The Oldest and most foul form of snobbery

The No More Page 3 campaign is gathering momentum, tens of thousands of people have signed the petition requesting that the Sun’s editor, Dominic Mohan, ceases his paper’s practice of publishing pictures of topless women. Naturally, there are those who take exception to the aim of the campaign, some because they (mistakenly) believe that the campaign aims to ban Page 3 and are worried about imposed censorship. Others, though, understand what is at stake but believe the premise – that showing women’s boobs in a national newspaper causes wider problems – to be fundamentally flawed. Brendan O’Neill has taken this view with a flourish and accused No More Page 3 supporters of being ‘driven by the oldest and most foul form of snobbery’. His contention appears to be that by campaigning against a publication that is largely read by manual workers a metropolitan elite demonstrates its disgust of this section of society.

Why? Where is the evidence? Could it not be that we believe in a much more wholesome human dignity that celebrates human potential without becoming sex objects? The reason this practice objectifies women is that there is clearly no relationship between viewer and viewed. Therefore, an object she has become (for someone else’s gratification presumably).

By placing the arguments out there, the campaign is generating debate about what we value in ourselves and what we value in others, in other words, what kind of society we desire to be. If we are happy for men to talk to women whilst gawping at their chests then we need do nothing. If we want to tolerate rude comments on the pavements of our cities, sit tight and hope nothing changes. If we want girls to aspire to cosmetic surgery to gain attention, keep quiet. If, though, we have a different view of society, we might like to stand up for it right now.

The No More Page 3 petition is available here.

And if Mr O’Neill wishes to call me inconsistent due to the prevalence of internet pornography, he might wish to read some of my previous posts.

The No More Page 3 petition is available here

And if Mr O’Neill wishes to call me inconsistent due to the prevalence of internet pornography he might wish to read some of my previous posts.

When breasts are not best

 

It’s a no-brainer really. Why are we still tolerating a national newspaper showing topless women on page 3? Really, I can’t find any good reason. Yes, it’s been around for a long time but does that mean it’s existence can’t be challenged? It’s not a great British institution simply a tool for luring men into viewing women as sex objects- pure and simple. For well-constructed arguments that debunk certain myths read this. Well, thanks to Lucy Holmes and her admirable campaign the momentum for change is growing. The Sun’s editor, Dominic Mohan, is being implored by thousands of people to put an end to this practice of judging women by their cleavage. This isn’t about introducing a law, it’s about standing up as the majority and saying we don’t think women should grow up in an objectified culture and we don’t think men should either. I think we are a majority and I think, this time, we might just succeed. So- if you can think of a good reason for page 3 to continue, do nothing.

If not sign here

Inspiring lessons from the NEXT campaign

‘I’m phoning you to ask for your help.’

The distressed Next customer called into the CARE offices on Friday afternoon about a T-shirt that depicted a woman in underwear in a provocative position under the heading ‘SINNERS’ with a definition of sin below including a Bible verse (Romans 7:1) from The Message version. ‘Is there anything you can do?’ she asked. Having explained that she had already registered a complaint directly with the company to no avail, she was looking for a bigger network with a campaigning voice. So I quickly put together a basic blog post focusing on the objectifying message about women and how using the Bible to encourage this was deeply offensive. Being more naturally at home on Twitter I began publicising the campaign there and was encouraged about how many others soon became involved. Particularly mention at this point goes to @sarasaith for her blog post that drew attention to Next’s Code of Practice and how this item contravened it at least two key points. As momentum gathered, individuals started messaging @nextofficial directly with their questions requiring individual responses. Then I realised that Facebook was the place for much of their customer service work and so posed a question for them there:

Friday at 15:14: Why are you marketing ‘Graphic T-Shirts’ with misogynistic poses of women in underwear and promoting such images using The Bible?

This brought in a few commenters, various likes and a response from Next that they were looking in to it. It all served to spread the message wider (bear in mind that Facebook users hugely outnumber Twitter users). Meanwhile the pressure was beginning to tell as a number of Twitter users with large followings encouraged others to join in (thanks to Evangelical Alliance, Vicky Beeching, The Vicar’s Wife and God & Politics UK amongst others). One interesting tweet was sent by @1SteveWade who asked whether the Conservative peer (and Chief Executive of Next), Simon Wolfson, was happy to sell this product. With such ‘noise’ created, a turning point was reached. I was contacted by a journalist at the Daily Mail who was interested in featuring the story. He had been following the online campaign and decided the story was worth following up – so after taking quotes (from others involved as well) he told me he was going to contact the Next PR department. What happened afterwards, I couldn’t quite believe. The journalist called back to say ‘Well done – they’re withdrawing it with immediate effect’. I was so stunned I asked him to say it again but sure enough the Next statements started to come out:

From Next’s Facebook page: “Dear all, thank you for your comments. We take all feedback very seriously. On reflection we agree it was a mistake for us to sell these garments and we are therefore removing them from sale.”

@DerahSA @jameslee42 On reflection we agree it was a mistake to sell these garments & we are therefore removing them from sale.—
Next (@nextofficial) September 07, 2012

The journalist wasn’t sure his story would make it into the newspaper but later that evening the online story was posted followed by the print edition on Saturday. Next responded to individual complainants to break the happy news and various blogs (@echurchblog, The Vicar’s Wife) gave a brief summary. But this is a story that began with one distressed person and a cry for help.

——————————————————————————–

A few lessons to draw:

1. One person can make a difference- if the phone hadn’t been picked up it would have been a quiet Friday afternoon.
2. Our Christian community and networks are well integrated and can be leveraged for very good purposes.
3. We don’t have to share exactly the same concerns- some may have been more concerned about the image, others by invoking the Bible.
4. We should use the media channels wisely- recognising that where the audience is greatest so the impact will be greatest (e.g. Facebook, national newspapers).
5. Acting courteously is a non-negotiable- we may be distressed by something, but we should engage thoughtfully & applaud good decisions when they are made.
6. We should help promote each other’s good work – this a team game and without wide participation we will be consigned to be ignored in a quiet corner.

If you have any other observations, do let me know in the comments section.

Thanks to God, thanks to friends & collaborators and thanks to Next for listening well and acting quickly.

Next: The T-Shirt that says it all

Sometimes you can’t quite believe what you’ve seen. My attention has just been drawn to a tee-shirt sold by NEXT in their ‘Graphic T-Shirts’ range. The black & white provocative picture of a woman in her underwear objectifies women and suggests availability. It is degrading & damaging to female and male alike. But what surrounds the picture is even more shocking. In order to create the allure of a ‘naughty’ sexual encounter it is headlined ‘SINNERS’ ‘The Night Before’ with a long definition of sin complete with Bible reference underneath.Do the publishers of The Message version know of & approve of this use of their material? Using a Bible verse (Rom 7:8) to seek to produce the exact opposite of its original purpose is scandalous. NEXT want to sell lots of these T-Shirts and one of the consequences will be to produce a misogynistic view of women. Is that an agenda they’re signed up to? Until they withdraw this product, I’ll assume it is. It is time to create some noise and get some answers. Watch this space.

A little more conversation…

Someone recently suggested that Christians talk too much about pornography (and that this is unhealthy). It’s certainly true that on Twitter there are a number of different individuals discussing this subject right now. There are dangers and I’ll name two: Firstly, that Christians are only seen as being interested in the socially conservative sins rather than the wider agenda (e.g. UK child poverty and overseas development aid). This is a perception of long-standing that will not change overnight, but I don’t believe that a solution is to keep quiet about something as damaging as pornography. It destroys lives and is therefore a matter of social justice. Yes, we need to advocate on other issues too – and thankfully the Christian community is much more comprehensive in its range of interests (e.g. personal debt, FairTrade, climate change). Secondly, that by talking about it we provoke further curiosity, thus leading others to fall into the trap. If I’ve written something that has been unhelpful then I want to hear about it,but my conviction is that we don’t talk about it enough.

In the last year or so a number of bloggers and organisations have taken up this issue with persistence in a way that might just indicate God’s guiding hand orchestrating a truth-telling and grace-filled response. It is better to bring troubling issues out into the light than to leave them festering in the darkness where the isolated individual has nowhere to turn. We were created as relational beings and our willingness to offer support is testimony to our God-given humanity. I recently talked to a church leader about this issue and he said ‘Oh – I thought pornography was looking at naked women’. Well, yes it is, but there is a staggering lack of understanding of what the 53% of Christian men viewing the stuff are looking at if that’s all you think it is. Clearly, we are not talking about it enough in our churches where the majority of pastoral support takes place. There is definitely a place for men’s groups to talk about it and for youth workers to address it with their teenagers. But this is not an issue that can be consigned to specialist silos. It needs to be addressed in plenary gatherings (albeit sensitively & appropriately), so that everyone knows that the issue is taken seriously and that help is readily at hand. And if we are worrying that some in our congregations might be shocked and outraged then I have a solution: Preach and model the gospel of grace. Because shock and outrage belong to the non-gospel of self-righteousness.

If you would like more help with this issue, click here.

Is our silence on pornography fuelling Islamic fundamentalism?

This post is slightly tangential and I certainly had no idea I’d be posting on this subject when the series first began. But having spent some time considering what is going on at a more international level, I stumbled across a couple of interesting news reports from the recent archives. Firstly, in 2008 there were a series of threats to a French TV station concerning their regular broadcasts of pornography into North Africa. The originator of the threats self-identified as a Muslim and threatened to blow-up the headquarters of Canal+. I can find no record of this being carried out. Secondly, after the US Navy Seals killed Osama Bin Laden it was widely reported that he had a sizeable catalogue of porn videos. As ‘A Tale of Two Cultures‘ has correctly identified his entrapment in this seedy, degrading world may well have acted as a compelling motive to oppose the values of the West or the Christian nations as he would have seen it. And this led me to thinking- is our silence on this issue actually fuelling Islamic fundamentalism? It is difficult for us in the UK & US to come to terms with the fact that for the vast majority in Islamic nations we are seen as Christian countries. Our Christian witness is damaged whenever we remain silent about, tolerate or promote anything that assaults our common human dignity. Whether our governments act is something we cannot be held responsible for but (whether through fear, wearied fatalism or lack of care) our silence is. It is not for me to comment further on the Islamic approach to sexual expression. But it is enough to know that pornography is considered a subversive medium & a threat to society that gives us common cause. Maybe if we were more vocal and developed more strategic campaigns on this issue we might discover new allies, make new friends and act as peacemakers. It’s an optimistic vision- a dream if you like- but nothing was ever achieved without a vision. If you doubt the admittedly swift trajectory of this argument, have a look at one of the commenters on the report of the Canal+ threats:

‘as long as there are christians to defend pornography france is safe’

Hmm

Liberalism has betrayed the porn generation

We know it’s there but how has it become so embedded in our society? The porn industry has successfully manipulated its way into mainstream society without large scale opposition. There have been notable exceptions (Whitehouse, Longford, Dworkin, Dines) but in the main we have wilfully turned a blind eye to the prevalence of porn. Perhaps, even more shockingly, liberalism has become the bastion for the freedom of the porn industry to purvey its trade virtually unrestricted in the western world. Well let’s have a further look at this. Here is one definition of liberalism:

[Liberalism is the] concept that the preservation of individual liberty and maximization of freedom of choice should be the primary aim of a representative government. It stresses that all individuals stand equal before law (without class privileges) and have only a voluntary contractual relationship with the government. It defends freedom of speech and press, freedom of artistic and intellectual expression, freedom of worship, private property, and use of state resources for the welfare of the individual.
(www.businessdictionary.com)

The freedom of the individual is paramount based on the premise of natural goodness. Whilst we all have capacity for great goodness this is far from the full story. Interaction with porn will show anyone with eyes open the twisted nature of much human thinking and many human relationships. The boundary of individual freedoms is the welfare of others. This is where liberalism asks itself the most challenging question- Is it better to restrict the right of the individual for the benefit of others? In the case of porn this question has been lamentably ignored. As the evidence of the harm of porn has gathered the governing elite have been silent. Shame on them.

I am aware of porn designed for females and gay porn but what follows is solely focussed on (the vast majority of) porn designed to appeal to heterosexual men.

Consider this:

‘As men fall deeper into the mental habit of fixating on these images, the exposure to them creates neural pathways. Like a path is created in the woods with each successive hiker, so do the neural paths set a course for the next time an erotic image is viewed. Over time these neural paths become wider as they are repeatedly travelled with each exposure to pornography. They become the automatic pathway through which interactions with women are routed…With each lingering stare, pornography deepens a Grand Canyon-like gorge in the brain through which images of women are destined to flow…All women become potential porn stars in the minds of these men’

Dr William Struthers, Wired For Intimacy, p8
It is utterly outrageous that Liberalism that has done so much to champion the equality and dignity of women should be in bed with the porn industry. That Larry Flynt is considered a hero for challenging the restrictions of the state in order to peddle pornography is a vile contradiction. You may think I’ve gone a little too far. I always like to ask myself the following question when opposing a particular viewpoint- What are its redeeming features? Well, in this case, there are none. What do they care about- the end user, the porn actors or the children who might discover their material? This is a multi-billion pound industry that is so financially valuable that the authorities dare not intervene. It requires a grassroots movement who will protect children, reject violence against women, will help men trapped on the internet for hours on end and are prepared to be castigated as haters of sex to make our voice heard. It’s because we have such a high regard for sex that we reject pornography- the shortcut to misery. We will campaign to protect our human dignity by refusing the worst excesses of a greedy and amoral business that seeks to destroy sexual pleasure and replace it with sexual degradation and slavery. Supporting the rights of pornographers to make money isn’t ‘progressive’ it is complicity in condemning a generation to misery.

For a more detailed blog on the lies of pornography read @jjmarlow here

For CARE’s resources on this issue click here

Is pain the greatest enemy?

 

Recently I was part of a discussion group that looked at various aspects of medical ethics. During the conversations we had, many of us reflected on personal encounters with pain whether they be physical, mental or emotional. In the midst of this the seminar leader shared the story of a couple who had been told they were expecting a baby with Edwards syndrome- a condition that meant his life expectancy would be short. They were presented with the possibility of a termination on receipt of this news. For them, though, this was no dilemma. Their Christian faith led them to continue with the pregnancy and so a boy was born. We were told that in his brief life he brought much joy to many people. Indeed when he died some months later friends were moved to bring stories of how their lives had been changed by meeting this dependant bundle of personhood. Such accounts reminded me that  there is much to be learned through suffering. It is not something we welcome but it is an opportunity for us to recognise that we are not in complete control of our lives. And that leads us to further questions about humanity and the existence of God. We should shrink back from becoming complacent or fatalistic but we can resist the clamour for assisted dying. A compassionate response demands improved investment in the hospice movement and our world leading palliative care. Is pain the worst thing we can face? Or is a society that determines when our quality of life has dipped below acceptable?

A visit to Shropshire

Admittedly, it’s not my most inspiring of blog titles but I did indeed visit the green and pleasant pastures of The Quinta Conference Centre last week for the annual UCCF student leaders gathering, Forum. This wasn’t a first for me, it was my 9th such journey this time to team teach in two ‘Theology of Social Justice’ workshops. So what impressions grabbed me by the throat as I mused in the company of over 800 students?

Firstly, the combination of serious discipleship peppered with great fun and ridiculous humour. I can’t think of a better way of making an important point about the challenge of following Jesus than encouraging the audience to laugh at themselves and then delivering the inspiration of how it could be different. Graham Daniels told the story of former QPR footballer who earlier in his career as a 17 year old had spoken up at a club Christmas dinner to say something of the significance of celebrating Jesus. But the words just wouldn’t come. So he offered a song instead ‘Thank you Jesus, thank you Lord for loving me’. He made it through all three verses as sniggering colleagues tried to hold it together. As you can imagine, training was a nightmare for a while ‘Come on Dennis, sing us a song!’ But it left an indelible impression on at least one, for later he became a Christian. This account made us all laugh precisely because we can all remember occasions when we felt entirely inadequate in attempting to explain our decision to become a disciple. And it inspired and encouraged us because, despite our faltering words, God chooses to use such weak and trembling vessels.

Secondly, there was such an intentional thread of an all-compassing biblical worldview. This has been such an encouraging development in the conference ethos. Whether it be approach to academic study, involvement in Uni sports teams or influence in the Student Union they are all places where being a Christ-follower should be encouraged, supported and resourced. These are not places where Christians carry out occasional forays to prove their evangelistic bravery but rather places where the Spirit of God is at work enabling the incarnational presence of His people to live and love. Becky Pippert’s challenge to us all was to ‘practise the presence of Christ’- in other words to sense His Lordship in the midst of the struggles of everyday living. By being there and showing the wonders of grace we can point the not-yet-followers to another way.

By modelling and teaching in this way, Forum will deliver a great legacy to the wider church. We will all benefit through being joined by thousands of younger Christians inspired to live differently and equipped to apply Jesus’ message to the every aspect of life.

What are the possibilities for Christian action through social media?

Like many I have observed (and participated in) the downfall of the News of the World over the last few days. It cannot be denied that this would never have happened so quickly ten years ago. Indeed, I don’t think it would have happened at all had social media not created such a vibrant, responsive environment for co-ordinating action. The advertisers withdrew their financial support for the newspaper due to overwhelming action on Twitter & Facebook that made campaigning so easy. Firstly, the top advertisers were listed in a process that ‘went viral.’ Secondly, the advertisers’ Twitter names, email addresses and phone numbers were distributed with ruthless effectiveness. All that was required of those who felt strongly was a tweet, an e-mail or a phone call. And for those determined to have their voice heard- all three. Done in a matter of minutes. The use of #hashtagging made the whole process so straightforward, a timeline could be a relentless feed of further prompts, news updates on the advertisers’ positions and identification of the next series of targets (e.g. newsagent chains). I ‘phoned one such chain who (when they had chance to get back to me) said they were inundated with calls and e-mails. So- what can we learn from all this?

Firstly there are many in the Christian world who are sceptical about the benefits of social media. It is true that it can be a distracting time waster, that it may not last forever and that it can be difficult to get started in engaging with the media savvy community. My observation over the last couple of years is that social media (especially Twitter) has become the ‘City gate’ of our society. It’s where people exchange ideas, challenge assumptions and talk about the most urgent issues of the day. Just as the ‘City gate’ of Jerusalem was a place the influential ignored at their peril, so we should be enthusiastically encouraging engagement by Christians across the land.

Secondly we, the Christian community, have often been poor at pooling our social capital and using it to good effect for campaigning on issues. This is of course fraught with danger. We must choose our issues carefully with wisdom and grace. We should be prepared to reach out to those who don’t share our faith with whom we have a common view on a particular campaigning front. And we shouldn’t let our occasional disagreements with each other stop us from working tirelessly together when we can.

Lack of engagement demonstrates a lack of care. It’s time we used what we have to make a difference for our society.