The Sun drops topless Page 3 pictures from Irish edition

Sunnyisland

http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=no%20more%20topless%20pic%20in%20irish%20sun&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CDQQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.independent.co.uk%2Fnews%2Fuk%2Fhome-news%2Fthe-sun-drops-topless-page-3-pictures-from-irish-edition-8752218.html&ei=XMoDUuSeDumM7QbzxoDACg&usg=AFQjCNEJCJmrIPjKkxilPVQOswcWON2esg&bvm=bv.50500085,d.ZGU

The Irish edition of The Sun has dropped topless women from its contentious Page 3, despite new UK editor David Dinsmore saying that the practice would stay because it was a "good way of selling newspapers"....

The move comes amid a national campaign to remove topless women from the media. The No More Page 3 campaign, spearheaded by Lucy-Anne Holmes, quickly garnered support and huge media attention, amassing over 113,000 signatures.


Just doing my after hours duty and keeping you all abreast of this story and be warned its not very up lifting, so what you all think,yes or no,

I am an Irish Times man meself ;);)

Pudsy33

Don't look at it myself, but seems like another nanny state decision.

L1011

Pudsy33 wrote: »

Don't look at it myself, but seems like another nanny state decision.

For it to be a "nanny state decision", it'd have to have been, erm, the state that made the decision. Not a private sector enterprise.

wazky

Of all the countrys problems, its safe to say that unfettered breasts on the inside of a paper are probably the biggest.

kneemos

It's market research to see if their sales increase.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

nutjob feminists once again ruin something beautiful

The_Kew_Tour

why buy a paper these days? waste of money

mikom

realies wrote: »

The move comes amid a national campaign to remove topless women from the media. The No More Page 3 campaign, spearheaded by Lucy-Anne Holmes,

Author of "50 Ways To Find A Lover".

Pudsy33

MYOB wrote: »

For it to be a "nanny state decision", it'd have to have been, erm, the state that made the decision. Not a private sector enterprise.

I phrased it wrong, but you know what I mean. PC gone mad. Anyways doesn't bother me.

Cienciano

All we need now is the Mail to stop printing upskirt photos of "celebs".

Hasmunch

Those women were in the nip!!!

1ZRed

Who cares anymore? If you want to see some tits, or more, just google them on your phone

Sunnyisland

kneemos wrote: »

It's market research to see if their sales increase.

Page 3 is a hugely popular pillar of the Sun in the UK and part of a package of great journalism which engages, entertains and informs in equal measure," editor Paul Clarkson told the paper.
"In the Irish Sun we strive to share the qualities that make the newspaper great in print and digital, but we also strive to cater for our own readers’ needs and reflect the cultural differences in Ireland."

:) Are we all prudes :eek:

Jaxxy

I really don't get why people have a problem with Page 3. It's not as though these women are being taken advantage of, or being flaunted without their permission. If they want to take their tops off for glamour fame, make a few quid or just to celebrate the fact that they have nice bods, well that's their prerogative. If you don't want to see it, pass over Page 3. Or don't buy The Sun.

There are topless men all over the media too. You can't open a magazine without seeing some shirtless actor/model posing ridiculously in advertisements. They're just breasts at the end of the day.

El_Dangeroso

'I think this is a terrible decision, what are women with great tits and no other talent supposed to do now?' - Kelly, 22, Essex

Duggy747

The groups will like the move to glamor models now.

Though give it time before one of them call that sexist, too.

kneemos

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

why buy a paper these days? waste of money

For the topless...ah right.

wp_rathead

The Sun is still a horrible "newspaper"

Sunnyisland

No more Sam fox. I remember been told about her

http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=sam%20fox&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CDgQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.samfox.com%2F&ei=0M8DUv_ELIuw7QaRloDACA&usg=AFQjCNHtrhYNzm_J0Q5D2_Ezlc-GM6CRUA&bvm=bv.50500085,d.ZGU

jimmytwotimes 2013

mikom wrote: »

Author of "50 Ways To Find A Lover".

i would have thought being a page 3 girl would guarantee a choice of lovers, Lucy-Anne would want to sort that out.

