A very short message, to some very stupid trolls...

Some wonderful, incredible women that I care very much about are currently being subjected to hideous online abuse. They are receiving threats of death and sexual violence simply because they have raised their voices and succeeded in making positive changes for us all.

The good news, though, is that these women do not stand alone. They can count on the care and support of thousands upon thousands of people, and scores of campaign groups are rallying around them, including mine (No More Page 3).

To those who like to spend their time in abusing and bullying women on the internet, I would just like to say this:

If you think your prejudice and your anger is working here, or frightening us, or forcing us into retreat, then please be assured that it works only to deepen our resolve and strengthen our voices. Every threat we get makes us stronger, and brings us - as a feminist community - closer together. It also strengthens our cause tremendously as you help us demonstrate the misogynistic attitudes still in play. You are the reason that the public sees our work as increasingly important.

In a nutshell, if you wish to keep abusing us, then keep this one thought in mind: you're only making us stronger.

Mr Cameron, you've been misunderstanding...

Dear David Cameron,

I’m writing to you to ask you to support the No More Page 3 campaign.

I know you’ve not been a fan in the past. I know that you’ve dismissed us, told us to ‘turn the page’, and brushed off Caroline Lucas when she tried to engage you in debate, but, after listening to your interviews on Woman’s Hour and The Jeremy Vine show this week, I realised this has all been down to a terrible misunderstanding. During your conversation with Jane Garvey you said that you couldn’t support a ban on Page 3, and that it was not the place for government regulation. Good news. We agree!

You see, our campaign is not about banning Page 3 at all! Don’t feel too bad about it, you’re definitely not the only one who has made that mistake (our twitter feed is often riddled with people deploring us for our attack on the free press, and our apparent disregard for free speech). Our campaign does not ask for a ban. It does not ask for censorship. It certainly does not ask for government intervention or regulation. Instead, we try to explain the Editor of The Sun (currently David Dinsmore) why Page 3 is not a particularly responsible thing to feature in a mainstream publication, and reminding him that he has an editorial responsibility, and perhaps he could use that to some level of professionalism, and that we’re not living in an episode of On The Buses anymore. We do not look for a ban, we look to change attitudes.

The reason we do not ask for a ban is because a ban does not solve the problem of the damaging sexist attitudes that led to Page 3 even existing in the first place. A ban does not mean that the big players in mainstream media have suddenly woken up and thought ‘you know what, this is 2013, and not a Benny Hill sketch, and many of the people I love and care about are women, and maybe I should start treating them as people rather than tits and arse’. A ban would not change these attitudes. They would simply make them less visible, further encouraging misinformed misogynists to declare ‘I don’t even know what these feminists are on about - they have jobs, trousers and the vote, why can’t they just accept we’re all equal now and go make me a sandwich?!’. If there’s going to be sexist nonsense and outdated attitudes going on, I want them out there where I can see them - I want them on the twitter feeds, I want them in the bumbling rubbish spewed out by MPs and I want them dripping down the right-hand side of the Mail Online. Because if they’re out there where we can see them, then we can point at them, we can laugh at them, and, more importantly, we can fight them. And that’s what we’re doing with Page 3. We are, on a daily basis, pointing at this anachronistic example of sexism, and more and more people are joining us in saying ‘oh yeah, that’s not really right, is it.’ We’d really like you to be one of those people.

We do not ask for a ban because we would rather challenge The Sun’s sexism until their editorial team sees that it has no place in today’s society, until they can be persuaded that this is not right, and until they make the voluntary decision to remove the breasts of young women from the pages of their newspaper. I’m sure that this is something you can empathise with, having told Jeremy Vine that we ‘need companies to act responsibly’. We simply ask for The Sun to act responsibly. Or, at least, to stop acting like a bad 1970s sitcom.

So there you have it, David. We’re not asking that you impose a ban. We’re not asking that you put in place legislation. We’re simply asking that you make a stand alongside many of your colleagues, and thousands of women and men, to say ‘ Page 3 is not a decent or respectful way to treat women in our society’.  Now, I can’t think of one good reason why you wouldn’t sign. Can you?

