Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ames.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!decwrl!Glacier!well!ptsfa!dual!ames!barry From: barry@ames.UUCP (Kenn Barry) Newsgroups: net.women Subject: Re: Re: A flash from the (recent) past. Message-ID: <1216@ames.UUCP> Date: Tue, 22-Oct-85 13:41:22 EDT Article-I.D.: ames.1216 Posted: Tue Oct 22 13:41:22 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 26-Oct-85 07:06:58 EDT References: <742@decwrl.UUCP> <5751@tekecs.UUCP> <1171@rayssd.UUCP> Organization: NASA-Ames Research Center, Mtn. View, CA Lines: 63 From Heather Emanuel (rayssd!hxe): >Jerry says: >> > > The Playboy Mensa pictorial . . . has finally appeared in this >> > > month's issue. . . . I've _got_ to start going to more regional >> > > gatherings. > >To which Jym replies (three cheers!): >> > One would think that a member of Mensa - as you have >> > announced yourself to be (in a rather roundabout way) - would have >> > more sense than to pollute this newsgroup with such sentiments. >> > <_Jym_> > >Which prompts Jeff to say: >> Stop being such a prig. Just because you feel guilty about being interested >> in pretty women is no reason to expect that others will have the same >> problem. >> Jeff Winslow > >Ooh, this makes me mad!!!!! First, I'm surprised at you, Jeff. >You're usually not like this. Maybe you were kidding? > >On the assumption that you were serious: are you *crazy*? Haven't >you been listening AT ALL to the overwhelming sentiment of the >postings in this group for the last two years? This is net.women, >started for discussions by and about women. Most of the women who >post or respond via personal mail to various posters have made it >QUITE CLEAR that we view pornography as something that demeans us as >a whole and offends us as individuals, NOT as "being interested in >pretty women." Even if you don't agree with that, and even if *Jym* >doesn't agree with that, Jym's posting was pointing out that most of >us *do* agree with that. As such, I feel your attack on Jym was >unwarranted. I think two points need to be addressed. First, reread the quote from Jerry. As far as I can tell, all it does is to express a liking for pretty women. It does not express *any* opinion on PLAYBOY, only an interest in meeting the Mensa members who were featured in the article in question. If an interest in pretty women make Jerry Hollombe a sexist, I guess it's time for me to come out of the closet and declare myself a sexist, too; it seems I meet the definition. As for the porn matter, you are assuming a lot. A variety of opinions on the subject have been expressed in net.women, by both men and women. If the women on this board have expressed near-universal condemnation of PLAYBOY, I have failed to notice it. >And by the way, as long as there are people who feel that not "being >interested in pretty women" in pornographic magazines is a "problem" >then I, as an individual woman, am going to be robbed of a little >of my identity. No one (except you) has suggested that lack of interest in pictures of naked women is a problem. *Please* read what you are responding to carefully before posting. Neither Jerry Hollombe's article, nor Jeff Winslow's, takes any stand on the propriety of magazines like PLAYBOY; all they say is that they like pretty women. I have no idea of their opinion of PLAYBOY and, unless they've expressed an opinion elsewhere, neither do you or Mr Dyer. - From the Crow's Nest - Kenn Barry NASA-Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ELECTRIC AVENUE: {ihnp4,vortex,dual,nsc,hao,hplabs}!ames!barry