EdenHazard

most of them are wrecked anyway

Jimoslimos

I'm in two minds over this.

IMO The Sun, Daily Sport, etc, moreso than any religious group, are primarily responsible for the perpetuation of the notion that women's breasts are somehow "naughty" and exist solely as sexual objects for male gratification.

However I don't think this reasoning is behind the idea to drop it from the Irish edition - rather it's because we have a problem with nudity full stop. The girls (tops covered) are still portrayed in the same fashion, with the ridiculous blurb on serious news items but the sight of naked female flesh is deemed too much for conservative Catholic Ireland. Both parties (reader and model) are equally patronised.

Augmerson

Would never buy the Sun anyway, absolute ****ing RAG.

mikeym

Whats the point in buying tabloids these days when you can access the latest news online.

Agent Smith

They should just publish a picture of jedward on page 3 every day. So they can keep printing pictures of epic tits....

:pac:

meoklmrk91

My mother always bought the sun when I was younger, there was a page three as far back as I can remember, we were far more culturally prudish back then than now so I don't see how it is anything to do with that, this was the 90's.

Regardless of whether there is a page three or not I won't be buying the sun, it's a **** rag with rubbish articles, rubbish writing, it is mostly just giant pictures with a tiny sensationlist article about something that no one really cares about. Nothing in there interests me in the slightest.

Christ the Redeemer

sure, it hasn't been the same since I could get hard core pr0n on my phone. It's hard to **** to these still images with no lady gardens in.

K-9

Just a publicity stunt, all newspaper sales are falling, this might slow the decline and get some edge over the competition. Don't think it'll matter much as I very much doubt the people bothered by this would read it anyway, P3 or not.

Doctor Strange

Hopefully a sign of that shit rag going out of business.

anncoates

Jimoslimos wrote: »

Iand exist solely as sexual objects for male gratification.

They more or less do exist for sexual gratification.

Unless you're currently being breast fed.

Aineoil

You have to pay to access The Sun online as in the last few days.
Not that I know this personally, I heard it from someone, who shall remain anonymous, I have my reliable sources, and close friends who tell me these things.

lertsnim

This will be handy market research for the UK edition. If sales pick up then no doubt, page 3 will be dropped in the UK too.

Red Nissan

We don't need it anymore, we see all the topless girls we need to see at almost any beach in Ireland now, when the sun shines.

UCDVet

I like topless girls and I like adult content.

But I like to read newspapers in public without concerning myself with who may or may not be around me. I don't buy the Sun because of the topless girls and other semi-inappropriate ads.

Celly Smunt

The comments those models used to give in the caption was fairly accurate and articulate.ill be missing their short commentaries of current affairs.

Owen_S

I feel sorry for anybody who still buys The Sun newspaper, the only newspaper that comes with a cut-out to torment a mentally unstable man.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jul/11/paul-gascoigne-the-sun-drinking

Femme_Fatale

EdenHazard wrote: »

most of them are wrecked anyway

Now now Eden, stop lying.

meoklmrk91 wrote: »

My mother always bought the sun when I was younger, there was a page three as far back as I can remember, we were far more culturally prudish back then than now so I don't see how it is anything to do with that, this was the 90's.

Been a page 3 since the 70s.

UCDVet wrote: »

I like topless girls and I like adult content.

But I like to read newspapers in public without concerning myself with who may or may not be around me. I don't buy the Sun because of the topless girls and other semi-inappropriate ads.

Despite your opening sentence, prepare to be told you are a prude, a victim of the catholic church's conditioning and have hang-ups about women's bodies.

B.A._Baracus

Sounds like a 'pc decision' to me.
I'm sure all the grannies and holy joes were crying out for years to get it removed. It's only a pair of tits. The Sun was known for it.

Sarn

Tomorrow's headline "Thanks for the mammaries"?

Czarcasm

My own thinking on this is that they're slowly trying to monetize the online versions of The Sun and Page3.com. I regularly buy the Sun, purely because it's a bit of entertainment for €1.

Of course I look at page 3 (Lucy Collett, say no more! ), then I'll have a laugh at the "problem" pages, and then I'll read whatevers in between.

I don't tend to take it seriously and I know well it's a rag newspaper, but fcuk it, gives me a bit of a laugh. People shouldn't take it so seriously.

Would the absence of page 3 make me reconsider purchasing it? I have to be honest it probably will. I like a nice bod and a fresh face as much as the next person!

MadYaker

Taxi drivers and truck drivers of the world lament!

The sun is an absolute rag. I've tried to read it but it just annoys me. Irish Times ftw.

Red Nissan

realies wrote: »

No more Sam fox. I remember been told about her

Sam Fox, Linda Lucardi and a few others had smouldering sexuality, coupled with wit, charm, voluminous curves and prettiness with innocence and alluring and I'm glad I lived through them live, so to speak.

My wife blames them for our seven children.

Red Nissan

I just thought, if they take out our cultural differences, then we might as well buy the Evening Echo, I don't believe we ever saw a tit there unless wildlife photographer Richard Mills took it.

Maybe I could be editor.

catallus

Slightly off topic but anytime there's an art-heist or an art-forgery scandal the Sun always sends their dedicated fine-arts correspondent, the wonderfully named Toulouse Le-Plot. Oh, I'll miss Rhiann Sugden, she always had something good to say about the news.

Eight Ball

It's a rag anyway. Should'nt be called a newspaper in the first place.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

nutjob feminists once again ruin something beautiful

There are many things I would call "beautiful" in this world, the sun is not one of them, with ot withotu page 3.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Red Nissan wrote: »

Sam Fox, Linda Lucardi and a few others had smouldering sexuality, coupled with wit, charm, voluminous curves and prettiness with innocence and alluring and I'm glad I lived through them live, so to speak.

My wife blames them for our seven children.

Sam Fox was only 16 when she first appeared (weren't they literally doing a ountdown to her birthday..?) - kinda weird considering their attitude towards today's laws about photos of topless 16 year olds.

Amirani

This makes no difference to anything.

Jimoslimos

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

UCDVet wrote: »

I like topless girls and I like adult content.

Despite your opening sentence, prepare to be told you are a prude, a victim of the catholic church's conditioning and have hang-ups about women's bodies.

I don't believe anyone will question a perfectly natural sexual attraction towards an aesthetically pleasing female form. But I wonder why we don't have the same hangups when a rippling 6-pack on a guy is used to sell a popular soft drink, yet the mere display of areola + nipple prompts hysterics. Both are sexually attractive to the respective opposite (and occasionally same) sex, but one is considered 'taboo'.

lertsnim wrote: »

This will be handy market research for the UK edition. If sales pick up then no doubt, page 3 will be dropped in the UK too.

I doubt it. The reasoning behind the decisions in both countries aren't entirely the same.

Red Nissan wrote: »

We don't need it anymore, we see all the topless girls we need to see at almost any beach in Ireland now, when the sun shines.

We never "needed" it. Page 3 didn't fill a gap in the market, instead it perpetuated the nonsense that nudity was something to be shocked at, and only done by those "crazy Europeans"

Red Nissan

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Sam Fox was only 16 when she first appeared (weren't they literally doing a ountdown to her birthday..?) - kinda weird considering their attitude towards today's laws about photos of topless 16 year olds.

And what year was that? Don't judge by today's standards.

Actual child sex [ 12 and under] was legal in some countries back then too.

Femme_Fatale

Jimoslimos wrote: »

I don't believe anyone will question a perfectly natural sexual attraction towards an aesthetically pleasing female form. But I wonder why we don't have the same hangups when a rippling 6-pack on a guy is used to sell a popular soft drink, yet the mere display of areola + nipple prompts hysterics. Both are sexually attractive to the respective opposite (and occasionally same) sex, but one is considered 'taboo'.

Dunno. Boobs are deemed more sexual than the male chest, whether that's reality or just conditioning. Mammary glands are sex organs I guess.

Why is the bush less taboo than the penis in mainstream films? (Showing of an erect penis in mainstream film isn't allowed at all, AFAIK).