From: nissim@mary.fordham.edu (Leonard J. Nissim)
Subject: Re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?
Organization: Fordham University
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 17:48:00 GMT
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Distribution: usa
X-Posted-From: mary.fordham.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <MUFFY.92Nov11075211@remarque.berkeley.edu>, 
muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy) writes...
>In article <11NOV199210045505@mary.fordham.edu> nissim@mary.fordham.edu (Leonard J. Nissim) writes:
>>In article <1992Nov11.070434.14395@dragon.acadiau.ca>, 
>>891666t@dragon.acadiau.ca (Trish Turliuk) writes...
>>[intermediate posts deleted] 
>>>Do you *REALLY* equate this necessary survival list with my desire for a
>>>choice over what kind of images I am forced to see every day? I'll bet
>				> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
me:
>>Nobody ever put a gun to my head and said "Watch this or else!"  
>>Every television set I've ever seen has an "off" switch.

Muffy: 
>No billboard I have seen has an "off" switch.  Shall I stop going to
>work to avoid the ads?  No newspaper has an "off" switch.  Should I not
>read newspapers?  Magazines contain ads.  Many books have ads in them,
>although these are fairly easy to skip over.  Many products have ads on
>them, and the stores you buy them in have ads everywhere.  There are
>trucks carrying billboards around to advertise cigarettes.  Regular
>transport trucks have ads.  Taxis have ads.  Buses have ads.  People
>wear t-shirts with ads.  You hear ads on the radio.  There are ads in
>some elevators.  I don't even *watch* TV and I see hundreds of ads every
>day.  The only way to escape them would be to stay in my house and avoid
>any media.  I'd rather have a semblance of a "normal" life.
>Muffy

me: 
You are not in fact obliged to read any newspapers or magazines whose ads
*you* find offensive.  Locally, the ads in the NY Post are quite different
from those in the NY Times, and ads in the Wall Street Journal have a different 
look yet.  Given the incredibly diverse array of magazines available, there 
must be some whose ads aren't offensive to you.  (The only non-work-related
periodical I subscribe to is `Dodgers Dugout', which has no models at all;
there are not too many pictures in it, and only pictures of baseball players.  
Oh wait--there was a picture last year of Diamond Strawberry standing next to 
her father.  I don't think it was supposed to represent the ideal human female;
the photographer may have wanted to contrast her size (about 3'0") with his 
(about 6'6"), and if you really have a chip on your shoulder, then you can 
consider it an offensive photo. :-) )

Ads in books??  Other than ads (with no pictures) for other books printed at
or near the end pages, I've never seen one.  Honestly. 

It is true that one is subjected to public billboards, bus ads, taxi ads, &c.
when venturing out.  It is not true that you have to concentrate on them--it is 
very easy to "tune out" all the clutter, and not be bothered by them.  I don't
find such ads offensive, just boring.   

>--
> 
>Muffy Barkocy                               muffy@mica.berkeley.edu
>~Weavers' fingers flying on the loom/patterns shift too fast to be
> discerned/all these years of thinking/ended up like this/in front
> of all this beauty/understanding nothing~ - Bruce Cockburn

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leonard J. Nissim  (nissim@mary.fordham.edu)   
Disclaimer:  "I speak only for myself."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky soc.women:19417 alt.feminism:4258 soc.men:19156