HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: roder@cco.caltech.edu (Brenda J. Roder)
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels,soc.women,alt.feminism,soc.men
Subject: Re: Self Appreciation (was: Re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?)
Date: 13 Nov 1992 19:28:00 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandman.caltech.edu

teri@sdd.hp.com (Teri Tracey) writes:

>**Men (or anyone) who have never experienced the type of societal pressures 
>that many women do, usually **don't understand** what it's like to be a 
>woman and to be bombarded by Madison Avenue's images of the ideal woman.**   
>You really *don't* have any idea, although you *think* you do.

>I'm not sure how to bring people to that understanding, either.   You can't
>understand what it can be like to grow up female.  It's not just "stepping 
>into her shoes for a few-second thought experiment."  It's living her 
>life of Vogue magazines and MTV videos and Woman's Day--whether she 
>consciously chooses to accept these messages or not!

I am a woman and I don't understand this either.  I don't think I had the
same experiences growing up as I was evidently supposed to.  My father 
bought me erector sets *and* dollhouses.  I still remember a stocking stuffer
of a clear plastic truck with gears inside and a small plastic wrench.  He
explained logarithms to me when I asked about slide rules (though I was too
young to really understand :-)

I don't wear makeup unless I'm on stage.  I rarely wear panty hose or heels,
but I still enjoy dressing up for formal Scottish Country Dance events or
going out for a special dinner.

So, did I manage to miss out on growing up female?

In case this is a generational thing, I was born in 1963.
-- 
-- Brenda (roder@cobalt.caltech.edu)
Thought before action, if there's time.
    _The Edge_  Dick Francis
Xref: sparky alt.supermodels:1685 soc.women:19269 alt.feminism:4131 soc.men:19035
From: kytan@mantra.fia.dmg.ml.com (Kok-Yong Tan)
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels,soc.women,alt.feminism,soc.men
Subject: Re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?
Date: 10 Nov 92 13:22:36 GMT
	<riaedwards.1.721307187@halls1.cc.monash.edu.au>
Organization: Organised?  Here?  Hahahahahahahaha.....

In article <riaedwards.1.721307187@halls1.cc.monash.edu.au> riaedwards@halls1.cc.monash.edu.au (AUDREY EDWARDS) writes:

   There are many women, of mature age, whom few would regard as rad. feminist, 
   particularly ones with strong religious beliefs (in the UK, Mary Whitehouse 
   springs to mind...no doubt the US has an equivilent) who share such 
   attitudes towards the evils of "girlie mags". Whilst I don't share there 
   views (my distaste is on aesthetic, rather than moral or censorship 
   grounds), and certainly see no direct link between such material and 
   rape, I wouldn't dream of dismissing such people as "insecure". Just I 
   defend your right to display as much bad taste as you wish, I defend their 
   right to consider it dangerous (though I suppose, if push came to shove, 
   I'd help you prevent them banning such things!)

Ah, but is religion not a crutch as well?  If one is truly secure, why bother
with the promise of an afterlife?  Que sera, sera.  And all that sort of thing.
Treat it as an adventure, where you never know what you will find around the
corner, instead of believing some fool dressed in a bedsheet who may yet be
wrong.  I agree that the religious have a right to be insecure about their
lives, just so long as they don't force their insecurities on me.

   One things for certain, whilst I'm as confident as I want to be, I 
   certainly would not date a man with an Elle MacPherson calandar on his 
   wall! Now, a Paul Klee calandar is different (and for the culturally 
   unenlightened, he is not a member of the Chippendales!!!!)   

That is your privilege.  What about a Robert Mapplethorpe calendar?  He's not a
member of the Chippendales either.  :-)


--
===============================================================================
Kok-Yong Tan, 			  	| My words are my own: 
Fixed Income Analytics Group, 	  	| My bosses know naught.
Merrill Lynch,			  	| Wherever they're sown,
World Financial Center, North Tower, 	| Just I should be sought.
New York, NY 10281-1315.	  	|		- K. Y. Tan, 5 Feb 1992
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
InterNet: kytan@fia.dmg.ml.com (Merrill Lynch)
	  75046.256@compuserve.com (CompuServe)
===============================================================================
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels
From: craigs@garfield.cs.mun.ca (Stace)
Subject: Re: eleniak.gif
Organization: CS Dept., Memorial University of Newfoundland
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 04:04:21 GMT

(Sneh Ctuh) writes:


>Outstanding pic.

