Posted on | March 11, 2013 | 27 Comments
Since 1970, Britain’s largest-selling newspaper, The Sun tabloid, has been famous — or, as some would say, notorious — for publishing photos of topless models on page 3, so that the “Page Three Girls” have become something of a national institution. Yet now, radical feminists have mounted a campaign to ban these buxom beauties:
The campaign to have the infamous ‘Page 3’ of The Sun Newspaper stopped, banned or otherwise censored has reached incredible feats over the past few months. There is no doubt that when it comes to orchestrating a campaign, Lucy-Anne Holmes and her sidekicks are no fools.
From high-profile news stories to political buy-in, from university blanket bans to a petition now signed by 85,000 people, the anti-boob campaigners are allowing their censorious and illiberal tendencies to shine through.
That’s from Raheem Kassam of The Commentator, who points out that the argument made by feminists is that — wait for it — celebrating beautiful women hurts the feelings of less-beautiful women:
Holmes declared her selfish and self-hating motivations in an interview with The Guardian in September 2012.
She said, “It took me until I was 35 to go, ‘why have I hated my boobs?’… Oh, because I’ve been comparing them to this image in the paper that is purely for the gratification of men. I have never really owned this part of my body.”
Does Holmes’s insecurity seem like a good reason to stop other, secure women from using their bodies in a way they choose to, and in a way that drives the sales of the most popular newspaper in Britain?
Hmmm. This war against “Page Three” confirms Rush Limbaugh’s Undeniable Truth of Life #24: “Feminism was established so as to permit unattractive women easier access to the mainstream.” It also looks as if it might be part of a larger strategy to hurt the business of The Sun’s publisher — Rupert Murdoch — by depriving his most successful newspaper of one of its most popular features.
But the question should be asked: Other than hurting the feelings of ugly feminists like Lucy-Anne Holmes, is “Page Three” bad for women? The models themselves aren’t complaining. The very first “Page Three Girl,” Stephanie Rahn was 62 when she described the impact on her career on the 40th anniversary of her Sun debut:
“I’d done the pictures for a modelling agency and I got a call one day to tell me my picture was appearing in The Sun. . . .
She says: “I would never have got other modelling jobs if it wasn’t for The Sun. Being on Page 3 until 1978 opened doors.
“I loved the people, the newspaper and I loved what they did for me and my career. I’m very grateful for my time on Page 3.”
Stefanie, from north London, notched up a few minor roles on TV series such as Some Mothers Do ’Ave ’Em, The Benny Hill Show and The Cut Price Comedy Show.
Her most famous role was playing Lady Marie in The French Revolution section of Mel Brooks’ comic masterpiece, History Of The World: Part I in 1981.
Read more about the war on “Page Three” at The Commentator, and you should follow Raheem Kassam on Twitter. I met this young conservative British journalist Sunday in D.C. and he reminds me much of the late Christopher Hitchens, of whom he is a great admirer.
UPDATE: “For Leftists, anything that is not illegal shall be mandatory. Anything that is not mandatory shall be illegal.” If the Left ever decided that every chick with a nice rack must appear on Page Three, I might consider becoming a leftist.
UPDATE II: The ever-diligent Donald Douglas is prepared to do extensive research on Page Three girls. Oh, the sacrifices required of a citizen-journalist . . .