque biography which tells the male audience what she likes to do when she’s not posing for them. Here, I’ll make one up for you:

        “Lovely Linda enjoys drinking Molson with the boys, and collects snowmobiles and pick-up trucks. In her spare time, she likes to study the human genome, and has converted a small bedroom into a laboratory so she can pursue this hobby at home. This buxom beauty has brains!!!”

        • Meghan Murphy

          Oh gawd. K I found them. You’re right on the money. http://www.calgarysun.com/sunshine-girl/archives

          But I want to do one too….

          Liberty is a fun-loving free spirit. She’ll blow you while you watch the game with you bros and then eat a pound of chicken wings in her bra! She stays in shape by doing keg stands and reproducing. Fav movie is that one with the fast cars that explode.

          • Morag

            Ha! Exploding cars are a MUST. Almost as important as a “free spirit” (wink wink).

            These blurbs practically write themselves, eh? Ugh!

          • All thanks to Rupert Murdoch, the progenitor of the entire global “Sun” brand.

    • Shauna

      Anemone,

      No, no, entirely justifiable pedantry there – you go, girl LOL

      And please don’t be “concerned about the editorial quality of this paper” because NOBODY else is, least of all Rupert Murdoch and not one of its 2 million readers ~ see funny clip below

      http://www.thepoke.co.uk/2015/01/22/vintage-yes-minister-script-explains-page3-hoo-ha-perfectly/

      Night night all

      (•_•)
      ( (>
      /

  • Ellesar

    I wonder how Jodie Marsh would suggest that I, a 50yo fat woman who has had a mastectomy, should be proud of my body?!

    I am guessing that stripping off for the lads would not be encouraged then!

    And yes, it is highly ironic that JM is opposed to FGM (presumably the non Western kind), but has had LOADS of cosmetic surgery. If she CHOSE a labia trim (because of course our labia should be tiny, like a prepubescent girls) of course THAT wouldn’t be FGM, because it was her ‘choice’ (I am am sure that some of the girls subjected to FGM believe that they have made a ‘choice’ too).

    • Morag

      “I wonder how Jodie Marsh would suggest that I, a 50yo fat woman who has had a mastectomy, should be proud of my body?!”

      Yes. Jodie doesn’t mention that, with fun-feminism, there’s an expiry date on “empowerment” and that men decide when that is. What a silly woman. I hope she plans on never growing older, never losing her shape, and never becoming sick or disabled.

  • Sabine

    https://www.change.org/p/david-dinsmore-take-the-bare-boobs-out-of-the-sun-nomorepage3

    Please sign the petition if you haven’t already and share far and wide! We trying to get to a million signatures 🙂

  • Carmel

    Hi Meghan, a wonderful article as always. I’ve been following your articles and this website for quite a while now and very much agree with the opinions presented. Not sure if you’ve posted a list before, but was wondering if you have any books on (your/my opinion of) feminism you would personally recommend? I do a lot of online reading but am looking for some hard copy material. Other commenters please feel free to add your suggestions!

    • C.K. Egbert

      Here are some authors I’d recommend:
      Catharine MacKinnon (especially “Feminism Unmodified” and “Toward a Feminist Theory of the State”)
      Andrea Dworkin (especially “Intercourse”)
      bell hooks
      Sheila Jeffreys
      Kate Millet (“Sexual Politics”)
      Marilyn Frye “The Politics of Reality”

    • Cale

      Pornland: How Porn has Hijacked Our Sexuality by Gail Dines
      Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture by Ariel Levy
      Big Porn Inc: Exposing the Harms of the Global Pornography Industry by Melinda Tankard Reist and Abigail Bray (eds)
      Laura Mulvey’s seminal essay, “Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema”
      Ways of Seeing by John Berger

    • C.K. Egbert’s list is absolutely excellent.

      You might also check our “Delusions of Gender” by Cordelia Fine. She’s a social psychologist who demonstrates how studies on brain sex tend to be flawed. Very handy for those tiresome conversations with someone who insists “but SCIENCE says ladies aren’t wired for leadership. They prefer wiping asses and cleaning toilets because of their brains”

    • … also what Cale said. 🙂

    • Carmel

      Thank you all for your fantastic suggestions, it is greatly appreciated.
      Carmel

    • Meghan Murphy

      Thanks everyone for your excellent suggestions for Carmel! Y’all covered all the books I would have recommended 🙂

  • Michael Max

    It seems to me that if a woman chooses to have her naked or near-naked pictures posted in a magazine or on a website then she should have a right to do that. Is ithe feminist position that women should be explicitly deprived of that right?

    • Meghan Murphy

      Too late I just made naked ladies illegal 🙁

      • Morag

        You mean it’s been you, all along, “depriving” women of their human rights? I’ll be damned! I thought this whole time that it was men and their patriarchal systems. This is a real game-changer.

        • Meghan Murphy

          Yes, it was me. Sorry about that.

    • You’re focussing on the wrong person. It’s the people who pay women to take their clothes off who make this happen. It’s about them and what they want.

      The women who pose for these pictures are either in it for the money or in it for the fun. They’ve likely never really had anything bad happen to them personally and don’t really see the big picture, feminism-wise. (They might or might not later on.) They like to flirt and want to enjoy themselves while they are young and conventionally attractive. They will probably go on to marry and have children and not have a chance like this in the future. I met a former Playboy waitress who was like this. She had a blast when she was younger, then settled down with husband and kids, and in her words, “grew up”, unlike some of the (male) people she met at a reunion who seemed to think she let herself go. There was a girl in my high school who was a Sunshine Girl, too. She was a model and this was a gig for her.

      None of this is about them. It’s about the people who pay for these pictures and put them in their newspapers.

      • Missfit

        ‘she let herself go’ = she is naturally aging or she doesn’t put much of her energy into altering her body in a way that sexually appeals to men.

        When applied to men, means hasn’t washed for 2 weeks.

      • Michael Max

        “You’re focussing on the wrong person.”

        The focus of my post is not something that you get to have an input on. It is what I decide it to be and what actually appears in the written content. In this case the focus was/is on women who choose to pose for pictures.

        “It’s the people who pay women to take their clothes off who make this happen. It’s about them and what they want.”

        A woman has to make a choice to pose for those pictures – that’s a personal, independent choice. Otherwise it is not happening.

        • Meghan Murphy

          It is not at all a “personal choice,” but an entirely public one.

        • Meh

          “The focus of my post is not something that you get to have an input on. It is what I decide it to be and what actually appears in the written content.”

          Wow, you sound like a bit of an aggressive fuckwit tbh

          • Morag

            Not, “a bit,” though. He sounds positively violent. Women, he says, should not have “input” on issues that affect women. Not when men are speaking. This is undiluted male supremacy. He’s not even hiding.

