[dimtimjim]

Imagine being stuck in a lift with Topher.

Wouldn't bother me. Two decent upstanding members of the community, we'd chew the cud.

Boobs are great though. Although I get T's point... Only 1 person on my paper-round got the sun, so the boobage was a key part of my life for a few years. Differing views now I'm a pop's, but to ban it would mean all future generations miss out on the tittilation (pun intended) I enjoyed.

[Nicola_Red]

There is a big 'no more Page 3' campaign running at the moment and...I'm really not sure what I feel about it. The campaign itself smacks of slut-shaming to me, and I support the right of adult women to do whatever they want, including posing for page 3. But on the other hand it is basically just blatant objectification, and I do share those concerns about kids (and we're not talking about ones who are small enough to think that boobs "just look funny", but tweens and teens) seeing it and taking away the message that women are there purely to take their clothes off and look nice for men's entertainment.

Interesting sidenote: all my family bought tabloid papers when I was a kid, and seeing page 3 in my Nana's and uncle's newspapers was one of the first things that made me realise I was bisexual. I was probably 10 or 11 at the time.

[The Deadly]

A teenage boy who has discovered sex won't be looking at the Sun newspaper. He'll be on the Internet looking for easily available hardcore pornography. I think that's a bigger issue than boobies on page 3.

[Nicola_Red]

You're right. It's more about objectification than actual sex though - page 3 is part of the culture that women only exist to look pretty and available for men.

[The Deadly]

I've always thought the Sun should have a hot naked woman and a hot naked man for balance.

[Nicola_Red]

They tried that - do you not remember the Page 7 Fella?

[The Deadly]

Yes I keep all of them in a scrapbook.

[Bonanzoid]

The 'boobs being inappropriate' for kids argument kinda loses its way when you realise they're what young children use for nourishment.

As for page 3, why would you pay 40p for one slightly grainy picture of a questionable girl when Google's safe search being disabled is a free haven for smut?

[Nicola_Red]

It doesn't, cos the kids that are old enough to be influenced by it in terms of objectification aren't the same ones who would be breastfeeding.

And people don't pay 40p for it - they pay for the so-called 'news' stories, the paper just put in a pic of a half-naked girl as an aside, cos...well, who can say why really.

[The Deadly]

It's just boobs at the end of the day. Teenagers will still be interested in boobs if they are on page 3 of the Sun or not. As has been said previously Google is the gateway to even more photos of boobs and stronger images so what's the big issue here? If the tame image of a woman's breasts is normalised then kids of an understanding age won't treat it as anything special and possibly won't investigate further using the Internet or other means. When you start treating page 3 as something massively controversial and taboo that will only make a teenager more curious and hungry for more.

[Yudster]

They tried that - do you not remember the Page 7 Fella?

A friend of mine was a page 7 fella once -

[The Deadly]

A friend or a "friend" ?

[Nicola_Red]

One of the words on this page is causing it to be blocked at work...but it's not breasts or smut...what on earth is it?

[The Deadly]

One of the words on this page is causing it to be blocked at work...but it's not breasts or smut...what on earth is it?

Rim job?

[Bas]

They tried that - do you not remember the Page 7 Fella?

A friend of mine was a page 7 fella once -

That looks like a skinny, young Neil Innes. That'll baffle the teenagers.

[Yudster]

Its a terrible picture of him. He's far better looking than that - but he couldn't get past being stupidly embarrassed when the photo was taken so he looks weird. Also that was a long time ago - he's actually in even better shape now. And his best bits are his legs, he has the most gorgeous thighs I have ever seen, and that picture doesn't even feature them. This one does though -

[dimtimjim]

he has the most gorgeous thighs I have ever seen,

Only 'cos we've never met...

[bmstinton93]

I've been paid £137 less than I should have. I think the reason for it is I booked a week and a half off paid at the start of this month and took it. But they've since realised they can make us take 40% holiday at our home store and 60% here so I'm guessing when they enforced that it went over my allowance. So now it looks like I haven't been paid for that week and a half and never got told that. Wouldn't have had it off if I couldn't get it paid. And the holiday year runs from April to march. Do I have any sort of rights here?

[dimtimjim]

I've been paid £137 less than I should have.

Piracy deductions. Ain't Karma a fecker. **sticks tongue out**

Do I have any sort of rights here?

Prob not, but Yuddles is the one to confirm dat.

[chrysostom]

I don't pay tax

I've been paid £137 less than I should have.

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1354272770.645700.jpg (46.67 KiB) Viewed 7192 times

Only joking

[bmstinton93]

Ah you couldn't have quoted a better thing!

Off £348 I have been emergency taxed £137 so there was no problem with holiday! That's like 40%?!

[dimtimjim]

I don't pay tax

I've been paid £137 less than I should have.

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1354272770.645700.jpg

I know its mean, but I 'd at that. (and got a funny look from Anna, who sits next to me)

[chrysostom]

It would be fantastic if her middle initial was L.

[bmstinton93]

Is she fit?

[dimtimjim]

It would be fantastic if her middle initial was L.

It is. Maybe.

Is she fit?

Certainly is. Although nothing compared to Suzie (who sits facing me and looks like Lucy Liu).