#9363249, By chopsen Aw hell naw!

  • chopsen 12 Feb 2013 11:29:00 19,993 posts
    Seen 1 week ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    kalel wrote:
    I can't quite pick a side of the fence on this one.

    On the one hand it's a sexist and backwards embarrassment, that propagates archaic perceptions of women and hinders progression and equality in society. On the other it's a post-feminist and empowering example of women asserting their femininity and right to use it to their advantage, and a good example freedom of choice both for those who appear in the Sun and those who buy it.

    I know the latter is certainly far from the minds of the people who make and buy the Sun, but nevertheless, nobody is forced to take their top off, and nobody is forced to buy the paper if they don't want to. I can't help feeling that banning it is somehow a regressive step, and the only possible real progress would be for it to die out naturally.
    Yeah, I'm in 2 minds as well.

    Also, while it's easy to tut and say how backward and antiquated this is, people (well, men) do enjoy looking at women's breasts. Are we saying that women posing topless and people enjoying that is fundamentally morally wrong? In which case we should be banning all forms of nudity in media. Or are we saying that this is not appropriate for a national newspaper? In which case we're just doing the typically British thing about being all icky and hypocritical about nudity and sex.

    The "well there's plenty of other places to see nudity" encapsulates the hypocrisy. of it It's either ok, or it isn't. Shoving it under the carpet helps nobody.

    Edited by Chopsen at 11:29:57 12-02-2013
Log in or register to reply