          • Meh

            Absolutely, Morag.

            And he’s doing it in the name of protecting women’s “choices” to have random losers wank to pictures of their bodies. A true gentleman.

        • Sabine

          You managed to stop your knuckles grazing the floor long enough to type? Bravo “Michael Max”. Shame it’s a load of aggressive, pointless shit, but you get a gold star for what must have been a monumental effort.

          “The focus of my post is not something that you get to have an input on. It is what I decide it to be and what actually appears in the written content.”

          Fuck off then. We come here to discuss things you moron. What utter twaddle.

          • Michael Max

            “Fuck off then. We come here to discuss things you moron. What utter twaddle. ”

            I thought my meaning was clear from my previous explanation, but let me try again. Another poster implied that I focused on the “wrong” thing in my original post. I replied, factually, that what I focus on in my posts is entirely up to me, and that I focused on precisely what I meant to. That’s all.

            P.S. I ignore childish name-calling. Feel free to continue it if you wish, but you’d be wasting your time.

          • bella_cose

            How about this then? The focus of your post is entirely irrelevant to the discussion at hand. You don’t have even the tiniest understanding of the topic, and no one wants to waste their time explaining it to you. Accept that you are way out of your depth, and continue to read the articles and comments here and learn something, or move on.

          • Sabine

            “The focus of your post is entirely irrelevant to the discussion at hand. You don’t have even the tiniest understanding of the topic, and no one wants to waste their time explaining it to you. Accept that you are way out of your depth..”

            Hence the accurate fact-stating that you referred to as “name calling”.

            bella_cose has surely spelt it out clearly enough this time, non?

    • Missfit

      Hahahaha! To see this posted here, it cannot NOT be sarcastic, right?

      And if I choose to have pictures of my hairy legs posted in a popular national newspaper, then I should have a right to do so, right? Wait what? Oh, it’s the men on top who decide. But what about my choice? Nobody want to see my hairy legs they say. Well then, I would like to see good looking near-naked men and I’m 100% positive there are men who would be choosing to show their abs (they work hard for these!) and receive money for it. Why don’t we give these men the opportunity to exert their choice? Wait what? Men do not want to see that? Ok, so I guess we will have to defer to men then, they only have the means to decide what are the choices and what people should see. Feminism!

      Pssst, there are plenty of places for women who wants to show their boobs for money to do so, don’t worry for them, they’ll find someplace else, they won’t be deprived of that fundamental right if no more page 3.

      • Michael Max

        “And if I choose to have pictures of my hairy legs posted in a popular national newspaper, then I should have a right to do so, right? Wait what?”

        Yes, of course you have a right to do that, why wouldn’t you? The only question is whether anybody would pay you for that. Chances are slim, but at least the freedom to try is there.

        “Well then, I would like to see good looking near-naked men and I’m 100% positive there are men who would be choosing to show their abs (they work hard for these!) and receive money for it. Why don’t we give these men the opportunity to exert their choice? Wait what?”

        What are you talking about? You can start a paper that posts pictures of scantily clad men. Men may not buy it, but they will not deny you the right to publish it and neither will men be denied the right to pose for pictures. Unless feminists get involved again, I suppose.

        “Ok, so I guess we will have to defer to men then, they only have the means to decide what are the choices and what people should see.”

        Here it is, in black and white, what every person should memorize and live by: people decide for THEMSELVES what they choose to see. They have no right to decide that for others, unless the others are their dependents (children and such).

        “Pssst, there are plenty of places for women who wants to show their boobs for money to do so, don’t worry for them, they’ll find someplace else, they won’t be deprived of that fundamental right if no more page 3.”

        Irrelevant.

        • Missfit

          I have the right to have pictures of my hairy legs in national newspaper? I’m gonna send picutres right away then and if it doesn’t appear in the newspaper I’m going to complain to a human rights tribunal.

          ‘The only question is whether anybody would pay you for that.’ Oh, so it is not simply a question of me and my choice then, the ultimate choice resides with who’s paying. Because by only focussing on women making choices, you deliberately omit that part of the equation. You make it appear as though it is only about women making choices, as if men in their newspaper office are just waiting for women to choose if and how they would like to appear in their newspaper and the men just go along with whatever comes up and there just happens to only be women wanting to show their breast.

          The ones in charge, that is men, choose how women will be portrayed in their newspapers. The choice women have is between agreeing or not to men’s terms. Of course you don’t see any problem with that. And only women who consent count, the others’ voices do not matter. Women ‘choosing’ to ‘consent’ to men’s terms (the key words are in brackets) is a feminism you can agree with because that works in favor of the status quo.

          Now you say I can just start my own paper and publish what I want. Do you even know how the world works? Or are you so blinded by your male privilege and neo-liberalism mindset? Do you know who possess the means/power of production/distribution? That would be men, not women. Women don’t have the same power as men in society, didn’t you know that? Men own the media. People decide what they choose to see? I see plenty of things everyday I would choose not see. I have kids to feed, I have to go out of my house you know. This is our world too and this is why feminists are working to change it so it not only gets determined by men’s terms. By men who obviouly do not see women as equals. Of course you personally don’t see any problem with women only being featured as bodies to be looked at while men’s accomplishments predominate. And the message it conveys, which is the same old repetitive patriarchy’s favorite of women = passive and men = active; women = objects, men = subjects. Many women have had enough and are saying so.

          You are the one who talks as if women will be deprived of a human right if no more page 3. It is indeed relevant that it is not the case. This is why it can be done with.

          • Michael Max

            “Oh, so it is not simply a question of me and my choice then, the ultimate choice resides with who’s paying.”

            The choice is your own from the consent point of view. If you decide that you don’t want your scantily clad pictures published then they won’t be.

            On the other hand, you are not guaranteed anything either because that depends on other people (men or women), but I don’t think that causes you too much pain.

            “You make it appear as though it is only about women making choices, as if men in their newspaper office are just waiting for women to choose if and how they would like to appear in their newspaper and the men just go along with whatever comes up and there just happens to only be women wanting to show their breast.”

            There is a lot of demand for sexual content so it’s not a coincidence that it’s abundant. However, there is a basic safety check in place such that nobody can be forced to perform any sexual acts. It is against the law.

            “The ones in charge, that is men, choose how women will be portrayed in their newspapers.”

            A man running a newspaper may choose what content should be included in it. So can a woman running a newspaper. I don’t suppose Arianna Huffington or Jill Abramson had ever any say about what hits the presses. Neither does Oprah in terms of what goes live on OWN.

