How do people get to maturity and yet be so ignorant?

It\’s Ms. Orr again. All about Page 3.

Tits, nipples, misogyny.

Sigh.

How can people gain maturity without gaining the most basic insights into the human condition? Surely marriage, the raising of sons, would lead to the knowledge that male sexuality is a frighteningly uncomplicated beast? Ooooh! Titties! Baps!

Printing photographs of them is not misogyny: it\’s exploitation of the simplicity of that male lust. As is the practice of women dressing up going in for showing a bit of cleavage.

Surely there are more productive things to do with one\’s time than whine about the way that humans are humans.

31 thoughts on “How do people get to maturity and yet be so ignorant?”

  1. So Much For Subtlety

    I think she deserves an award for the most cruel and unusual abuse of the word “surely” in recent times. As in:

    Surely Page 3 caters only for men who don’t have relaxed, healthy, mature relationships with women.

    Humans have instinctive responses to people with big breasts. Just as a turkey buzzard will attempt to feed any red rag on a stick or a Thai fighting fish will attempt to kill any multi-coloured object near by even though it is not remotely fish-like. She needs to deal with this fact rather than make the utterly unproven assumption that responding to nature’s queues means men hate women. I mean even a lame attempt to justify the claim would be nice. I assume that as she does not like to look at women’s breasts and they make her feel bad, so all men must be bastards for making her feel bad.

    Some times I think the female correspondents at the Guardian are part of a secret conspiracy to convince everyone that giving women the vote was a mistake.

  2. So Much For Subtlety

    She cites some nonentity called Lucy-Anne Holmes and her campaign to stop the Page Three girl. This would be more interesting if Ms. Holmes did not make a living producing dreck that is the chick-lit equivalent of the Page Three Girl. I quote a book blurb:

    Book Description
    We kissed until it became necessary to stop so that we could breathe, by which time my lips were so swollen it looked like I’d been pleasuring a brillo pad. We grinned at each other again and I felt the urge to utter something brilliantly intellectual. ‘Have I mentioned that I’m hopelessly in love with you?’ Actress Sarah Sargeant has finally landed the perfect boyfriend. But as she leaves London for LA, Sarah finds herself morphing from the perfect girlfriend, baby voicing ‘i love you’s, into a nutty one who throws phones and screams a lot. Where did it all go wrong? Was it the photo of a semi-naked ex-girlfriend doing a downward dog she found in her boyfriend’s filofax? Or maybe it’s the steamy sex scene she films with the handsomest man in the world, ever. Laugh-out-loud funny and brutally honest, The (Im)Perfect Girlfriend is the story of one woman’s search for her happy ever after. It is a novel that firmly establishes Lucy Anne Holmes as one of the best writers of romantic comedy today.

    Not exactly the sharpest tool in the box, but perhaps it is all a cynical campaign to cash in on the chick porn.

    Still I will happily do a deal – I will accept a ban on public displays of male sexuality such as the Page Three girl, if there is an equal ban on public displays of female sexuality – Chick Lit for one. No more Bridget Jones, nothing by Ms. Holmes, a ban on Eat Pray Love and Titanic, the lot.

    It would be a small price to pay.

  3. Beazels like la Orr are, sadly, as much a feature of the anthropological landscape as are chaps who like breasts. More of a leg and bum man, myself.

    Anyway, can’t think of any lengthy period of time in the Christian era when a whinge such as la Orr’s could not have occurred.

  4. Ms Orr asks a question that we might trivially answer “yes” to:

    Can men who need a fix of tit each day really have healthy relationships with their mothers, sisters, daughters, let alone female colleagues or any possible female friends?

    Firstly, however, I don’t think she understands the differences between “need”, “want” and “consume”. A man who’s mental health is materially affected if he doesn’t see a picture of a pair of tits every day is a significantly ill person. It is quite possible that somebody that “needy” for marginal sexual exposure would be unable to have a normal relationship with women.

    But it is a straw-man (sighs, yes, sorry).

    I suspect that very few Sun readers actually “need” the paper at all – never mind Page 3. Some of them will buy that paper as opposed to one of the competition because of Page 3 but many buy it for other reasons (such people normally state that it is the football coverage when I ask – but that may just be my social environment.) Some of the latter will look at Page 3 in passing, others will go past it with nary a glance.

