The Day I Did The Alternative Page Three Shoot!

The idea for the Alternative Page 3 was in response to the UK based paper ‘The Sun’ where for around 4 decades they’ve featured topless women on page 3. While I have nothing against models posing topless / naked I find it madness that a so called family newspaper continues to put semi naked women in their newspaper. Newspapers are supposed to be for news not boobs.

What I felt that needed addressing that children could easily pick up the newspaper and see these topless / naked images of women. How are parents supposed to protect their children from soft porn when it is so readily available in what is Britain’s number one selling newspaper?

For many years I’ve campaigned against the Sun for what it did to the Miners, the Dockers, Greenham Common women, the Liverpool fans and the Lesbian, Gay, Bi and Transexual communities amongst others.

I fully supported Clare Short for making her stance against page three. What a woman Clare Short is! Despite all the abuse and threats she carried on making her stand not just on the page three issue but many more issues too! Everyone should applaud Clare Short on her position. One of the few MP’s with integrity to ever enter parliament.

Going back to the point about children I happened to be in WHSmith In the Summer of 2014 where a young child started running about with the Sun newspaper open on page three. Not only that he was shouting ‘boobies’ much to the embarrassment of his mum who felt like she just wanted to be swallowed up!

I felt for the woman and went away and did some thinking. I had heard about the No More Page Three campaign which was founded in August 2012 by actress and writer Lucy-Anne Holmes. Late September I joined up with the NMP3 campaign, signed the petition, read what women in including feminists had to say and have been pretty much into it ever since.

Over Christmas 2014 I started to think more about the NMP3 campaign. I wanted to do something which would have an important message as well as having a bit of fun too! Being as I’m gender neutral and wear what society calls women’s clothing I decided to do an Alternative Page Three photo shoot and put forward the images to the Sun as an alternative to the page three boobs.

Trying to find a photographer was the hardest part. None of my friends could aim straight with a camera to save their lives. In late January I put an advert out on Purple Port for a photographer. A local lad to me Alex Ford stepped up to the mark! A date was arranged!

On Tuesday 3rd February 2015 I met up with Alex Ford in Shrewsbury and the location of the shoot was to be Shrewsbury Castle for sure!

What a cold day it was too. -2c on the day so I was led to believe.

The first photos taken were of me fully dressed. I was feeling the effects of the cold even then!

I was like O.M.G. when standing their being photographed in the top part of the castle! Oh the cold!

As part of the alternative shoot I was to strip down as a page three model would! Before I had second thoughts I slipped out my jacket, hoody and dress leaving me in just a pair of panties, stockings and some boots! Here’s three images from the shoot!

For 20 minutes I posed like that and I felt every second of the cold. I could feel myself going into shock but hey it was for the NMP3 cause so I dutifully carried on even when a couple came up to take photos of the scenery.

I didn’t think I could get any colder until I went to a discrete place to change my panties. I was basically naked anyway but removing those pants made me even colder! I quickly put on layers of clothing!

We took a few more around the outside of the castle!

Shortly after the shoot came to an end. I had to warm up somewhere!

It was certainly worth doing the shoot on a number of levels. Sadly the Sun nor the Daily Star have accepted my offer to be featured as a model on their page three’s. I did ask for any payment to be donated to the page three campaign! Alas no reply!

Despite having a laugh doing the shoot has made me even more committed that soft porn should be removed from certain tabloids simply because it’s not just about children seeing bare breasts. It’s also about adults being uncomfortable with seeing bare breasts be it on public transport or at work. Myself I hate to see men drooling over page three at work. I throw the papers in the recycling bin!

Aside from the cold the only downside to the shoot was being a man groped me at the cash point machine. You can read more about that on this BLOG

Thanks to Alex Ford Photography for the awesome photo’s. Much love and respect to everyone involved with the No More Page Three Campaign – Check them out on the link. Finally many thanks to everyone who reads the new blogs and have made some kind comments. Thank you all!

Photo Credits: All photo’s by Alex Ford Photography except the Clare Short photo (Photographer Unknown)

Advertisements

Published by:

Street Voice UK

Street Voice UK came about at the start of the digital age in 1996. We had been publishing magazines and promoting live events as far as back in 1982. Most of our work has been lost since the sudden demise of My Space so we started again elsewhere after a short break. Over the years we have worked with my bands, models and PR companies throughout the world. Our current mailing list boasts 43200 legitimate subscribers from around the globe. Since 1982 we have remained non-profit and will continue to do so. We deliver a professional service and working with is very effective to sell your product at no cost to yourself. PR: Hope DIY

3 Comments

3 thoughts on “The Day I Did The Alternative Page Three Shoot!”

  1. This is brilliant! Many many different reasons…

    It also really goes to show the one thing that remains different in your photoshoot to Page 3. As in… they could change the gender, they could make their models fully clothed and it *still* wouldn’t be an end to the thing we think is harmful… because the one thing you didn’t do in yours that marks the difference… is sell yourself on a sexual level.

    You didn’t look at the camera coyly as someone shouted “Now show me those come-to-bed eyes!”

    You *almost* did the body language that implies the same advertisement of access to sex but (perhaps because of the cold) didn’t quite go there.

    The irony of course being that it’s entirely possible that (perhaps in a warmer setting)… you could have put sex firmly on the table for the ‘reader’ of your pose and expressions. Then it would have really been and equivalent, alternative, male Page 3.

    But that one factor… is as it happens what Page 3 is all about, and why it is that it needs to go.

    It’s not the nakedness.

    I could send them in a completely naked picture of my fairly fit 32 yr old approvingly white-skinned female body… lurching along with a bunch of shopping bags and a look of thorough disgruntlement on my face… and they would not like it, it would not get on Page 3. Why? Because that’s not what they want. They want *sexy*, they want “will provoke thoughts of sex”.

    But that means its not the gender either.

    Even if we didn’t (as we do) default associate ‘sex’ with one gender (women) it wouldn’t matter switching the gender. A man, pouting in his naked glory adversiting his sexual availability for *service* to the reader… would still be a bad thing. Why?

    Surprising thing is… it’s not the sexual objectification factor either.

    What else is porn, except various forms of sexual objectification? Does that make porn bad, and Page 3 bad therefore because it is porn..? A Page 3 model is usually a white girl… who fits only one very narrow standard of beauty: just-pubescent-and-not-fully-sexually-matured age (boom-busted but not pear-shaped by fully matured widened hips), full-lipped and air-brushed poreless, hairless, blemish-free perfection. Sure that’s porn, but those things aren’t what *make* it porn… they are what make it *bad porn* (although granted, that’s the default norm for porn for the time being).

    It’s not even the fact that Page 3 is porn that is wrong.

    The problem is that Page 3 is porn in a *context* and with accessibility that does harm. Porn provokes sexual arousal, but the porn of Page 3 is porn *for use toward that end* – sexual arousal – that is not only available on sale at child-eye height, but is supposedly perfectly socially acceptable to be *used* in public.

    Not only does that mean that before and after purchase the image of porn may be seen by non-consenting, age-inappropriate individuals, but it *also* means that the user of porn, is *using* it and therefore themselves viewable by the public (non-consenting adults and potentially age inappropriate minors included) – *while they are using it*.

    That is the real harm caused by Page 3.

    Porn uses natural mechanisms in human brains that play off our instinctive tendency to respond to expressions of sexual interest as per body language and facial expressions.

    [not just words or how we say them or the fact that without our clothes we’re more vulnerable, and therefore this can be construed as an intimate act when we see someone else naked]

    But by making access to it *in public* a public *right of use* (one is not expected to shut oneself in the bathroom or one’s bedroom or a closet to read a newspaper)… Page 3 makes being in a state of sexual arousal *in public* a public right too. We already have plenty of problems that stem from that false perception.

    For what exactly does “consent” mean?

    It’s not just whether or not I want to take my clothes off in front of someone, or whether or not I want them to come within a metre of me, or whether or not I want them to have physical contact with me… Or whether or not I want them to open up a dialogue with me for the purpose of them accessing my body for sexual services either, to be fair. When you think about it, it’s consent I give (or not) to someone to *interpret me* in a given way… in this case, as a prospect for sex.

    That consent is taken away from me, from everyone – especially girls and women – every day. Every day ‘consent’ is supplanted by the “right to sexual expression” – or rather (because I think that term *might* be used for the right of a person to be openly non heterosexual) the right to “sexually express oneself as aroused or seeking arousal”…

    Long has there been a misinterpretation in society where it is assumed that we, or at very least the heterosexual male ‘we’, have a default *right* to sexual expression – to find arousing, to be aroused by, sexually, people we *do not know*, and express that aloud by word or actions, *in public* even towards complete strangers.

    That is what Page 3, reinforces. That’s why it needs to go. And that’s why your pictures here are so interesting… It’s not what you’re wearing… It’s not even how you’re posed, or that you’re on your own… You prove the difference by omitting it: advertisement of and invitation towards sexual arousal.

    That unnamed quality is something that should only really be coming out in controlled circumstances, where the only people present are going to be *consenting* adults. Arguably, your pictures are “decent” for child viewing… on that premise, because in none of them are you advertising your willingness to sexually please and want to be found sexually arousing by the person – the audience – with whom you are making eye contact through the camera.

    Thank you for being brave enough to do such a thing, and to enabling the gathering of thought on the matter.

    Like

  2. Thank you so much for taking the time out for your words. You are correct about the cold and I wish I could have gone that little extra but at that point my body was is shock from the cold. There is going to be another shoot this Wednesday in Wolverhampton as Part 2. Hopefully it should be be warmer. I’m also hoping to raise awareness for other causes too, The clothes and underwear that I wear in the photo’s is what I wear on a daily basis. I think that surprised a lot of people who thought I just dressed up and down for the day. I hope people get a lot of out of your comment as that what the blog was created to do and that was create debate 🙂

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s