            “Now you say I can just start my own paper and publish what I want. Do you even know how the world works? Or are you so blinded by your male privilege and neo-liberalism mindset? Do you know who possess the means/power of production/distribution? That would be men, not women. Women don’t have the same power as men in society, didn’t you know that? Men own the media.”

            As I pointed out above, that’s simply not true.

            “This is our world too and this is why feminists are working to change it so it not only gets determined by men’s terms. By men who obviouly do not see women as equals.”

            I see women as equals. I tend to debate those who see women as helpless victims.

            “You are the one who talks as if women will be deprived of a human right if no more page 3. It is indeed relevant that it is not the case. This is why it can be done with.”

            Women will indeed be deprived of a personal freedom. Not a big one in this case, but it begs the question: what is the rationale for making any such restriction? I can see that I posed a question that wasn’t really anticipated – and that’s a good thing.

          • Meghan Murphy

            “I see women as equals. I tend to debate those who see women as helpless victims.”

            Listen up, ladies: Michael is simply a better feminist than the rest of us.

          • Morag

            Michael insults us, yet again, by offering that he is willing to “see” us as equal to himself. He, naturally, being the self-elected standard of what a human being is; and he, who can either grant — or deny — equality to those beneath him.

            Fuck that. I spit on his “equality.”

            We are not, nor do we want to be, equal to the ones who lord over the shit pile while they wank over pictures of dehumanized girls and women. Why is that so hard to understand? It is so simple.

            We are not seeking equality with men (and, if we were, which men, anyway?), because we do not want the opportunity to wield power over others, to rape, to hurt and to degrade, and to decide who gets to live and die with dignity. What we want is to be liberated from all these systems and institutions that men have created to benefit nobody but themselves and to protect their property.

            In other words, we want to smash it all and start all over. Of course, more likely than not, the entire Earth will be smashed (by men) before we ever get the chance to make it better. That doesn’t mean, however, that we’re going to give up and stop telling the truth.

            Fuck your equality, Michael. YOU are the problem.

          • marv

            Zinger, Morag

          • Sabine

            Nailed it again Morag.

          • Michael Max

            “Michael insults us, yet again, by offering that he is willing to “see” us as equal to himself.”

            You tell me then — how should I see women? There are three choices, in no particular order:
            A) men are equal to women
            B) women are superior
            C) women are inferior

            You said that option (A) is not acceptable. So which one is the “correct” one according to your perception?

            “He, naturally, being the self-elected standard of what a human being is; and he, who can either grant — or deny — equality to those beneath him. ”

            I have my own set of opinions. I am neither proud of them nor am I sorry that I hold them. I am entitled to them as any human being should be, male or female. I cannot grant absolute equality to anyone, that is not within my power, but I can treat others as equals, and that’s a courtesy that I pay to every human being.

            “Fuck that. I spit on his “equality.””

            Interesting. Same as above. If I am not supposed to treat women as equals, then you tell me, how should I treat them?

            “We are not, nor do we want to be, equal to the ones who lord over the shit pile while they wank over pictures of dehumanized girls and women. Why is that so hard to understand? It is so simple.”

            I explained this several times already, but I will do it again. The fact that you don’t like OTHER women choosing to pose for naked pictures, and that you don’t like men who pay women to do it, is completely irrelevant. The important thing is that you are not forced to do it. Your life is not diminished by people who make choices that don’t align with your moral compass.

            I hate to break it to you, but we are, all of us, equal to people we don’t like. Otherwise, any reason would be valid to resort to discriminatory prejudice. It’s very easy and very common in human history.

            “What we want is to be liberated from all these systems and institutions that men have created to benefit nobody but themselves and to protect their property.”

            There is not a single legal right that would be exclusive to men. If you can find one then please share it.

            “That doesn’t mean, however, that we’re going to give up and stop telling the truth.”

            What truth? I am quite perplexed at the disjointed rhetoric around here. There are a lot of high-flying words, but very little evidence presented for factual assessment.

            “Fuck your equality, Michael. YOU are the problem.”

            The wonderful part of our society is that I can disagree with your opinion. Which I do, for the time being. You need to give me arguments that are substantive rather than generalizing.

          • Sabine

            Trolling 101. Paid or doing it off your own steam?

          • marv

            ‘The fact that you don’t like OTHER women choosing to pose for naked pictures, and that you don’t like men who pay women to do it, is completely irrelevant. The important thing is that you are not forced to do it. Your life is not diminished by people who make choices that don’t align with your moral compass.’

            All hail the Liberal Gods! Who has the audacity to stand against them?

            As a zealot priest of the Church of Liberty you remain undeterred from preaching your gospel. It brings to mind white male missionaries evangelizing the savages about Christian salvation – the colonizers instructing the colonized on civilized morals and behaviour. In this case the male devised creed is the opposite of adopting conservative purity: “do what you will unless it harms others”. The simpletons’ doctrine is unmindful for example to the cumulative ecological effects of companies and individuals pursuing self-satisfaction in a capitalist consumerist society.

            Producing and consuming porn too has no detrimental effects on women as a whole as long as no person is coerced, according to liberal scriptures and devotees. The blasphemous feminist heretics however dare to question the sacred texts, risking the peril of a vainglorious inquisition:

            http://www.huffingtonpost.com/johnhenry-westen/want-to-stop-sex-traffick_b_6563338.html

          • Missfit

            You can’t conclude that men don’t hold mediatic power by stating a few names, you have to go with representation. The same goes with politics btw. And you have some nerve coming here saying that women hold equal power in society, pretending women do not face any systemic barriers. Again, you don’t seem to know how the world works. Even the women you like to allude to who have made it to positions of influence will tell you for the most part that they did encounter obstacles because of them being women. And yes, women are victims of sexism and misogyny in this society but see, we are not helpless victims, we fight back. And your last question really show how much you don’t get the point when yous ask ‘what is the rationale for making any such restriction’? You are asking what is the rationale behing no more page 3? You can read what the women from the no more page 3 campaign have to say about it, you can read back my comment, read this whole blog! Or maybe you shouldn’t bother, because with your inability to think in any meaningful way, I doubt you will get it.

        • Meh

          “They have no right to decide that for others, unless the others are their dependents (children and such).”

          Actually Michael, I have the right to judge and decide whatever the fuck I want. You can’t stop me. I think this is fucked up and should be stopped. You can have a wank about that if you like, champ.

          • Michael Max

            “Actually Michael, I have the right to judge and decide whatever the fuck I want. ”

            You have the right to judge and decide what is good for yourself, not for others. It will never be any different as long as we live in a free society. What you think is good and moral, may be deemed damaging by someone else, and vice versa.

          • Morag

            You’re spouting boring cliches about individualism and about our ostensibly free society to people who have a much deeper analysis of what real liberty is. “Freedom” is not the ability to “choose” in which particular way we’re going to serve and legitimize our capitalist, racist, sexist overlords. Such as yourself.