>You did it the right way.  Now lets see more.

>Thanks.

>Sneh

Well, not quite.  The subject line said gif, but the file was a jpeg.

->Stace<-
-- 
"Not just any gazelle!   The opinions above are not necessarily those of the 
 Thompson's Gazelle!"    University, or myself.  They are definitely those of
                         Mrs. Shapowski in Milwaukee, Wisconson.
craigs@garfield.cs.mun.ca (Call me Stace)               ABC BBS (709)747-3451 
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels,soc.women,alt.feminism,soc.men
From: sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart)
Subject: Re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?
Organization: my opinions only
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 21:37:07 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???"

>Basically the question is supposed to be offensive to feminists.  It's 
>implications: 
>
>1.  Doubt (by the word "if") one of the few statistics that it is safe to
>    "believe" because the information it contains is straightforward
>    and easy to obtain from accurate and diverse sources. 

When I first saw that statistic, it was presented as "women earn 59%
of what men do"--that is, the total salaries of all women in the US
were 59% of the total salaries of all men in the US.  The fact that
there were a lot more men in the workforce was not mentioned, of
course.

More recently, I've seen statistics that when men and women have the
same level of education and experience, they earn about the same.  The
only reference I have is that in the most recent salary survey taken
by the MAA that I've seen (probably a year or two old), women with new
PhD's in math earned more, on average, than men with new PhD's in math.

>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.

Anybody who considers a calendar to be harmful (I admit that any
phyical object can be used in a harmful manner, but that's not what
we're discussing here) is certainly guilty of taking something too
seriously.

And anybody who claims that only men can be sexist is a reincarnation
of Ed Nilges.

Seth		sethb@fid.morgan.com
Xref: sparky alt.supermodels:1675 soc.women:19257 alt.feminism:4118 soc.men:19024
From: pepke@dirac.scri.fsu.edu (Eric Pepke)
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels,soc.women,alt.feminism,soc.men
Subject: Re: The Beauty Myth (was:Re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?)
Date: 12 Nov 92 01:20:28 GMT
Reply-To: pepke@dirac.scri.fsu.edu (Eric Pepke)
Followup-To: alt.supermodels
Distribution: usa
Organization: Florida State University, but I don't speak for them

In article <1992Nov11.150801.12628@cbnewsk.cb.att.com> krw@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (keith.r.smith) writes:
>This "size thing" is cyclical.  Back in the 20's (and possibly 30's as well)
>thin women were idealized,

In the 30's it was shortish plump women with puffy cheeks.

> in the 40's and 50's it was full figured women,
>and from the 60's on, it has been thin women again.

Only the late 60's, since Twiggy.

  I guess that when
>full-figured women are in vogue again, that thin women will have to feel
>inadequate..... Or maybe (hopefully) by that time enough folx will realize
>that they have their own set of desirable characteristics, regardless of what
>images are put out by the media.

"Who cares if hair is long or short or sprayed or partly greyed?  We know 
 that hair ain't where it's at.
 There will come a time when you won't even be ashamed if you are fat."
                                                         -Frank Zappa

Yeah, right.
 
-EMP
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels
From: auer@cs.swarthmore.edu (David S. Auer)
Subject: Re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?
Organization: Swarthmore College, PA
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 11:28:48 GMT

In article <23758@galaxy.ucr.edu> starbuck@ucrmath.ucr.edu (starbuck) writes:
>[...]
>I think of the Chippendale guys as male bimbos mostly becasue posing seems
>to lack any depth.  But what I like, and what I don't like is more or
>less my business.  So if a somebody wants to put up a Chippendales poster
>I'm not going to object just because I don't like it.  I love my freedom
>more.  I don't want to give up my rights to be myself and to express my
>self in any manner I choose.  And I would be by denying others their freedom.
>It's freedom that were talking about.

Should one express oneself in a manner that is offensive to another?
Legally, this should be allowed; yet, if one knows that one's expression
will wantonly offend those who do not wish to be offended, is not appropriate
to move one's expression elsewhere?

Freedom is only a good thing when it does not interfere with another's
freedom.  I consider freedom from offense nearly as important as freedom of
expression.

What you seem to be advocating is a bargain: I will not get offended if you
will not get offended.  What if the other person does not wish to engage in
your bargain?  Is this just?  Permissable certainly, but hardly equitable.

