The Suns Page 3 - 1970-2015

Shrap

The Backwards Man wrote: »

I wouldn't imagine there's much money in it anymore anyway. Tits are ten a penny on the internet.

Exactly. The "oh the poor redundant girleens with their massive knockers! What will they ever do now?" argument is a bit thin, to say the least.

somesoldiers

VinLieger wrote: »

Plus its now illegal to make any of the fun stuff in the UK

on no, what will "Fake (insert profession here that involves meeting young women) UK", do now?

Shrap

catallus wrote: »

these girls are going to have their prospects cruelly restricted by this move.

:pac::pac: My heart bleeds. Perhaps the banks will start repossessing their implants :rolleyes:

somesoldiers

Shrap wrote: »

:pac::pac: My heart bleeds. Perhaps the banks will start repossessing their implants :rolleyes:

don't think implants were allowed on page 3

Galwayguy35

Doubt the women were forced in the door and forced in front of the camera, they got paid big money and ofton used used to pics to get noticed and make more money.

It's made the likes of Jordan and Sam Fox very rich, so let's not make them out to be some sort of victim here.

It's a first world problem for the saddos whinging about something so trivial.

catallus

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

It's a first world problem for the saddos whinging about something so trivial.

Hey! :mad:

It's just another little bit of our culture being whittled away by the inhuman forces of intolerance, so I guess we should all just go with the flow, yeah?!

When they come for you I hope you have someone to speak out for you! Unlike the victims of this campaign of prudery.

Whither are we going?!

Shrap

somesoldiers wrote: »

don't think implants were allowed on page 3

Wouldn't have a clue - maybe not. Ah well, perfectly good theory gone to the dogs

Seriously?

They made other females feel uncomfortable and that is enough these days to justify their removal.

Anyway doubt many (if any) people bought the paper for the page 3 these days. Like others have said if that's your thing the internet has an abundance of it.

Galwayguy35

catallus wrote: »

Hey! :mad:

It's just another little bit of our culture being whittled away by the inhuman forces of intolerance, so I guess we should all just go with the flow, yeah?!

When they come for you I hope you have someone to speak out for you! Unlike the victims of this campaign of prudery.

Whither are we going?!

Ok

twin_beacon

eviltwin wrote: »

Given the amount of porn available online these days page three seems a bit pointless.

exactly, we need hardcore porn on page 3!

who the fug

twin_beacon wrote: »

exactly, we need hardcore porn on page 3!

Don' t put your yogurt adverts on page two or four

RobYourBuilder

Some of the headlines in the sun are great - http://i.imgur.com/p5jjMDr.png

BlaasForRafa

If only it was the last issue of The Scum and not just the last page 3 it'd be great.

Kermit.de.frog

Isn't it a bit demeaning of the Sun and Rupert Murdoch to think that the lower socio-economic groups ever wanted page 3?

Kermit.de.frog

Dave! wrote: »

Fine Gael Cllr Keith Redmond is getting dogs abuse over this tweet

https://twitter.com/DrKeithRedmond/status/557505267546722305

Has that page been taken down? What did he say?

*EDIT* he deleted his tweet.

Cienciano

Seriously? wrote: »

They made other females feel uncomfortable and that is enough these days to justify their removal.

Anyway doubt many (if any) people bought the paper for the page 3 these days. Like others have said if that's your thing the internet has an abundance of it.

It's nothing to do with females feeling uncomfortable, the sun expect to sell more copies with their removal, simple as that.

jimgoose

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Isn't it a bit demeaning of the Sun and Rupert Murdoch to think that the lower socio-economic groups ever wanted page 3?

It is unconscionably racialist of you to suggest that only the lower socio-economic demographs like the boobies.

catallus

God damn it. I love boobs.

AllGunsBlazing

Getting your arse out is the new getting your tits out. Worked for Kim Kardashian.

Kermit.de.frog

jimgoose wrote: »

It is unconscionably racialist of you to suggest that only the lower socio-economic demographs like the boobies.

But only the lower socio economic groups tend to buy the Sun. That is who it is aimed at.

You are in a shop and two blokes have two papers - one has the Sunday Independent Irish Times you think "sophisticated", "suave", "intelligent", at least moderately successful.

The other has The Sun - you think "scum" :pac:

jimgoose

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

...The other has The Sun - you think "scum" :pac:

I used to think that. Now I think the people who control the Times are making a tit of me, and at least the Sun provides actual free-range tits.

strobe

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

You are in a shop and two blokes have two papers - one has the Sunday Independent Irish Times you think "sophisticated", "suave", "intelligent", at least moderately successful.

Heh.

Cienciano

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

But only the lower socio economic groups tend to buy the Sun. That is who it is aimed at.

You are in a shop and two blokes have two papers - one has the Sunday Independent Irish Times you think "sophisticated", "suave", "intelligent", at least moderately successful.

The other has The Sun - you think "scum" :pac:

The Mail is the real scum. At least the sun doesn't take itself too seriously. But yeah, it's still scum

fryup

as a young lad growing up in pre-porn ireland....page 3 was a godsend for me

i used to **** myself silly to....sam fox, linda lusardi, kathy lloyd, maria whitaker, suzanne mizzi etc etc

aaahhhhhhhhhhh those were the days

catallus

Rhiann Sugden

Shrap

jimgoose wrote: »

I used to think that. Now I think the people who control the Times are making a tit of me, and at least the Sun provides actual free-range tits.

Free-range tits?! What are they? I was intrigued by an earlier post that said pg3 didn't allow implants. I quite like their ethical stance on body modification, if so.

And ALL the papers make a tit out of everybody. The Sun at least has fewer words and a smaller vocabulary with which to make one a tit. Never had a problem with it myself, although as an utter waste of money it can't be beat.

kowloon

The thing I do find backwards here is nipples still being considered offensive. It's something I've never understood.

AlanS181824

I think my favourite Page 3 was the one from when the PS4 launched.

Sorry [model] but this is for the players!

jimgoose

Shrap wrote: »

Free-range tits?! What are they?...

Normal, natural, non-enhanced boobs, be they champagne-glass shaped titlets or great pendulous garbonzas. Nature usually gets it right!

The Th!ng

If I were Murdoch I'd just move the pictures from page 3 to page 4 and each issue feature two topless models instead of just one. Anybody who didn't like the new arrangement could just fcuk off and die.

Shrap

jimgoose wrote: »

Normal, natural, non-enhanced boobs, be they champagne-glass shaped titlets or great pendulous garbonzas. Nature usually gets it right!

I have to say that I didn't realise Sun readers had such good taste. I'm quite impressed, and now I am horrified, HORRIFIED that this worthy arbiter of moral standards has been silenced. I'm with whatever campaign is started about the return of free range boobs.

somesoldiers

Protest tomorrow 3pm outside the Dail?

Yurt2

Bewbs

BBDBB

somesoldiers wrote: »

Protest tomorrow 3pm outside the Dail?

One out, All out

shruikan2553

Meh, the only people who paid attention was teenage boys before the internet. Any reason why they removed it?

Yurt2

shruikan2553 wrote: »

Meh, the only people who paid attention was teenage boys before the internet. Any reason why they removed it?

The bewbage was found to be too awesome, and was having a detrimental effect on society....

Paramite Pie

The Th!ng wrote: »

If I were Murdoch I'd just move the pictures from page 3 to page 4 and each issue feature two topless models instead of just one. Anybody who didn't like the new arrangement could just fcuk off and die.

Why not show some cock too while we're at it? Something for the ladies...:D

Shrap

Paramite Pie wrote: »

Why not show some cock too while we're at it? Something for the ladies...:D

Cock would be nice......


Probably too late now they banned the boobs from the paper, but still. I approve of your question.

somesoldiers

Paramite Pie wrote: »

Why not show some cock too while we're at it? Something for the ladies...:D

Or keep everyone happy & have some she-males on, boobs & cock...or maybe not

catallus

They keep us mesmerised with the drugs and the porn to steal our precious bodily fluids!

sligojoek

No more page 3?

But how will I find out what India, 22, from Kent has to say about Enda Kenny. fracking and Michael Noonan's budget?

catallus

Ah, you can follow them on the twitta!

somesoldiers

I remember one day the girl liked reading Carlos Fuentes, I do t know anything about he writer but it sounded impressive

Venus In Furs

How are jobs being lost? It's not like being a page 3 girl is a full-time job. Bit of a straw-clutching statement really - can't those saying it just say they'll miss the titties at breakfast?

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

As a woman I'd have more support for this if I though there would also be a ban on naked and semi naked pictures of men in publications but I guess that's asking a bit too much isn't it?

That would just about start to make sense if there was a daily publication featuring men baring their ass.
Nothing was banned - just discontinued.

PLENTY of material featuring naked or partially naked women is not banned, therefore... not sure what you're saying.

citytillidie

Will heat magazine now stop doing there male torso of the week and such?



I doubt it

Venus In Furs

citytillidie wrote: »

Will heat magazine now stop doing there male torso of the week and such?



I doubt it

Dunno. Ask them. Not sure what your point is, seeing as the reams and reams of other publications featuring naked or semi-naked women aren't discontinuing publication of such images.

smcgiff

catallus wrote: »

Ah, you can follow them on the twitta!

Titta?

Haven't seen page 3 in years. Quite fondle of it once upon a time.

kowloon

Venus In Furs wrote: »

That would just about start to make sense if there was a daily publication featuring men baring their ass.

I can think of several where they talk out of it.

Photo-Sniper

But what about page 4? Presumably thats gone as well seeing its a double sided page?

barneysplash

Some historical context:

Any excuse to promote the Good News that is Yes Minister