            So, I understand why you’re so shallow, why you demonstrate no intellectual depth about this topic, and why you accuse us of moralizing and dictating (which is, of course, a projection: men are the class of people with the power to be dictators). It’s an attempt to control the limits of the conversation — to try to keep it short and stupid.

            You feel most comfortable with thought-stopping, vaguely feel-good meaninglessness, and platitudes about the sacredness of choice, because these tactics serve your interests.

          • Meh

            “It will never be any different as long as we live in a free society.”

            But that’s just it, Mikey. I’m trying to take your peen privileges away from you. I’M A MEANIE!

        • Sabine

          Irrelevant. The same word could be applied to you and your hilariously uninformed and embarrassingly ignorant comments.

          “Here it is, in black and white, what every person should memorize and live by: people decide for THEMSELVES what they choose to see. They have no right to decide that for others, unless the others are their dependents (children and such).”

          Here it is! In black and white folks!

          Gee, thanks.

          You don’t appear to have even the slightest grasp of what anybody else here is talking about. You come across like a kindergartener trying to discuss Quantum Physics with Post Grads.

          • Michael Max

            These “quantum physicists” you speak of seem incapable of understanding the trivial difference between a free society and a tyranny.

            I see a lot of insults being thrown my way, but not a whole lot of arguments.

            I keep pointing out, more and more directly, that every individual decides for themselves what they want to do in life. They have the freedom to do anything as long as it doesn’t harm other people. And no, naked pictures of women in a magazine do not hurt all women as a gender as every woman is a separate individual who… guess what? makes her own choices.

          • Shauna

            Michael,

            Really, you should just wipe your butt-hurt tears off with a napkin because you keep getting served, poppet, over and over again. And then you come back for more?

            However, I am sure you are familiar with this wonderful article that Meghan referenced in her What’s Current post today because you read it thoroughly and learnt from it. Oh no, wait, there’s no Comments Section at the end for you to inflict your exquisite wisdom on us all so, why would you bother reading it? Silly me. Lots of big, scary words in it, too ~

            http://www.isiswomen.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=630:why-womens-spaces-are-critical-to-feminist-autonomy&catid=127:theme-mens-involvement-in-womens-empowerment&Itemid=452

            It may, however, help to explain TO YOU why your whinging, pontificating and inadequacy (intellectual and “otherwise”) are really not welcome here.

            And, for your information (again) *sigh* ~ calling an adult “childish”, AS YOU JUST DID, is actually also an insult but one that any self-respecting, evolved grown-up wouldn’t flinch at.

            Now, kindly ask me for no clarification nor attempt to engage me in any dialogue.

          • Michael Max

            “Really, you should just wipe your butt-hurt tears off with a napkin because you keep getting served, poppet, over and over again. And then you come back for more?”

            What I am seeing around here is a lot of people who don’t know how to debate. In fact, I got this notion from reading several feminist articles (with one or two notable exceptions), which eventually led me here.

            I see a lot of sweeping “arguments” being made such as: men wield all the power in society. I suppose an argument of that sort sounds nice to those who would like to believe it, but from a logical perspective, that’s not an argument at all. It is extremely easy to refute by simply citing some examples of women in power; from executives in corporations, through media personalities, publishing potentates, to politicians and high court justices.

            “However, I am sure you are familiar with this wonderful article that Meghan referenced in her What’s Current post today because you read it thoroughly and learnt from it. Oh no, wait, there’s no Comments Section at the end for you to inflict your exquisite wisdom on us all so, why would you bother reading it? Silly me. Lots of big, scary words in it, too ~”

            I think that feminists are focusing on the male/female dichotomy way more than is sensible; more even than the not-so-sensible general public does. Quite simply, the world has moved on. Men and women live their lives relatively unencumbered by zealots of any kind. As they should. At some point, it’s just time to let go and take up more productive pursuits.

            “It may, however, help to explain TO YOU why your whinging, pontificating and inadequacy (intellectual and “otherwise”) are really not welcome here.”

            I have no inherent need for being welcome. That’s not what I am seeking in a debate. I presented my view of things on the matter and I am responding to those who have differing opinions.

            “And, for your information (again) *sigh* ~ calling an adult “childish”, AS YOU JUST DID, is actually also an insult but one that any self-respecting, evolved grown-up wouldn’t flinch at. ”

            I didn’t call anyone childish. I called a certain type of behavior childish, which it definitely is. It doesn’t necessarily define a person. I am rather confident that the same people can act in far more reasonable ways under different circumstances, but I had to call them out on particular instances of juvenile behavior.

          • Meghan Murphy

            “I think that feminists are focusing on the male/female dichotomy way more than is sensible; more even than the not-so-sensible general public does. Quite simply, the world has moved on.”

            LOLLLLLOLOLOLLLLLLL

            Oh boy, do I wish! Explain the fact that women and girls around the world are raped and abused every fucking day BY MEN, if the world has, supposedly, ‘moved on.’

          • marv

            “…every individual decides for themselves what they want to do in life. They have the freedom to do anything as long as it doesn’t harm other people. And no, naked pictures of women in a magazine do not hurt all women as a gender as every woman is a separate individual who… guess what? makes her own choices.”

            We don’t live in a free society. We are divided by classes in which the ruling groups structure the very range of options and the very definition of choice onto those groups beneath them. Those at the bottom often willingly comply because of indoctrination. It’s a tyrannical system. You can’t see it because you belong to the privileged male sex class. The feminists here are awakened dissenters and you are an elitist social conformist to the male established order of power and control.

            There will never be substantial freedom for the oppressed without sexual, racial and economic equality. They will remain enslaved by your secular religion of liberal orthodoxy.

          • bella_cose

            The only arguments you would see are ones you agree with. There are many arguments being made, much better than your own. Your arguments seem to completely dismiss any perspective that is not your own. You’re a very sexist man, commenting on a feminist blog, in a very sexist way. Did you expect anyone here to defer to your comments, where you try to explain to us how we aren’t doing feminism correctly?

            The only feminism most men can get behind, is the kind that tells them they don’t have to change. Guess what? That’s not actually feminism, which is why no one here agrees with you.

          • Sabine

            Guess what? You’ve made your “point” and it’s vacuous, clichéd, over-simplistic rubbish. Why keep laboring it when nobody is interested? Oh, gosh, silly me. That’s the rasion d’etre of the troll! Stop wasting everybody’s time.

          • ptittle

            “…every individual decides for themselves what they want to do in life.
            They have the freedom to do anything as long as it doesn’t harm other
            people.” Your naivete is stunning. Are you an economist?

