From: rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari)
Subject: Re: Boycotts (was Re: Why are many low-income women fat?)
Summary: Fish is gross 
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 22:16:05 GMT

In article <BzqELE.8Hs@news.cso.uiuc.edu> levine@symcom.math.uiuc.edu (Lenore Levine) writes:
>rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:
>
>>In article <Bzq9q5.78w@news.cso.uiuc.edu> levine@symcom.math.uiuc.edu (Lenore Levine) writes:
>>	A lot of people pay this lip service, because
>>	it's the in thing to do (and, for men, the only
>>	safe thing to do around women).  Still, I'll take
>>	it at face value.
>I don't think you understand, how different the tastes of us jaded 
>middle-aged sensualists can be! I don't think I would have believed at 
>eight, how much I love sea urchin sushi now.


	Blech.  Fish.  Grossest thing on earth. 

	<B?ut I can understand--as a child, I hated onions.  thought
	they were some form of torture--bitter, nasty--by 16 I 
	loved them--nowadays, I'm kind of ambivalent about them>


>>>>	Not the type of boycott I'm referring to.  The type of boycott
>>>>	I'm referring to (feminists marching outsode the building spreading
>>>>	subversive "evidence" of sexism) is sad and immoral--it's right
>>>>	up there with Operation Rescue and Lambs of Christ in terms
>>>>	of sleaze.
>
>>>If you want me to comment on the *goals* of a *specific* boycott,
>>>you have to describe them.
>
>>	Take a look at the feminist actions against a that radio 
>>	station in Canada for playing a beatles song--boy, those
>>	people would make Terry Randall proud.
>                          ^^^^^ ^^^^^^^
>                          Randall Terry


	Whoops.  Terry Randall is the actor.. 


>I am not particularly enthused about the goals of the above boycott.


	What, censorship?  oppression of ideas?  squashing of 
	free speech?

	Gee, me neither.

>However, I have planned a boycott myself, which I would like to
>see implemented at some future time (and which I plan eventually,
>to discuss with the appropriate organizations). 
>
>There are some Silicon Valley companies which have a policy of
>not hiring large people. I would like to create a database
>of companies which have this policy (using appropriate safeguards for
>accuracy -- which I am *not* an expert on, and would have to discuss
>with those who are).  
>
>I would then like to make this database available to those who are
>concerned about the rights of large people, and wish to make buying
>decisions based on this concern. I suspect that just being informed
>that they *are* on such a list, and that it is avaiable to the
>public, may be enough to make some companies significantly modify
>their policies.
>
>I am curious what you think about this boycott idea.


	I would probably advise you that you need to take such policies
	in context.  For instance, I think it's in New York, a very obese
	man is suing McDonalds for not providing a table that he can
	fit into.  This man is enourmous--for McDonalds to provide
	proper seating for this mans physique would require them to halve
	(or less) the number of seats they can fitin their restaurants.
	McDonalds can seat people from 30 to 350 lb folks pretty much 
	fine.  

	That, one.  Two, I would suggest that you consider whether
	these jobs are jobs that an obese individual can properly fill,
	that is, look at the activity the job involves (physical
	activity and safety, especially).  Third, take a look at the
	work areas that the companies _have right now_ (I think it's
	rediculous to make them rebuild) and make sure that those 
	(and not bigotry) aren't the underlying reason.
 
	After all this, there are alternatives that are better than
	boycotts.  Publicity, media.

	Boycotts don't hurt anything but the employees of the company.

>Lenore Levine


-- 
	"If you can't eat sand, why the hell are you living in a desert?"
			Equality is a delusion.
	     Rule 1:  "Don't have more children than you can feed."
	      Buy American as if your job depended on it. 
Newsgroups: alt.feminism