    Until she sorts out this confusion of hers, her opinions are based on the same sort of solid foundations as Ritchie’s. Paper structures on quicksand. Held together by wishful thinking and group delusions.

  5. No idea about needing a breast fix. Happily married and enjoy the breast display many women put on, as well as page 3 if i happen to see it.
    Hard to ignore the things when they are presented for viewing. Does not mean mental health issues, does not mean my wife gets any less love and attention.

    I presume Orr does not in any way dress to present her boobs for viewing by anyone? Perhaps wears a full muslim female covering (burqua?) in order for men not to see any of her body parts that might incite lust?
    Or does she, like many women, dress to show?

  6. If all you are capable of is writing shitty, whiny and ignorant articles for the Grauniad then yes, it is the most productive use of your time.

  7. From Ms Orr

    ………But a lot of women don’t. A lot of women feel the people who want an end to Page 3 are uptight harridans, envious, bitter, prudish and prescriptive. They would love to be glamour models themselves, given half a chance. They want it for their daughters. You can see them in any city on a Friday night, hobbled by their Lycra dresses and towering heels, so keen to be viewed as “empowered” that they can barely walk……….

    Like all Guardianistas she is a snob. She looks down on woman who don’t share her views. She even asserts that any woman who dresses sexily for a night out, wants to be a glamour model.

    If a chap called every girl in a short skirt a slut, he would rightfully be called a Neanderthal. Yet her we have a spokesperson for woman’s rights doing exactly that.

    Champagne socialists’ beliefs are based primarily on the fact that they are disgusted with the lower classes and wish to change them completely.

  8. From the article:

    A lot of women feel the people who want an end to Page 3 are uptight harridans, envious, bitter, prudish and prescriptive.

    If the bridle fits.

  9. SMFS: Lucy Holmes is not calling for a ban on breasts in The Sun, she’s seeking popular support to ask The Sun to give them up voluntarily.

    I can see her point. If I pick up a copy of The Sun, I usually do look at page 3, because I like it. But it is pornography not news, and does seem out of place in what claims to be a newspaper.

  10. So Much For Subtlety

    PaulB – “I can see her point. If I pick up a copy of The Sun, I usually do look at page 3, because I like it. But it is pornography not news, and does seem out of place in what claims to be a newspaper.”

    I can see her point too, but that doesn’t mean I like it. Car adverts are not news either. Newspapers will miss them when they are finally all gone. Nor are job ads news. Nor are the personals. Or Horoscopes – actually I would like to see them gone. I could go on.

    Newspapers make money two ways – providing something someone wants to look at, and then charging someone else for putting what they want some people to look at near by. The news is just one thing among many that some people want to look at. If people want to look at young women’s breasts then they will buy newspapers. And advertisers will pay for space. Thus the newspaper will continue to exist.

  11. Closer, the mag that printed Kate’s tits, has a readership that is 100% female.
    Maybe not this week’s edition, and I don’t know if they increased the print run, but there was a big unsold pile in the supermarket yesterday.

  12. Tim, I fear you’re being naive about female human nature.

    Attempting to stop men from looking at younger, sexier women is as typically feminine as ogling tits is masculine.

  13. If I were one of the blokes pictured reading the Sun, over an article which essentially suggests male Sun readers are dysfunctional, perverted woman-haters, I might consult my learned friends.

    It seems at least possible that the association might make other people shun or avoid me.

    Orr seems to have found her own solution to this ‘problem’ anyway: ‘I hardly ever look at the Sun these days…’

  14. Steve has of course hit the nail squarely on the head. What this article is about is insecurity. And in that, it’s no different from most Graun articles.Because the thing the Graun readership has in common is, in their hearts they know with a dreadful certainty, they can’t hack it. Hence the desire to rig the entire world to protect them from their own failings

  15. Ms Orr, and more clearly Ms Holmes, are not objecting to the existence of pornography. They are objecting to its use in public – on trains and in workplaces – being normalized by its inclusion in a newspaper.

  16. So these women would object to me pulling out a lads mag on the train and reading that?
    But I can pull 50 shades of grey out and read that instead of the Sun?

  17. As usual PaulB projects his more moderate views onto other people. If Orr is objecting only to the public availability of Page Three, then why does she feel the need to be so snobbish about the women that appear in it?

    Why does she make the usual facile claim (divorced of any need for evidence, or even knowledge of how basic causality works) that men who enjoy Page Three will necessarily have no respect for women as a result?

