rabble blogs are the personal pages of some of Canada's most insightful progressive activists and commentators. All opinions belong to the writer; however, writers are expected to adhere to our guidelines. We welcome new bloggers -- contact us for details.

After 44 years, The Sun drops Page Three

Please chip in to support more articles like this. Support rabble.ca today for as little as $1 per month!

Congratulations are in order for our U.K. sisters!

The BBC reports that "Friday's edition of The Sun was the last that would carry images of topless women."

The No More Page Three campaign, founded by writer and actor Lucy Anne Holmes, has been going strong since 2012, lobbying the current editor of The Sun, David Dinsmore to remove the completely outdated, embarrassing, sexist, and unnecessary "Page Three," which featured photos of topless models. The change.org petition garnered over 217,000 signatures. It reads, simply:

We are asking very nicely.

Please, David.

No More Page 3.

George Alagiah doesn't say, 'And now let's look at Courtney, 21, from Warrington's bare breasts,' in the middle of the 6 O' Clock News, does he, David?

Philip and Holly don't flash up pictures of Danni, 19, from Plymouth, in just her pants and a necklace, on This Morning, do they, David?

No, they don't.

There would be an outcry.

And you shouldn't show the naked breasts of young women in your widely read 'family' newspaper either.

Consider this a long overdue outcry.

David, stop showing topless pictures of young women in Britain's most widely read newspaper, stop conditioning your readers to view women as sex objects.

Enough is enough.

Thank you.

While this achievement should most certainly be celebrated, what's really incredible is that it took this long and took such persistent activism, over so many years, in order for a page that ensured, in the words of Lucy Hunter Johnston at The Independent, "the most prominent pictured woman in The Sun was wearing only her pants" to be dropped. The message was clear, Johnston writes: "men are in the paper for their achievements, women for their bodies."

According to an interview with LBC, Clare Short was the first MP to speak out against Page Three, back in 1986. She was attacked, vilified, and threatened for doing so. She brought in a bill to remove it and the response was "sneers and giggles," followed by The Sun going after Short, starting "a really vicious campaign of vilification" which included sending Page Three girls to stand outside her house. The Sun endlessly ridiculed her like a bunch of childish, sexist, entitled, little boys (weeeeeird!), printing "stories" like, Short says, "20 things you ought to know about crazy Clare!" and publishing "horrible pictures of [her]." But, she says, "once they start in on you, you either crumble or you fight back." On the flip side, of course, she received thousands of letters of support from women who were also tired of the overt disrespect and degradation of women Page Three conveyed.

When the interviewer asked Short about the "former Page Three girls who've come out today and defended it, defending what they did" she responds, simply "Well, they would wouldn't they. They have to. There are some ex-Page Three models who say 'I now regret it' and 'I wish I hadn't,' now that they're older… But if you're still doing it, you're going to have to say it's a good thing, aren't you?"

We've heard this song before, have we not? Sometimes we call it "false consciousness," sometimes we call it "the backlash," and sometimes we call it "marketing."

Wait! Is this third wave feminism, an advertisement for Your New Exciting Career In Porn, or your basic, decades-old, sexist attacks from unoriginal anti-feminist men? Confusing! Also, come on now. Men wear comfy shoes and no bras at all, yet have been dictating "everything we do" since forever. How do they manage! Anyway, Rhian, all the cool girls wear sneakers and Chelsea boots.

But back to actual feminist arguments -- Short says it's a small step, but a symbolic one, and I have to agree… Despite the fact that today's Page Three featured this image:

Also, The Sun will still have topless "Page Three Girls" online.

So what we know is that The Sun doesn't get it, nor do they care to. They see women as objects, they enjoy objectifying women, they profit from the objectification of women. End of story (for The Sun, in any case.)

That said, feminist activism forced change upon them, even if the change is insufficient. And the reason they were able to force change was, in part, because they had such widespread support, but also because they were tireless in their efforts.

The fact that there are no topless breasts in The Sun shouldn't strike us as all that revolutionary because, really, can you even believe that, up until this week, the U.K.'s largest circulation newspaper essentially ran porn? Also, objectification isn't solely attached to nipples. We still can and do sexualize women who are wearing lingerie and bikini tops.

Even Holmes herself agrees that this decision doesn't really signify a change in attitude, in terms of those behind the publication, saying, "The Sun hasn't suddenly decided that women say, think and do interesting and incredible things. It's still basically saying women are here for decoration, but it's a step in the right direction."

But it is a hard-earned success. One that serves as a good reminder that feminist activism matters and does effect change, that the tide is turning, even if The Sun isn't fully on board, that we should celebrate even the small achievements, that we have sisters all around the world who want change, and that we need to keep up the work.

Solidarity, sisters!

Thank you for reading this story…

More people are reading rabble.ca than ever and unlike many news organizations, we have never put up a paywall – at rabble we’ve always believed in making our reporting and analysis free to all, while striving to make it sustainable as well. Media isn’t free to produce. rabble’s total budget is likely less than what big corporate media spend on photocopying (we kid you not!) and we do not have any major foundation, sponsor or angel investor. Our main supporters are people and organizations -- like you. This is why we need your help. You are what keep us sustainable.

rabble.ca has staked its existence on you. We live or die on community support -- your support! We get hundreds of thousands of visitors and we believe in them. We believe in you. We believe people will put in what they can for the greater good. We call that sustainable.

So what is the easy answer for us? Depend on a community of visitors who care passionately about media that amplifies the voices of people struggling for change and justice. It really is that simple. When the people who visit rabble care enough to contribute a bit then it works for everyone.

And so we’re asking you if you could make a donation, right now, to help us carry forward on our mission. Make a donation today.


We welcome your comments! rabble.ca embraces a pro-human rights, pro-feminist, anti-racist, queer-positive, anti-imperialist and pro-labour stance, and encourages discussions which develop progressive thought. Our full comment policy can be found here. Learn more about Disqus on rabble.ca and your privacy here. Please keep in mind:


  • Tell the truth and avoid rumours.
  • Add context and background.
  • Report typos and logical fallacies.
  • Be respectful.
  • Respect copyright - link to articles.
  • Stay focused. Bring in-depth commentary to our discussion forum, babble.


  • Use oppressive/offensive language.
  • Libel or defame.
  • Bully or troll.
  • Post spam.
  • Engage trolls. Flag suspect activity instead.