    • Meh

      “Is ithe feminist position that women should be explicitly deprived of that right?”

      Yes, that’s right Michael.

      We’re being so mean to your peen peen 🙁

    • FrustratedRadFem

      Hey MM you do know that the photographers and newspaper do tell women what do. They tell the woman modelling what, when, where because they organise it. Stand here, pose like this and don’t forget to smile so hard your top lip disappears. They often tell the models to groom themselves to their liking and get plastic surgery if the want more ‘opportunities’.Throwing money at her after the shoot doesn’t negate the fact they told her what to do. Do take issue with anything the organisers of shoot tell her do? 

      Besides posing in a magazine or newspaper isn’t a right if it is then everybody should have the right to pose how they like in the sun. It’s more accurately a ‘privilege’ (not that it benefits women)  so it is discretionary and can be refused. Not just any woman can be chosenarvo pose, Michael would fight for the right for women who’ve had a mastectomy or breast implants that went wrong to be on page three? Wouldn’t more likely this resonate with more women?

      As a woman I know there are a lot things that aren’t really accessible to me even if I try really hard. Not being able to be exposed on camera for male chauvinist pigs to wank to and share with their buddies is an opportunity that I won’t miss. I guess I’ll make due with career, lifestyle and travel opportunities things like decent representation in the media, action against male violence, women’s history being taught in schools etc. 

      If I was in charge I’d put a 
      naked old man posing with fake smile with the headline ‘LOOK AT IT!’. Then I’d sit back and watch the angry men vomit with rage over it. I’d get rid of the sexist shit and the puns, oh god the puns and hire people who are actually competent and funny. 

      I would have average women staring into the camera judging the male viewers. I’d show depictions of breast cancer survivors, women who’ve had surgery and show the scars including cosmetic surgery that has gone wrong without necessarily having them unclothed.

      Subverting the male gaze always makes men uncomfortable. This whole display is just men at the sun waving around their male privilege around let’s be honest here this is sexist bullying. They’re not only saying this what we think of you and use other women a weapon against us, classic divide and conquer strategy. It goes to show that you can be the biggest asshole to those with less power and still be seen as David and not the Goliath that you actually are. 

      Saying that we’re jealous of the topless models insulting in more than one way. Not only it doesn’t seem to register that we want to be higher than wank fodder. They don’t seem to consider that perhaps we’d want their jobs instead. If they said that women were envious of their positions instead of the posing they’d be too honest. It’s depressing that these guys have jobs let alone have such a large platform.

      PS we are naked ladies under our clothes if you stopped being so thick you’d realise we aren’t offended by female bodies but the disrespect and cruelty  that comes with it. Men are not entitled to our bodies or pictures of it.

      • Michael Max

        “Hey MM you do know that the photographers and newspaper do tell women what do.”

        It is always done with a model’s consent – signed consent unless it’s some very amateur, informal deal. In light of that, the rest of the paragraph is irrelevant.

        “Besides posing in a magazine or newspaper isn’t a right if it is then everybody should have the right to pose how they like in the sun.”

        The point is that trying to suppress freedom of expression implies taking away personal freedoms.

        “Michael would fight for the right for women who’ve had a mastectomy or breast implants that went wrong to be on page three?”

        Clearly – yes. Doesn’t mean I would choose to look at them, but the freedom should be there. It doesn’t seem like you grasp my fundamental point.

        “As a woman I know there are a lot things that aren’t really accessible to me even if I try really hard.”

        There are no systemic barriers to anything (at least there shouldn’t be), though of course certain thing have requirements that have to be met. Sometimes given goals are beyond a given person’s realistic reach – such as a dwarf getting to play in the NBA. Those are circumstantial issues that cannot be helped though. What is important is that everyone should have a right to try.

        “If I was in charge I’d put a naked old man posing with fake smile with the headline ‘LOOK AT IT!’. Then I’d sit back and watch the angry men vomit with rage over it.”

        You can do that. There is nothing stopping you. Everyone else would have a choice to not look at it.

        “Subverting the male gaze always makes men uncomfortable.”

        What does that mean exactly?

        “Saying that we’re jealous of the topless models insulting in more than one way.”

        Who said that? A voice in your head? I certainly didn’t.

        “PS we are naked ladies under our clothes if you stopped being so thick you’d realize we aren’t offended by female bodies but the disrespect and cruelty that comes with it. Men are not entitled to our bodies or pictures of it.”

        The same explanation one more time: women CHOOSE to pose for those pictures. It’s their personal, independent, adult, human CHOICE. They are not forced to do it.

        • Meghan Murphy

          Consent is not the only issue at hand. Context and the global epidemic of violence against women, which is very much connected to the objectification of women, is the issue.

          Men’s freedom to objectify women should not trump women’s right to humanity, as a class AND as individuals.

        • Morag

          Nobody’s buying what you’re selling, Mr. Max. You’re concerned about your male privilege to consume images of sexualized women, and your privilege only.

          Pretending to care about women’s freedom and rights, when what you really care about is ensuring a supply of sex objects for your rotten gaze, is morally disgusting.

          But, I like the way Meh put it: “We’re being so mean to your peen peen”

        • Meh

          “The same explanation one more time: women CHOOSE to pose for those pictures. It’s their personal, independent, adult, human CHOICE. They are not forced to do it.”

          They choose to pose because they want money. Isn’t it sad that they also don’t care about your doodle?

        • Meh

          OOH OOH ALSO: Isn’t it funny that I’m CHOOSING to emphasise how stupid you are? Choices are great.

        • Anonomega

          ““PS we are naked ladies under our clothes if you stopped being so thick you’d realize we aren’t offended by female bodies but the disrespect and cruelty that comes with it. Men are not entitled to our bodies or pictures of it.”

          The same explanation one more time: women CHOOSE to pose for those pictures. It’s their personal, independent, adult, human CHOICE. They are not forced to do it. ”

          A suggestion, Michael Max. They know you said the women choose to pose. Theres no point in bringing it up again because its clear thats not the issue. The thing is they dont care about the choices of the women who do this sort of thing because they come from a stance that images such as the ones on page 3 are inherently sexist. This, by the way is something I disagree with passionately…but I’m just saying this is the heart of the issue, and I personally believe should be at the focus of any kind of arguement or debate regarding anti-porn feminism, rather than “but they’re CHOOSING to do it!”. Its pretty much established at this time that erotic imagery is capable of existing without trafficing women or taking advantage of impovershed women and whatnot. Waxing on about choice at this time is kind of beating a dead horse.

          • Meghan Murphy

            @Max. Like, a woman can “choose” to objectify herself. That doesn’t mean objectification is good for women. Why is this so difficult for you to understand?

