Sometimes, it's just a cigar

This is our truth, tell us yours

NMP3 show they dont understand consent, again.

So you may have seen the cartoon by Jacky Fleming, that No more page three and their supporters think is brilliant. The moment I saw it my anger and disappointment fought with my lack of spoons to try and yet again explain what consent it, and why sex workers, and glamour models are able to give it. I tweeted Jacky Fleming, and was of course ignored, and tried to get on with an essay on gaming, misogyny and why skyrim doesn’t, but might have sex workers.

It wouldn’t go away though, the anger, the not againness, the unrelenting and sometimes it seems impossible attempt to be treated as a human being with just the same ability to make choices as the women in their nice NMP3 t shirts blaming a pair of tits for all the worlds sins, whilst calling the Scum a family newspaper.

 

So here it is, this “brilliant” cartoon. A man reads of the Rotherham case and wonders, as many have, why no one stopped them, why the police and social services turned a blind eye to the abuse of young people and children who they saw as sluts, whores, poofs, chavs, sex workers, no better than they should be. He then turns the page and expresses appreciation for the model of that day. He doesn’t make a sexist or misogynistic statement, unless you see being a heterosexual male as inherently sexist or misogynistic, he simply moves on. Perhaps he should have commented on GBBO, that is the acceptable middle class way to avoid thinking about how our society is complicit is sweeping uncomfortable topics under the carpet of celebrity.

Why did no one stop the abusers in Rotherham. There are a number of reasons, as we have already explored here, but one that keeps coming up in the report is that it was assumed they consented. Thats how grooming works in so many cases, the building of relationship with the victim that creates a false sense of responsiblity and complicity in their own abuse. Of course for many of the victims it was simpler than this, violence was used. Those who should have been the safe haven, who should have stopped the abuse ignored this lack of consent, preferring instead to believe their own prejudices about who can and cannot be raped, be abused, be a victim.

Just like NMP3. In the second picture is our reader looking at a non consenting picture stolen from 4 chan? (That actually would have been a brilliant cartoon, showing how we all are responsible for creating a culture that ignores consent) No, he is looking at a picture Kelly wants published, one she has not ony consented to be taken, but which was taken expressly to be put on page 3. It is after all her job, it pays the bills, feeds the cat, ensures she isn’t having to stack shelves at tesco or jump through the latest job center hoops of degradation. Kelly choses to be on page 3, she consents.

By comparing the rape and torture of young people and children to the consentually taken and published pictures of an adult Jacky Fleming, and NMP3 have shown  their issue isn’t misogyny, or sexism, it’s tits. They object to the sight of them, and most of all that some people make their money by getting them out, be it on stage, in print, or for a man in the privacy of their bedroom. They link the children of Rotherham with Kelly because in their minds glamour models and sex workers are victims, unable to consent. Kelly is not a real person to them, but someone who must regret her picture being on page 3 as surely as the girls of Rotherham regret believing those most dangerous of words “I love you”. The man in the cartoon actually understands better than NMP3 or the cartoonist that consent is what matters, not the job of someone, or their behaviour, or where they come from, but whether they gave consent.

Nothing will change though, the cartoonist has already claimed she was just making a point about wider societal attitudes (as I have pointed out, there is a huge news story about non consensual pictures she could have used to make that point.) NMP3 will continue to be the friendly face of OBject, pushing an anti porn agenda that puts internet blocks on childline while pretending to be whiter than white. And me? I will continue wondering when feminist campaigns will stop attacking other women and start doing something to change the capitalist patriarchy we are all just trying to survive under.

Advertisements

17 comments on “NMP3 show they dont understand consent, again.

  1. ValeryNorth
    September 2, 2014

    I’m afraid I’m going to raise your blood pressure even more here. By coincidence, I have just received from “SumOfUs.org” (I forget which of their petitions I actually signed) an email to campaign against:

    The Sun has reached a new low: it’s offering up a topless “Page 3 girl” as a raffle prize. Yes, you read right, a raffle prize. Readers are encouraged to register for this “prize” when they sign up for the Sun’s Fantasy Football Dream Team.

    There’s no other way to put it: the Sun is selling women’s bodies as a form of news.

    Fortunately, they provide a link to the actual story, with the headline: “The Sun is offering a date with a Page 3 girl as a prize – women and men deserve better than this” (my emphasis). So, not selling women’s bodies, not the model as a prize. And no different than most telly dating gameshows, as far as I can see.

    Like

    • jemima2013
      September 2, 2014

      they dont see us a people, so it makes perfect sense they think we are objects who can be won as a prize

      Like

  2. Not The News in Briefs
    September 2, 2014

    This is all lies and conjecture though. The NoMorePage3 campaign holds none of the beliefs you ascribe to them, so you are making assumptions about motives and then criticising the campaign based on the mistakes you’ve made. Moreover, NMP3 supporters are as differentiated a bunch as you could get, consisting of people who object to Page3 on as many different grounds as you could possibly think of. And there are some glamour model supporters too, because this is not about criticising the models and their choices, but about a culture of sexism which P3 reinforces – ie. that women are best silent and with their tits out. The cartoon is obviously not comparing the viewing of P3 to the abuse of young girls, but drawing attention to a juxtoposition of ideas that the Sun excels in – putting tales of sexual abuse next to a picture intended to sexually titillate is at best incredibly insensitive, and they should be called out on it.

    Like

    • jemima2013
      September 2, 2014

      really, so the cartoon shows the editor who made that choice does it? No, the cartoon, as I described shows a man angered by Rochdale then expressing a liking for a picture on another page. NMP3 links rape, abuse sexism and female nudity all the time, its supporters blame page 4 for the attitudes of society at large.
      if you think i am wrong about the views NMP3 hold i suggest you spend more time listening to their views and their supporters, they have called glamour models pieces of meat, laughed at the idea they could have political opinions and constantly berate the job as something a nice girl wouldnt do.

      If they were not trying to link sexual abuse and female consensual nudity why not, as I said compare the reaction to the 4 chan pics or the various long lens papped pics they run each day? It would after all have made the point about hypocrisy far better? they didnt because the campaign is opposed to page 3, probably the least objectionable thing the Sun prints daily. They are opposed to page 3 cos its part of a wider anti sex worker, anti female nudity agenda, where the norms of purity culture and censorship are daily promoted by second wave sex negative feminists

      Like

      • lucybottomface
        September 4, 2014

        I am in two minds about the whole thing. On the one hand this cartoon is ridiculous and I think your analysis about it is spot on. It seemed like a horrible attempt to exploit the situation in Rotherham. As you say- there are so many other juxtapositions they could’ve used but I think they wouldn’t have made the point they wanted to make, and instead would’ve promoted the idea that page 3 is the least of the paper’s problems-rather than the idea that that one page is responsible for sexual violence in greater society (which is a ridiculous position to take).

        I don’t think that they’re comparing them as like for like (consensual photos are like child sexual assault) but that they’re saying one caused the other (consensual photos cause childhood sexual assautt)- which completely diminishes the multiple causes for the situation in Rotherham. Whilst NMP3 has this huge podium young girls continue to be groomed and abused because the intersection between classism and sexism makes them “sluts who deserve it” in the eyes of those paid to protect them. Why aren’t there poets, artists, comedians, writers, journos, pettions, special fundraising events, marches etc against the institutional bias against girls in care?

        That said i do oppose Page 3 for a number of reasons. I don’t state that anyone should take The Sun seriously, nor view it as a family paper, but they do both of those things. I’ve been in the vicinity of dudes reading it on the train with page 3 open and it’s been in the vicinity of my children. I don’t want their sexual awakening to be so prescriptive. Page 3 encompasses classist, white supremacist, and ableist ideals of beauty and holds them up as idealised beauty. I don’t mind women trying to do away with that-it’s regressive and anachronistic. but I do give a shit about how they’re going about it, which is so often slut shaming, and classist in the extreme. Which comes to the point of my rant- slut shaming and classism are the very things which allowed the situation in Rotherham to go on unchecked, NMP3 in their actions have themselves replicated the causes of the situation in Rotherham. Instead of wildly defending themselves they should take some time for introspection.

        Like

        • jemima2013
          September 4, 2014

          thanks for your comment, I too hate the ideals page 3 presents of women, although i dot think it is any different from any other media portrayal, the only difference is that NMp3 dont like the fact it shows breasts, vogue however is a diffferent matter. It all boils down to prudery and classism.

          Liked by 1 person

    • ValeryNorth
      September 2, 2014

      “this is not about criticising the models and their choices, but about a culture of sexism which P3 reinforces – ie. that women are best silent and with their tits out.”