>Another poster said something like this, 'You have the right to be 
>uncomfortable, you don't have the right to tell me what I can read and
>not read.'  One has to learn to be indiferent to what one does not like.
>We cannot all live our lives based on other peoples likes and dislikes.
>It is the price of freedom.  There is no right or wrong.

What if other's do not wish to be indifferent to their desires?  You may
feel fine and dandy in suppression city, but why enforce that numbness upon
others who are content with their preferences and wants?  You have decided
on the price for yourself and wish to extract it from other's.  Do not be
surprised when others resist payment.

>Some think there is so much danger in someone putting up a Cindy Crawford
>calander but the real danger is in the political attitudes that wish
>to control.  I believe they want control of other people out of fear.

Show some consideration towards the feelings of others.  You will be amazed
at how liberating the experience can be.  I do not fear offending others,
for I know that when I do it is not out of pettiness or indifference.

-dave
Xref: sparky alt.supermodels:1682 soc.women:19266 alt.feminism:4128 soc.men:19032
From: kytan@mantra.fia.dmg.ml.com (Kok-Yong Tan)
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels,soc.women,alt.feminism,soc.men
Subject: Re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?
Date: 9 Nov 92 17:50:38 GMT
	<dsblack.720940978@vincent1.iastate.edu>
	<KYTAN.92Nov6110939@mantra.fia.dmg.ml.com>
	<1992Nov7.170150.12610@dragon.acadiau.ca>
Organization: Organised?  Here?  Hahahahahahahaha.....

In article <1992Nov7.170150.12610@dragon.acadiau.ca> 891666t@dragon.acadiau.ca (Trish Turliuk) writes:

>kytan@mantra.fia.dmg.ml.com (Kok-Yong Tan) writes:
>>their feminine vibes (since they are societally bound not to have to come up to
>>you to ask you for a date and have you stare down your nose at them like
>>something slimy just crawled up to you.) Do you notice that the women (that
>>I've met, anyway) who DO come to ask you for a date DON'T have any problems
>>with Elle calendars?  :-)

>Rash generalization alert! RGA! I ask men on dates as much as they ask me.
>It doesn't bother me that a man will find a real woman who walks by 
>beautiful (unless she's composed of several artificial features: loads'o'makeup,
>peroxide/dye, killer coloured nails). It *does* bother me that what society
>has governed to be beautiful is put up on a wall. Unrealistic objectification.

>My 2 cents on a cloudy saturday in Nova Scotia.
>Trish

Hence the smiley.  Sigh.  I wouldn't think a female with loads of makeup,
peroxide and killer coloured nails even remote attractive.  In fact, the less
makeup a woman, the more interesting I find her. 

--
===============================================================================
Kok-Yong Tan, 			  	| My words are my own: 
Fixed Income Analytics Group, 	  	| My bosses know naught.
Merrill Lynch,			  	| Wherever they're sown,
World Financial Center, North Tower, 	| Just I should be sought.
New York, NY 10281-1315.	  	|		- K. Y. Tan, 5 Feb 1992
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
InterNet: kytan@fia.dmg.ml.com (Merrill Lynch)
	  75046.256@compuserve.com (CompuServe)
===============================================================================
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels,soc.women,alt.feminism,soc.men
From: nissim@mary.fordham.edu (Leonard J. Nissim)
Subject: Entry level salaries (was: Re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?)
Organization: Fordham University
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 14:16:00 GMT
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
X-Posted-From: mary.fordham.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <1992Nov7.213707.15211@fid.morgan.com>, 
sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart) writes...
[stuff about MacPherson calendars deleted]
> 
>More recently, I've seen statistics that when men and women have the
>same level of education and experience, they earn about the same.  The
>only reference I have is that in the most recent salary survey taken
>by the MAA that I've seen (probably a year or two old), women with new
>PhD's in math earned more, on average, than men with new PhD's in math.

Here are the *new* statistics (from the November 1992 issue of "Notices of 
the American Mathematical Society"):
9-month academic salaries of people with new Ph.D.'s in mathematics:
(`new' means granted during the 1991/92 academic year) 
Median salary for men----$34,000  (interquartile range--31,000 to 36,000)
Median salary for women--$34,900  (interquartile range--33,000 to 37,100)
Note that women earn over $1.02 for each $1 earned per man.  