    Nobody is forcing Orr, or anyone else, to like Page Three. The more adult approach is to recognise that it is at worst a minor inconvenience and move on.

  18. CS is of course right that I don’t speak for Orr. But I think she might say that a more adult approach would be to recognize that giving up having breasts on page three would be a minor inconvenience in exchange for making a fair few women feel more comfortable in their daily lives.

  19. My fragrant wife has a photo she took of a statue called ‘The Dying Gaul’.

    It’s in the Capitoline museum in Rome and depicts a naked bloke, with an ‘oh bugger’ expression on his face.

    To tidy it up to fit on her screensaver 9where it has lived many years), she first had to crop out the 50 or so other women eagerly taking pictures of the poor fellow.

    Bottom line: (pun intended) women are just as lascivious about well-made manly forms as men are about women’s. The ladies just keep quiet about it lest they startle us.

  20. Why doesn’t she then? The fact remains that the reaction to page three is disproportionate to its actual impact. Part of adult life is accepting that other people do things that may make you irritated or uncomfortable.

    It would be hard to defend (for example) the sleazy slavering that accompanies most of these pictures. It’s rare, though, to find a article that treats the issue with any kind of moderation. Instead we get the tripos of illiberalism – the false causality, the Helen Lovejoy gambit and (less overtly here), the anti-business angle.

  21. CS: are you asking me why newspaper columnists engage in polemics rather than calm and objective analysis?

    I suggest that the impact of these pictures is greater than you realise. Many women feel that they are judged, especially at work, on sexual criteria that should be irrelevant, rather than on their professional competence. They see Page Three as encouraging this sort of judgment.

    “No, Ms Doesntflirt, I’ve decided not to promote you this year. And cor, weh-heh, look at the knockers on that.”

  22. PaulB – “I suggest that the impact of these pictures is greater than you realise. Many women feel that they are judged, especially at work, on sexual criteria that should be irrelevant, rather than on their professional competence. They see Page Three as encouraging this sort of judgment.”

    A series of interesting assumptions. Many women? How many? What polls have been done lately? Where have women expressed these views? How do they come to that conclusion? On what basis do they think Page Three girls are to blame?

    There was a time when Britain did not have any Page Three girls. And when many women in the workforce were definitely not judged in their appearance because women did not have careers and those that did were not the sort of women any man cared to marry by and large. Were the number of women in high positions greater? Like hell it was. Female emancipation and work force participation – especially at the top end – has gone hand in hand with the liberalisation of depictions of the female form.

    So on what basis are you suggesting anything?

    What has happened is that in the old days, women were either smart or they were pretty. Smart women got taken semi-seriously on the basis of their intelligence. Pretty girls did not. Now all women have to be pretty even if they are smart. I am not sure that is male demand driving that but rather greater competition for the available men in the work force.

  23. SMFS: There are no assumptions in what I wrote. I don’t know how many women: a minority, but not an insignificant minority.

    Smart women got taken semi-seriously on the basis of their intelligence

    Smart women would like to be taken as seriously as smart men, irrespective of how pretty they are.

  24. Paul B,

    Ms Orr, and more clearly Ms Holmes, are not objecting to the existence of pornography. They are objecting to its use in public – on trains and in workplaces – being normalized by its inclusion in a newspaper.

    Yet they don’t seem to be protesting about the painting of Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe by Manet that is on show at the Courtauld Institute, a public building. And I doubt that if Manet’s Olympia would have feminists protesting, despite the fact that it is clearly more erotic than the current incarnation of Page 3.

  25. Of course they don’t. Read what I wrote and see if you can work out why not.

    (Not that I agree about the Manets, but certainly some works of art on public display are pretty fruity.)

  26. So Much For Subtlety

    PaulB – “There are no assumptions in what I wrote. I don’t know how many women: a minority, but not an insignificant minority.”

    I am not sure how “a minority” works out as “many” but of course you are assuming there are many. You don’t know.

    “Smart women would like to be taken as seriously as smart men, irrespective of how pretty they are.”

    There is no evidence they are not. If anything women still benefit from long-dead codes of chivalry so people so rarely tell people like Polly Toynbee or Yasmin Alibhai Brown what total idiots they are. Although again you are making assumptions about what smart women do or do not want. The fact is women dress up to attract the attention of men. Not for any other reason.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *