Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.6.2.17 $; site uicsl.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uicsl!pollack From: pollack@uicsl.UUCP Newsgroups: net.women Subject: Women and Movies Message-ID: <27400002@uicsl.UUCP> Date: Fri, 28-Sep-84 14:18:00 EDT Article-I.D.: uicsl.27400002 Posted: Fri Sep 28 14:18:00 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 5-Oct-84 04:34:32 EDT Lines: 34 Nf-ID: #N:uicsl:27400002:000:1285 Nf-From: uicsl!pollack Sep 28 13:18:00 1984 The mainstream press does not help people who do not want to pay money to see rape in movie theatres. Just as conventional critics have multiple stars, and porno reviewers have angularly graded male parts, so should women have a well-distributed rating for Violence agains Women in movies. For example, different icons could be used to express ratings: (lowest rating) A Dismembered dead body (for mutilation movies) A Bound and Gagged Body (for silencing and rape movies) A headless body (for airhead and sex-object movies) A Body in apron (for barefoot & pregnant in the kitchen movies) Smiling Person (for movies with positive images) (highest rating) These categories are probably enough to cover the entire range of Hollywood offerings. Thus, Chainsaw, Slasher and Snuff movies should get the dismembered rating, Indiana Jones would get a Headless rating, Brimstone & Treacle (ugh!) and Mad Max Movies would get Gagged ratings, and the Last Starfighter and old Doris Day movies would get Apron ratings. With enough advanced warning, I think many people would avoid Revenge of the Nerds (Headless) or Tightrope (Gagged) no matter how much Siskel & Ebert liked them. I'd probably avoid anything with an apron rating or less... Jordan