> 
>And anybody who claims that only men can be sexist is a reincarnation
>of Ed Nilges.
> 
>Seth		sethb@fid.morgan.com

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leonard J. Nissim  (nissim@mary.fordham.edu)   
Disclaimer:  "I speak only for myself."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels,soc.women,alt.feminism,soc.men
From: good@pixar.com ("You can't lose them all." -- Richard M. Nixon)
Subject: Re: Madchen Amick
Organization: Pixar - Pt. Richmond, CA USA
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 09:20:43 GMT

:
:I see Cindy and Richard are on the cover of Vogue talking about marriage among
:other things.  Any mention of those lingering "homosexual rumours?"  Has either
:of them spoken publicly about it?  Are they even aware?

Those kinds of rumors show up fairly frequently where attractive, successful
people are involved.  I've also heard them about Olivia Newton-John and
Whitney Huston.  The rumors typically have the earmarks of urban legends: it's
always a FOAF who read/heard/saw the interview.  Whether or not the truth
of such rumors makes any difference in my life, I tend to discount them as
some sort of mass jealousy.  It's quite possible, after all, that Cindy and
Richard are happily married, faithful heterosexuals.  Hey, it happens
sometimes.

		--Craig
-- 
	good@pixar.com
	Remember: Slick Willie was swept into power with 6 out of 10 voting
	against him.  Four years of this guy, and Kemp'll be a shoo-in.
		Jack Kemp for President in 1996!
From: cf542@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Julio Richard Laredo)
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels
Subject: Calendars and Brains
Date: 10 Nov 1992 02:52:11 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


A couple of matters/questions. First, calendars. Here are
some addresses of calendar publishers, or companies that
offer calendars. As far as I know, these companies are still
in business, and the calendars they offer use models.
 
California's Glamour Girls, Inc.
P.O. Box 93459
Los Angeles             CA    90093
 
The Ridge Tool Co.
400 Clark Street
Elyria                  OH    44036-2023
 
Vue Hawaii
P.O. Box 10365
Honolulu,               HI    96816-0365
 
Frederick's of Hollywood
P.O. Box 229
Hollywood,              CA    90078-0229
 
Schisler International, Buckeye Barbell
7034 Worthington Galena Rd.
Worthington             OH    43085
 
Hawaiian Tropic Swimwear
19727 Bahama Street
Northridge,             CA    91324
 
Looking Good!
PO Box 77264
Los Angeles, CA  90007
 
Crown Publishers, Inc.
225 Park Avenue South
New York, NY  10003
 
Day Dream Calendars
1129 State Street
Suite 20
Santa Barbara, CA  93101
 
Bo Mireles Productions, Inc.
7050 Industrial Street
West Melbourne, FL
 
Second Glance, Inc.
8306 Wilshire Blvd.
Suite 615
Beverly Hills, CA  90211
 
Landmark Calendars
51 Digital Drive
Novato, CA  94949
 
Secret Passions
PO Box 8870
Chapel Hill, NC  27515
 
Now, as to the questions asked of the models by Mademoiselle
magazine, here they are:
 
1) What are the names of the two airports in Paris?
2) What is the name of the square in front of the big church
in the center of Milan?
3) What is the French word for shoe?
4) Which architect designed the new glass pyramids in front
of the Louvre in Paris?
5) How many calories are in a banana?
6) Who is the designer behind the COMME des GARCONS label?
The Perry Ellis label?  The Chanel label?
7) Math question: If you earn $5,000 in one day and only pay
your agency 10 percent, how much money will you receive
before taxes?
8) What color is ecru? (Claudia Schiffer answered with,
"Broken white? I'm just guessing, wondering if it's the same
in English as it is in French, which is derived from a word
in Latin.")
9) Who is Anna Wintour?
10) Which poet said, "Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty"?
 
According to the article Elle came in first, the college
post-graduates last.
 
-- 
Have straitjacket, might travel.

Newsgroups: alt.supermodels,soc.women,alt.feminism,soc.men
From: rfs@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (richard.f.j.soyack)
Subject: Re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?
Organization: AT&T
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 14:18:19 GMT

>>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.
>

Didn't Torqemada (I'm too lazy to go and look up his name, he
was the Spanish Inquisition guy) say the same kind of thing
about the heresey of his day.  Just admit to your heresey,
don't even stop to think or question because that is further
heresey.

Cleanse ME!
Rich Soyack

Xref: sparky alt.supermodels:1591 soc.women:19076 alt.feminism:3954 soc.men:18881
From: starbuck@ucrmath.ucr.edu (starbuck)
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels,soc.women,alt.feminism,soc.men
Subject: Re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?
Date: 8 Nov 92 05:06:49 GMT
Followup-To: alt.supermodels
Organization: University of California, Riverside

In article <Bx9sGt.LAM@world.std.com> marty@world.std.com (Marty M HaleEvans) writes:

>Okay, what about those of us that *do* hate the Chippendales, too? What can you
>say to us? What I'm hearing here is that it's okay if I do it, because someone
>else does it. Please tell me that's not what you really think.
>

I think of the Chippendale guys as male bimbos mostly becasue posing seems
to lack any depth.  But what I like, and what I don't like is more or
less my business.  So if a somebody wants to put up a Chippendales poster
I'm not going to object just because I don't like it.  I love my freedom
more.  I don't want to give up my rights to be myself and to express my
self in any manner I choose.  And I would be by denying others their freedom.
It's freedom that were talking about.

Another poster said something like this, 'You have the right to be 
uncomfortable, you don't have the right to tell me what I can read and
not read.'  One has to learn to be indiferent to what one does not like.
We cannot all live our lives based on other peoples likes and dislikes.
It is the price of freedom.  There is no right or wrong.

Some think there is so much danger in someone putting up a Cindy Crawford
calander but the real danger is in the political attitudes that wish
to control.  I believe they want control of other people out of fear.

starbuck
Xref: sparky alt.supermodels:1706 soc.women:19308 alt.feminism:4164 soc.men:19065
From: y0000028@rzab0.rz.tu-bs.de (Kielhorn)
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels,soc.women,alt.feminism,soc.men
Subject: re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?
Date: 11 Nov 92 10:09:54 GMT
Organization: TU Braunschweig, Informatik, Bueltenweg, Germany

In article <lflbvlINNh6j@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>, williamt@athena.Eng.Sun.COM (Dances with Drums) writes:
|> In article  891666t@dragon.acadiau.ca (Trish Turliuk) writes:
|> >The fact is we see *one-type* of women portrayed everywhere as the idealized
|> >women and even this isn't a real type for she is subjected to hours of makeup
|> >and airbrushing before she goes in front of the camera. The majority of women
|> >don't see themselves reflected in society at all. How many models have you  
|> >seen with crooked teeth?
|> ----
|> 	I had to take issue with this.  When was the last time you saw
|> a car in a car add anywhere that was dented and/or scratched, paint
|> bleached out, seats torn, tires flat or worn, windshield cracked, rag
|> top torn, etc etc etc...  The fact is when advertisers are selling somethink,
|> they want to use 'perfect' models.  They don't want to show us anything
|> necessarily realistic.  I don't find my car represented or reflected
|> in the media any more than the average woman finds her body represented
|> there.  Should I regard this is as some horrible plot directed at me,
|> or does it make more sense to realize that this is 'madison avenue' and
|> should be taken as ignorable.  
|> 
|> -wat-
|> --
|>  --- "If women really earned fifty-nine cents to the dollar for the same
|>  work as men, what business could compete effectively by hiring men at
|>  any level?"    -- Dr. Warren Farrell
	They can't, look around      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Hi Warren!

There is one flaw in your statement: 
You can buy a car as advertised, they are actually making these things witout
bleached paint, torn seats etc. and when you don't like it anymore you are
free to dispose it or sell it to someone who won't mind how it looks.
With women it is a little different, they come in different shapes and only 5
percent look similar to those models. What happens to the other 95 percent, are 
they second choice (and therefor cheaper?)? 
At least it seems many women feel second rate compared to those supermodels,
even some beautyful wowen (in my eye) feel too fat and want to loose weight
because they can't wear fashionable things which decreases their value even
more.

The whole thing is a plot to make women feel uneasy. As long as they 
have _problems_ with their weight, they won't interfere in politic, science etc.
They are occupied creating/restoring their beauty (Which by the ways cost 
a lot and supports a powerful chemical industry) and we (men) can go on as
we like it.

In my opinion we are leaving the rape theme (physical rape) and are approaching
something like manipulation through adverts (brain rape?). 
My suggestion is to change the subject of is branch of discussion to 
something like

The beauty myth

(I recall a book with a similar title written by Naomi Wolf (Woolf?))

Axel Kielhorn
TU-Braunschweig
y0000028@rzab0.rz.tu-bs.de
 
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels