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