          • Anonomega

            “Like, a woman can “choose” to objectify herself. That doesn’t mean objectification is good for women. Why is this so difficult for you to understand?”

            Why is it so difficult for YOU to understand that images such as the page 3 photos…or men looking at or even wanking to said images…are not inherently demeaning to women?

          • Meghan Murphy

            Because I am not stupid?

          • Sabine

            My God, Anonotwit, you are one of the most obvious trolls I have ever come across. It’s beyond sad that you still keep rocking up here under the delusion that you’re getting one up on the genuine commenters here. You are just reaffirming your lack of intelligence with every post. Funny for a while but desperately tragic and dull now…

          • Michael Max

            “A suggestion, Michael Max. They know you said the women choose to pose. Theres no point in bringing it up again because its clear thats not the issue.”

            That is the fundamental issue because personal freedoms are about our own choices, and not dictating what other people can and cannot do. I have yet to be convinced that this distinction is understood around here.

            “Its pretty much established at this time that erotic imagery is capable of existing without trafficing women or taking advantage of impovershed women and whatnot. Waxing on about choice at this time is kind of beating a dead horse.”

            See above. By your own logic you should come to the conclusion that trying to force others into the narrow confines of your subjective moral values is a recipe for a police state. To make an analogy: this is like fundamentalist Christians telling gay people that they are not allowed to be gay. It’s a sin!! The person making the claim isn’t even impacted by it, unless they are closeted gays (happens a lot, for some reason), but it doesn’t stop them from trying to control how others live their lives.

        • FrustratedRadFem

          You didn’t address any of my points you just said “choice”. There was no nuance to your argument. When you pulled the choice argument on the last paragraph it made no sense, it’s like we aren’t even having the same conversation. The choice argument comes down to ‘they did it so it’s ok nobody can question’ thats lazy discourse try harder. 

          You didn’t answer my questions you just made excuses. I asked do you have an issue with the organiser of the shoot and her agents telling her how to groom herself, how to pose or to get cosmetic surgery not whether or not there was a contract.  

          Contracts confine choice and can’t be retracted without consequence is that freedom to you?

          What about men’s choices and the implications and effects of their choices. The conversation should about options not just choices. Why do men have the right to create jobs that require you to be naked and sexually service men in the first place? That’s sexual harrasment. Why are those positions infinite  but real jobs are hard to find (especially in this economy). Besides you can’t actually buy genuine consent to sexual activity. Its dishonest means of gaining access to women’s bodies. What your buying is compliance and silence.  

          Personal freedom to pose for pigs?
          You do know that if she really wanted to pose nude she’d find a different medium. She could pose nude for art students or set up a blog there are plenty of choices for her to chose (see what I did there). Aren’t you undermining her agency by worrying about her? I’m just following your logic. The real motivation is the money because you need it to live and you know women get paid less.

          How about the freedom to move through the world without the threat of male violence and sexism. Why aren’t you prioritising that? That’d really freeing.

          Male gaze: Go look up the Hawkeye initiative on tumblr and you’ll see what I’m talking about.

          PS said you’ll support page 3 with the disastrous results of cosmetic surgery but won’t look at. Could you be any more obviously self serving. You’re not for freedom you’re against anything that restricts your entitlement to women’s bodies. Again why aren’t you talking about women’s choices to go out at night with being threatened or to go into jobs or anything without barriers. 
          You’re giving away your priorities.

          • Michael Max

            “The choice argument comes down to ‘they did it so it’s ok nobody can question’ thats lazy discourse try harder.”

            Wrong. The argument comes down to: they CHOSE to do it so it’s ok, and nobody can question it. You omitted one word, but it’s the most important one, which tells me that you either still don’t understand my point or refuse to acknowledge it.

            “I asked do you have an issue with the organiser of the shoot and her agents telling her how to groom herself, how to pose or to get cosmetic surgery not whether or not there was a contract.”

            I don’t have an issue with the organizers. They are in the business of taking pictures of scantily clad women. It wouldn’t be my chosen profession, but I am not going to say that others have no right to take that path themselves.

            “Contracts confine choice and can’t be retracted without consequence is that freedom to you?”

            Yes. That’s being held accountable for one’s choices. It’s unfortunate sometimes, but that’s how the world works. If contracts weren’t enforced then we’d be living in mud huts because hardly anyone would keep his/her word.

            “Why do men have the right to create jobs that require you to be naked and sexually service men in the first place? That’s sexual harassment.”

            It’s not harassment as long as nobody is forced into doing it. Which they are not. Also, I don’t see how it’s an exclusively male privilege to create jobs of any kind. Women have the exact same opportunities to start and lead businesses, and indeed, many do so successfully. There is no profession from which women are excluded.

            “Why are those positions infinite but real jobs are hard to find (especially in this economy).”

            There is a lot of demand, and it seems that supply is there too. Otherwise the industry wouldn’t exist.

            “You do know that if she really wanted to pose nude she’d find a different medium. She could pose nude for art students or set up a blog there are plenty of choices for her to chose (see what I did there).”

            Why would she pick a different medium? The choices are:
            1) don’t pose nude, make no money
            2) pose nude, make no money
            3) pose nude, make good money
            Most women would probably go for option (1), but those who don’t are much more likely to go for option (3) than option (2), for obvious reasons.

            “The real motivation is the money because you need it to live and you know women get paid less.”

            Women don’t get paid less. I’ve been in the management structures of the corporate world for about a decade and I know first hand how careful companies are about not selectively underpaying any group – women, minorities, disabled people, etc. There are specific policies that govern this stuff although they are hardly needed any more. There is no incentive to pay a female employee less than a male if they do their job equally well. It would make no sense.

            “PS said you’ll support page 3 with the disastrous results of cosmetic surgery but won’t look at. Could you be any more obviously self serving.”

            I (probably) won’t look at it because that’s my choice. I might peek out of curiosity, but a sustained interest is not likely. I am not hurting anyone with this type of personal choice.

            “You’re not for freedom you’re against anything that restricts your entitlement to women’s bodies.”

            You are wrong here. I am advocating for freedom all throughout this conversation. I only draw the line at people trying to control others. I also don’t see where I profess entitlement to women’s bodies. That I may choose to look at pictures of women who chose to pose for them is not entitlement – it’s freedom. And I am not even saying that I do enjoy that specific activity, I was never a big fan of staged erotica.

            “Again why aren’t you talking about women’s choices to go out at night with(out) being threatened”

            We live in a relatively safe society, the safest that the world has seen, but that doesn’t mean there are no dangers lurking out there. Those dangers can never be removed because it’s enough for one psychopath to hide among a crowd of thousands to make things unsafe. Women are more at risk because they are physically weaker and at the same time more sexually attractive. That’s an unfortunate fact of life.

            “or to go into jobs or anything without barriers.”

            There are no barriers for women to go into any jobs.

          • ptittle

            “It’s unfortunate sometimes, but that’s how the world works.” Oh yes, the “that’s the way the world works” version of total abdication of any moral responsibility whatsoever. Funny how those words come out of men’s mouths SO much more often than out of women’s.

            And, as so many here are trying to say…have you stopped to wonder, to investigate, who it is who made the world work that way? And why?

      • Anonomega

        “Men are not entitled to our bodies or pictures of it. ”

        I believe it is you who have a gross sense of entitlement.

        I’ll say it before and I’ll say it again.

        A man is not entitled to PHYSICAL access to any INDIVIDUAL woman. For that he needs her consent. Of course if a woman consents he has every right to enjoy whatever she wants him to enjoy.

        A man is not entitled to pictures of women? That is ONLY true to the extent that nobody can be FORCED to pose for the photos or draw the image. But it is very clear that radfems are not really talking about this.

        But so long as the images are consensually produced….and there will always be cases where this is such. (RK Crumb as a youth would masturbate to images of women HE DREW HIMSELF) Then men do have a right…. EVERY RIGHT….to enjoy women and their bodies in this manner.

        In this case we are not talking about any actual violation of any women. This is simply the visual/mental pleasure of women’s (or at least the idea of a woman) sexual attractiveness. This particular kind of enjoyment is not something you own. It is not yours to grant or deny. You dont have that kind of monopoly. Only your own bodily autonomy and that of others is what you can be concerned about. If for some…irrational, mean-spirited… reason, the idea of a man getting to enjoy a mere fascimile of a womans (even a fictional one) breasts, curves, feet whatever, without having to have a woman find him fuckable, makes you so angry, well that’s just too bad. We’re not even under any moral obligation to accommodate you by totally repressing our “gaze” in such a manner.

        You dont owe us your physical sensuality

        We dont owe you our mental chastity.

        You’re not entitled.

        • Meh

          Shut up, doodle. You and Michael can get together and cry to each other about how sad your lives are.

        • Sabine

          Oh God, the trolls are out in force today!

          “We don’t owe you our mental chastity.”

          Wow. Like…how profound.

          P.S. I think there’s 2 for 1 membership going at Trolls Anonymous right now. I can definitely see you and “Michael Max” being each other’s buddies, talking one another out of satisfying the urge to write shit on random blogs to get lame “kicks” out of annoying people who DO have brains and valid opinions. You can beat this addiction, go for it, woo!!!

        • Anonomega, why don’t you put your pee pee back in your pants, come out of your Mommy’s basement and go do something helpful for someone? I know that being a useful human being is a foreign concept to you, but try it – you might find you like NOT being an asshole for a change.

          • Meh

            I’m actually almost 100% certain that anonomega has a wank circle of friends just like him, where they sit around fapping each other and crying about how their mothers are never satisfied.

            When doves cry.

        • FTR, Ano, no one wants your “mental chastity” (“chastity”???? what the living fuck are you on about???)

          What we want is for you to quit depressing us by demonstrating that your hatred for females overrides any self-respect you might possess. You make these public comments that are so painfully stupid that it’s hard to believe you are THAT much of a drooling idiot. Yet you’re clearly willing to trade off looking like pathetic imbecile if it will waste the time of women who question the free ride you so obviously, desperately need.

    • “It seems to me that if a woman chooses to have her naked or near-naked pictures posted in a magazine or on a website then she should have a right to do that. Is ithe feminist position that women should be explicitly deprived of that right?”

      A few years ago a white woman from Alabama was interviewed on TV. She was proposing that the abolishment of legally sanctioned slavery in the U.S. was unfair to blacks because it took away their “choice” to be slaves if they wanted to.

      Your comment is as stupid as that. No one said women should not be allowed to be naked or post naked pictures of themselves. It’s pretty obvious that you go out of your way to waste people’s time with your asinine drivel because no woman will willingly show you their boobs without some kind of coercion. Poor baby.

      • Michael Max

        “A few years ago a white woman from Alabama was interviewed on TV. She was proposing that the abolishment of legally sanctioned slavery in the U.S. was unfair to blacks because it took away their “choice” to be slaves if they wanted to.”

        No, because slavery is by definition non-consensual.

        • Sabine

          There were slaves so shamefully indoctrinated by the system they did not want to leave the “safety” of their “position” once they were given “freedom”. Long-term prisoners have been known to reoffend on release in order to go back to the world they know. But who cares if that’s their CHOICE, right? You are incapable of expanding your mind beyond the most simplistic, narrow and shallow parameters. Your concept of “consent” is unformed and basic to say the very least. Have you actually read ANYTHING that is not 100% aligned with your unwieldy, concrete views? Try it, you might learn something. I can only conclude that you get off on humiliating yourself amongst people who are discussing things of which you clearly have no intellectual grasp or any apparent ability or willingness to try and understand.

        • FrustratedRadFem

          But a lot of porn is bdsm (they have tie to the industry) and openly talk about ‘slave training’. Many of the women in porn are actual slaves. Does this register with you?

    • C.C.

      The point isn’t that women are forced at gunpoint to do it, because women certainly have the ability to make choices. Including choices that aren’t very progressive. It’s under what social context that’s the meat of the argument, and why women are so constantly sexualized that topless pics of them are included in a fucking newspaper. Men are presented in a way that emphasizes their accomplishments in papers, and then look, there are women with their tits out. Women are constantly being reminded that their worth is in their appearance. I do believe all of this hypersexual representation of women in everything from beer ads to Page 3 – to bring a personal anecdote into the conversation, a local convenience store near my house sells “Barely Legal” magazine in plain site, along with others, in which 18-year-olds are often made up to look even younger – affects our societal treatment and perception, and there are studies that assert it’s not really aiding female liberation so much as hindering our development. I grew up seeing magazines like that at shitty little convenient stores, along with big posters of bikini-clad women on the walls in beer ads, as a teenager, and I know every time I never felt equal to men. I felt we had two different realities, where I would be valued differently in accordance to a different metric: I was wank fodder, jailbait, and they’d never let me forget it.

  • marv

    Believing in porn as legitimate sexual and economic expression of one’s rights runs parallel to the dubious right of people to practice their faith in god. You uncritically assume the agency of many women capitalizing on their (ass)ets. Would you make a similar presumption about women defending hijabs and burkas as free choice?

    Liberals and conservatives are much the same in their refusal to see male dominance as the precondition for choosing cultural norms and values. It is no accident that the patriarchal social determinants of our decisions are left unexamined by the right or left. It would be a threat to men’s power to admit the truth. Whether it be worship of god or of individualism, both are men’s religions foisted on women (and other men). These cults need to be expelled through feminist exorcism.

  • Sarah Ditum write a good piece on the “return”.

    Quoting:

    “For men who want women to be soft, pliable and wank-overable, giving up Page 3 really is too much to ask. And that’s why the Sun won’t let it go without exploiting it right to the very last gasp as a way to make women look stupid. Maybe we are. Stupid to think it was worth asking nicely. Stupid to think that if we were respectful and considered, we might get respect and consideration in reply. We have so much to fight for, and when the Sun finally gives up on its idiot daily pantomime of woman-as-shag-toy, it will only be the start.”

    http://www.newstatesman.com/media/2015/01/return-page-3-sun-revels-chance-make-women-opinions-look-stupid

    • Morag

      Thanks. Another quotation from Ditum’s piece:

      “That’s why the tense-jawed male columnists all tumbled out their bag of clichés yesterday, squeezing together something about Charlie Hebdo and that Orwell essay about saucy postcards to reach the conclusion that – goodness – the right to print pictures of tits is one of the most sacred aspects of English free speech … ”

      I think this is dead-on. When men talk about free speech, just scratch the surface of their rhetoric, and you’ll find that pictures of tits (i.e., pornography, prostitution) are the most sacred and cherished of all “speech.” No, seriously. It’s number one. Didn’t Charlie Hebdo show us that? When men criticize religion, they draw cartoons of people fucking and they draw tits. That’s how it’s done, right?

      Tits — that is, women’s bodies — belong to men. When all men have to do is offer women a few bucks to put their bodies on display, male ownership and superiority is confirmed. Male superiority is validated again and again, forever, amen. It IS sacred for them. That’s what masculinity is. That’s what masculine identity is: power over another. Without that power, what would they be? Just ordinary human beings, like everyone else beneath them.

      No wonder they are freaking out! No wonder they are pitching fits, getting angry, behaving like buffoons, and writing like mad to reverse the truth and make feminists look like the fools and the dictators.

      My god, they are so pathetic, so empty! They are behaving as if their very lives were in danger of disintegrating over Page 3 — one, tiny symbol of male privilege in a vast sea of male privilege. They are pathetic — and really terrifying.

      The assholes who have inserted themselves into this discussion, for instance, give off an atmosphere of violence. They know that we know what they are (pitiful, empty, wholly dependent on the subjugation of others), and they want us to shut up about it. They want us to know — to feel, especially, at a subliminal level — that they are more than willing to use force if we don’t submit to their stupid “arguments” about speech, freedom, rights and choice.

      When women expose men’s lies and speak the truth, men will — sooner or later — go berserk. We can, and should, fully expect the absolute worst from men when their superiority is threatened. Goodness knows that Jodie Marsh does.

      • Sabine

        You are absolutely on the money as usual Morag. I couldn’t agree more.

      • Like Ditum’s article, there is so much in your comment that is brilliantly spot on. (I was stuck for a moment choosing between the Ditum quote I posted and the one you posted, so thanks, Morag!)

        The entire conversation about “freedom of speech”, cloaked as it is in the false conceit of decontextualized rationality, is really about men (usually white men) speaking hate. And you are correct, yet again, that the ultimate hate is about being female. I hear “progressive” guys teasing each other with “what? does your VAG hurt??”. They could as easily insert a dig about having cloven hooves or a prehensile tail.

        I have not fully formed my words on this yet, but the entire “freedom of speech” debate is moot for people who don’t get heard in the first place. And you are right (again!!) when you write, “They want us to know — to feel, especially, at a subliminal level — that they are more than willing to use force if we don’t submit to their stupid “arguments” about speech, freedom, rights and choice.” The punishment implied for not being silent is deadly. And hyper sexualized, as you point out. How many porn scenarios include gags? How often does a standard sexual exchange involve a woman’s tights or underwear stuffed into her mouth? It’s hot and edgy, right? It’s “free expression of sexuality”, right?

        • Shauna

          Lizor,

          May I just add to your last paragraph, I made the extremely distressing but innocent/stupid mistake a couple of days ago of clicking on a link via a twitter anti#gamergate thread to a porn site, where several of the videos featured “teens” having their mouths “destroyed” by massive cocks that were preventing them from breathing let alone enjoying the luxury of speech, free or otherwise.

          Sorry to bring it up but I think it’s pertinent here, on many levels.

          • Morag

            ‘A great many men, no small number of them leftist lawyers, are apparently afraid that feminists are going to take their dirty pictures away from them. Anticipating the distress of forced withdrawal, they argue that feminists really must shut up about pornography–what it is, what it means, what to do about it–to protect what they call “freedom of speech.” Our “strident” and “overwrought” antagonism to pictures that show women sexually violated and humiliated, bound, gagged, sliced up, tortured in a multiplicity of ways, “offends” the First Amendment. The enforced silence of women through the centuries has not. Some elementary observations are in order.’

            From Andrea Dworkin’s essay, “For Men, Freedom of Speech; For Women, Silence Please”

            http://www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/dworkin/WarZoneChaptIVE.html

        • bella_cose

          For years, the whole idea of free speech bothered me, and I couldn’t quite understand why. I mean, obviously it’s important. No one wants to live in a society where having an unpopular opinion will get you imprisoned or executed. However, it’s only after becoming more educated in radical feminist analysis (I still have a ways to go), that I’ve been able to pinpoint my discomfort. That discomfort is due to the fact that free speech as a right, applies only to those with the most power in society, and because of that, they get to shape that which is normalized and accepted in society. Free speech works as a way to oppress those who are marginalized, and subordinate to (in the U.S. at least) white men, and as it normalizes that oppression, it also eliminates the most means of fighting it.

          I came across an article about free speech vs fair speech, which led me to a book, “Unspeakable: A feminist Ethic of Speech” by Betty McLellan. I just started it, but it’s very interesting so far.

  • I’m going to suggest that Mike be ignored. He cannot be a stupid as he presents, so I suspect he’s simply being dishonest and having a bit of a mind-wank over how much time-wasting attention he can get.

    Just a suggestion.

    • Morag

      Excellent suggestion.

    • Shauna

      Completely concur, Lizor, having zero tolerance for the nonsense & neediness of inadequates myself. They don’t even register on my radar now, let alone get read. I’m far too busy loving my life, it loving me back and using my energy & intellect & patience in better ways.

      • Sabine

        Yes. This guy is very blatantly a troll intent on deliberately misunderstanding and antagonizing the genuine commenters on here. He probably visits multiple websites on all kinds of subjects to do the same thing. If he’s not a troll then he really is that thick, so either way he’s a sad tool who does not deserve anymore of our time.