Yours,

No More Page 3

Dear The Sun (Do men like you naked?)

Dear The Sun,

So, today you addressed one of the issues that many No More Page 3 campaigners have with your paper; you invited women of varying ages, varying ethnicities, and varying body shapes and sizes onto your pages, and went some way in demonstrating that beauty is more than white, slim and big breasted. It was a noble move, and one that I think you genuinely made with only good intentions. You invited women onto your pages, and allowed them to talk openly and honestly about their bodies, the relationships they have with their own self-image, and what they like about their bodies. So far, so positive.

But then, the women’s bodies were then presented to four other people (three of whom were men), for them to pass judgement on. The panel was made up of:

1) Dr Hilary Jones, a medical doctor (who brought the benefit of his professional opinion to the table with comments such as ‘[her] bigger bust makes her waist look slimmer’ and ‘I would imagine she has no health problems’. It is true that you can ascertain the state of a woman's health simply by looking at her naked body - it's one of the reasons why A&E waiting times are so short)

2) Kate Nightingale, a psychologist (who brought the benefit of her professional opinion to the table with comments such as ‘a push-up bra would be good’ and ‘She has lovely, slim legs so could show them off by wearing skirts and dresses’ - I guess maybe she moonlights for Femail’s fashion section?’)

3) Martin Daubney (an ex-editor of Loaded who talks about the women as if they were cars he’s considering buying)

4)And a builder called Luke. Because builders are the true people.

At this point, I have to ask whether you are aware of a television show in Denmark, called ‘Blachman’, on which women are invited on to unrobe, and then have their bodies discussed openly by a panel of men, and which has also been described by many as one of the most sexist shows on television. Oh, sorry, of course you have, you published this article about it...

In the article, you identify that the show is very controversial, and you talk about how ‘The pair...openly run their eye over the nude guests - and controversially judge the women on their bodies.’ I’m genuinely intrigued as to why you then decided to adopt this approach in your ‘hey ladies, let’s all love our bodies!’ article? Is it because ‘The female body thirsts for words...the words of a man.’ - oh no, sorry, that was Blachman, oh gosh, I’m getting so confused! Is it because, actually, a woman’s opinion of her own body is nowhere near as important as the judgement of strangers (particularly men). Maybe that’s why you chose to call the article ‘Do men like you naked’ rather than something like ‘I couldn’t give a shit about whether a man I’ve never met wants a bit or not, I’m actually pretty happy with whadda-got, and that kinda still stands whether strange men agree or not.’

I do think your intentions were good, but maybe you can see two glaringly dangerous things about promoting this approach to the female body. Firstly, you give women the idea that, even though they may come in all shapes and sizes, the ultimate validation should come from men. Sometimes men they don’t even know. And that women’s opinion of themselves will never be as important as men’s (including men they don’t even know). Secondly, and potentially most dangerously, you give men the idea that their opinions on our bodies are super important to our self-esteem, thus encouraging otherwise well-meaning men to think they’re doing us a favour by commenting on us physically and sexually, or by expressing their desire for us, regardless of whether that desire is wanted or not. Because women just want to know whether men approve, right? But, wait...what’s that other word that people use for unwanted physical and sexual attention? Oh, yeah, sexual harassment, that it’s. And, as the Everyday Sexism Project demonstrates, it’s a major problem for women globally, yet you’re continuing to feed into this idea that women’s bodies are there to be commented on, that women, whether they know it or not, ‘thirst for words...the words of a man.’

If you’re genuinely concerned about your female readership, and whether or not they feel comfortable in their own skin, then there’s one very important significant changes you could make: stop treating women as though their opinions and views on their own bodies are secondary to the opinions of strangers, and stop treating women’s bodies as objects for the approval and entertainment of men.

And d’you know how you could take one, big, easy step towards showing your respect for your female readership?

No. More. Page. 3.