From: shagan@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Susan R. Hagan)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv.soaps
Subject: Re: DOOL: In Defense of Carly
Date: 5 Nov 92 17:19:52 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

EFS6MEF@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU writes:

>Susan,  You really don't have to wonder about this group.  A lot
>of us find the character of Carly obnoxious (at best).  If you like
>her, that's fine.  We won't "wonder" about you :-)  But I will say

I don't really like her anymore.  I used to, but now I find her
boring.  I'm not wondering about this group because they don't like
Carly.  I'm wondering about the people who are so offended by her
pool room scene that they call Carly or Crystall (I'm not sure which)
a "closet whore" for participating in it.  I wonder further about
those who are reminded of a rape when they watch it.  It just seems
like a *very* extreme reaction.

>that I continue to object to the now infamous pool table scene.  You
>seem to forget that Carly chose to strip in a PUBLIC bar, and f***
>her boyfriend on a pool table in what we can only assume was in full
>view of most of Salem. Watch those instant replays.  All the blinds were
>wide open.  It was night and all the lights were on.  That must have

So?  I don't see what the problem is.  Sure, its a little kinky.  Its
a little outrageous.  But offensive?  Why?  They are two consenting
adults.  The bar may have been public, but it was after hours.  The
door was locked.  They should have closed the blinds, but I think
that was a technical oversight.  And I certainly don't understand
why she deserves to be called a whore for it.  Maybe there is a RATS
generally accepted definition of "whore" that I am not aware of?

>been good entertainment for someone.  Maybe Carly likes to be watched,
>but I found the scene offensive.  (But I also found 9 1/2 Weeks

Why?  Because they had sex in a place where they might be seen?
I guess there are many people on this group who are far more conservative
then I am.  Different strokes, I guess.

>offensive, not because of the sex, but because of the abuse heaped
>on the female character.  The point of that movie was that the
>male lead liked to degrade women.  Interesting Crystal should choose

That movie didn't glorify the man's degradation of women.  It was the
story of how a woman was seduced and led into a manipulative
relationship and then how she got herself out of it.  I think the
film was wonderful.  It portrayed a woman sinking into a bad situation
and then pulling herself out of it.  I think that is a very important
message and there is nothing offensive about it.  (Except Mickey 
Rourke - who is just generally offensive to look at.)

>that movie as her model, but I digress.)  I must also point out
>something no one else has mentioned.  This scene was aired on
>Good Friday and the first day of Passover.  I would have hoped
>that TPTB might be sensitive to this, since they do know when a
>show will air.  I know people who were offended on this ground alone.

What?  No sex on the holy days?  Or no kinky sex on the holy days.

>But, I'm preaching to the converted and so are you.  I'll never like
>that scene and obviously you, or others, do.  To each his own.

I didn't like the scene.  It was just stupid.  But I can leave it at that.
I just don't understand some of the people on this group who think
that the scene is morally reprehensible and offensive and degrading
and etc, etc, etc.  I just think it is being blown all out of proportion.

>Razzie (who would fight for your right to disagree with the majority)

If majority ruled, slavery would still be legal.

Sue


-- 
Susan R. Hagan (shagan@gandalf.rutgers.edu) 
Publications Coordinator - User Services
Rutgers University Computing Services