      But they would gladly replace “silent and with their tits out” by “silent and sexualilty repressed”. There is no room in the debate, it seems, for “loud, gobby, awkward, opinionated, self-aware and with their tits out.” You’re only assumed to have a voice if you haven’t (ever) got your tits out (for cash). And yes, the Sun does that but so does NMP3.

      Like

      • jemima2013
        September 3, 2014

        Only NMP3 thinks being a glamour model = being silent, cos they assume a sexual woman is brainless,

        Like

  3. CandyRoux
    September 2, 2014

    I saw a version of this cartoon at Laydeez Do Comics in Leeds a few months ago. It was originally Savile-themed. I wasn’t 100% on it then, but I thought in that context it made more sense – it seemed to be more on-the-nose about media hypocrisy, because the Sun is part of the system that feted and protected Savile and his ilk.

    But equating Rotherham with Page 3 puts the point at one more remove. And in the gap left by that remove there’s a whole lot of unexamined sexism, classism, paternalism, whorephobia and just plain fucking willful misunderstanding of what CSE is, wriggling like woodlice.

    Like

    • jemima2013
      September 3, 2014

      Thanks for your comment.

      Yes, whilst i am still uncomfortable with the selective blaming going on (as in we are all responsible for creating a culture that allows child abuse to flourish) it is a far better point. It was the worship of celebrities, created by the media, that allowed Saville to access areas that frankly he should never have been allowed within a million miles of.

      The cartoonist here seems to willfully misunderstand the difference between being a producer and a consumer. Is the Scum a repellent misogynistic pile of crap? Yes. Is everuone who reads it? No. I would never buy it and thats nothing to do with its sexism, more to do with a little thing called Hillsborough and the smashing of the unuons, 2 things that the resoundingly middle class NMp3 campaign dont even seem to know exists.
      , Anyway back to the point, the consumers of the sun are accused of all sorts all the time by NMp3, such as here where a man cannot apparently like tits and care about child abuse. This is, as you say based mainly on classism.

      A question i would love to know is how many MNP3 supporters read the Daily Mail…bet its more than they would care to admit.

      Like

  4. Sarah Faulkner
    September 3, 2014

    This article sums up the feeling perfectly. No sense in irony in that a NMP3 troll directed me to this blog, after her describing it as ‘bullshit’ on the basis that it follows a different view to her own. NMP3 are dangerous, they form a twitch hunt to people who oppose them on twitter and there are known trolls using multiple accounts to ‘dox’ people, purely because they do not agree with them. The only justification they have in removing P3 is’because they do not like it’.

    Like

    • jemima2013
      September 3, 2014

      thanks for your comment, and sorry to hear they are reacting so badly to being disagreed with

      Like

  5. vmcparlin
    September 3, 2014

    This piece just shows that the writer not only doesn’t understand the NMP3 campaign, but has missed the point of the cartoon. There isn’t even any mention rape culture.

    Like

    • jemima2013
      September 4, 2014

      please do explain what I have missed, or what you claim the point of the cartoon is? And no, it doesnt show media hypocrisy, read the comment above about producer and consumer, the cartoon shows the consumer of the Sun, not the producer.

      Like

  6. vmcparlin
    September 3, 2014

    And on reading some comments, there is a total ignorance on the point of the NMP3 campaign too.

    Like

    • jemima2013
      September 4, 2014

      Care to enlighten us, since you have such a greater understanding of why objecting to page 3 is more important than objecting to the racism, sexism, misogyny, transphobia, homophobia, disablism, on all the other pages of the Sun? I realise that for you NMp3 supporters its hard coming across the many people, including feminists who have long standing objections to the campaign, but simply saying we dont understand it isnt an argument, its petulance at having your assumptions challenged.

      Like

      • vmcparlin
        September 11, 2014

        No need for the arsey tone Jemima. I am not claiming to be ‘enlightened’ and nor did I claim being opposed to any one form of discrimination is more important than being opposed to another – I have simply taken a few minutes to find out what the cartoon and NMP3 campaign are about. This is why I commented as I did, not because there is some petulance on my behalf. You have made a number of assumptions, not just about myself, my views and what campaigns I am and am not involved in, but also about NMP3 and the cartoon. It’s wise to research a topic before publishing a piece about it online, else you can expect to be challenged. Confusing why you feel the need to try and rank all the different discrimination demonstrated by The S*n, not sure what you were trying to achieve with this? I’d like to point out that Page 3 is misogynistic, one of the forms of discrimination you imply that you are against.

        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

Information

This entry was posted on September 2, 2014 by in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , .

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

%d bloggers like this: