From: stevenra@feserve.cc.purdue.edu (Alex Stevens)
Subject: Re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?
Organization: Purdue University
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 08:52:11 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.150355.9849@rtf.bt.co.uk> fletcher@rtf.bt.co.uk (Catherine Fletcher) writes:
>stevenra@feserve.cc.purdue.edu (Alex Stevens) writes:
>...
>> to say about the opposite of what you inferred.  It's basically
>> something to the effect of "if women make half of what guys make, why
>> don't they all hire women, and cut salary costs in half???"
>> 
>> Calm down!
>> Alex
>
>Yes, of course that's what it is *saying*, but it is also *implying*
>something because it is asking a question and leaving the reader to think
>about the answer - which could be any of these:
>
>1.  The statistic about women's salaries is not correct.
	Which it isn't. I'm well read, and WELL open minded, but the worst
I've heard is SLIGHTLY under 3/4 that of men.  If I'm "blind to the fact"
than you're right....I've barely made over minimum in my so-far-as-yet-short
life, so after I'm work for a billion dollar company, maybe then my eyes
will open and I'll see the light.  Still, the salary difference isn't that
big of a gap, in THIS nation, AS A WHOLE.

>
>2.  The statistic is correct and no company has ever realised this simple
>    way of making more money.

No, the stat isn't correct....but companies are just afraid of trusting
ALL the work to women, because(like it or not)  unfortunately  
they are still run by old men
who believe the woman's place is in the kitchen...
>
>3.  The statistic is correct but no company wants to employ a purely female
>    workforce.
>
see above reply

>Basically the question is supposed to be offensive to feminists.  It's 
>implications: 
>3.  Laugh at women.
>
>This is what printing the quote and the quote itself implies on a very simple
>level.  Keith Duddy has already explained what it implies on a slightly
>more complex level, but that obviously went straight over Alex's head.
>
	I don't think the quote is any more sexist than you assuming 
 I am a male because my name is Alex!!!!

>By the way, anyone who has the slightest grasp of what sexism is and doesn't
>understand why an Elle calendar is offensive and harmful and a Chippendales
>calendar isn't probably has no aptitude for complex thought - therefore I
>am resorting to condescending insult rather than reasoned explanation.
>
>-- 
> Catherine 

	You make it sound as if sexism only exists toward the female.  The
complex thought you don't see in others is shrouded by you closed mindedness
or other factors(see below).  An Elle calender is offensive to those women
who think they were cheated or are jealous of her.  You can't play God and
save the women who want saving.
	The only reason it is sexism is because the corporate male is
(unfortunately) still in primary
control and because of this "blatant, crule, exploitation" of the female
mind, body, and soul,(of a rich VOLUNTEER to the system).  I THINK (my opinion)
that the women who find the female model industry as exploitative are either
insucure or are jealous that they don't have the bodies (or the money for
plastic surgery - and a large percentage of models are not the voluptous, siliconed women, look at ELLE) or the brains to take advantage of the industry.  Even if
the women are dubbed as "airheads" they are smart enough to be making the money.The numerous smart ones may just be using it to fund other ventures. 
Chippendales and other male models, etc.. are doing the same.  It's basiclly
"if you can look at half naked men dancing, wee can look at half-naked women
posing---they're just making 10 times as much).
	Maybe you feminists don't realize that many women like to adore
and idolize these beautiful women.  And I know there are just as many men
who wish they could look as good as a Chippendale.  Anyway, I'm blowing
steam at a close-minded indiividual (oops, sorry, society doesn't allow
you be an individual!!) and as I don't deem it necessary to think long
and hard at every response I give, I'm done....flame back, cause you ain't
the majority, no matter how much you believe.....and people like you
just feed th sexism flames so people can laugh at you and wave it in your
face....maybe you haven't realized the (extreme human) trait of ragging on
someone about what they hate or refuse to listen to most...

*whew*
Alex
stevenra@feserve.cc.purdue.edu