From: parker@ehsn17.cen.uiuc.edu ()
Subject: Re: Am I "exploiting" this woman?
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 22:08:34 GMT

kaarts@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Kenneth John Aarts) writes:

>In <1992Nov3.195735.13037@adobe.com> kendall@adobe.com (Janice Kendall) writes:


>> 2) Same with the offensive magazine - it should be read in private, not
>>    public.  How would you feel if you walked up to a woman at lunch to
>>    visit and then realized she was staring at a picture of some guy's
>>    erect penis?

>      This is very authorative, telling people what they can and cannot read in
>your presence.  It is also pretty narrow.  I don't see why anybody should be
>upset at the woman for reading an erotic magazine.

Not everyone is bothered by such things.  Many people *would* find it
uncomfortable; that is why it is "wrong".

>> Guys, it can't be too much skin off your back to keep this stuff at home.
>> Put it on the ceiling over your bed, in your bathroom, on your refrigerator,
>> I don't care, but don't put it on your office wall.  I tend to avoid men
>> who put such things on their office walls as I tend to feel that they have
>> little respect for the women with which they work.

>	This also seems to be a pretty narrow view of people.  Do you really
>think that the fact that a women puts up a Chip & Dale's calender says anything
>about what she thinks of you as an individual?

Ditto above.

>> An interesting experiment is to bring in similar material which features 
>> the opposite sex and display it in a similar fashion - sometimes people 
>> have to experience the discomfort themselves.

>	And sometimes people have to realize that we are not all carbon copies
>of each other. People can have different tastes.

I read a paper about the obstacles that women face in Computer Science and
Engineering (mostly CS, maybe all of it was CS).  A large section (or two) was
dedicated to sexual harassment, mostly "soft" unintentional stuff.  (Stuff not
done specifically to make women uncomfortable, but which causes that as an
obvious side effect.)  One woman paraphrased in the study described a situation
where she and other female coworkers were annoyed at the pin-up calendars
displayed by the male workers in *obvious* places.  I believe their solution
was to post their own similar material right next to it (or in similar places):
The men got the hint and took their stuff down.  (I think they *did* complain
first, getting a "what's the harm" response.)

>	I myself plan to get a 1993 Sports Illustrated Swim Suit Calender
>solely as a protest against the polically Incorrect Attitude that I shouldn't.

I have no problem with what you or anyone else owns for your amusement.  The
problem comes when you display things that would "obviously" make other people
uncomfortable in areas that they can not be expected to avoid.  Posting a KKK
calendar (if they make such things) in a publicly visible area would make
members of most minorities rather uncomfortable.  That is wrong.  Even if you
aren't "really" racist, to display such material *says* that you are and can be
intimidating to minorities.  Similarly for you to display your SI Swim Suit
Calendar on the wall behind your desk, or on the wall of your alcove, or
whatever you have, *says* that you value women for their bodies and that will
make women uncomfortable.  (not everyone will care, but some surely will)
Ditto for a woman displaying a Chip & Dale's Calendar, which would make (some)
men uncomfortable.

If you have to have your SI calendar at work, try putting it someplace that
won't force it on anyone who walks by or who comes to talk to you (about work).

>Ken

-Rob
Xref: sparky soc.women:19470 alt.feminism:4306 soc.men:19202