From: panlilio@acs.ucalgary.ca (Victor P. Panlilio)
Subject: Re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?
Summary: Another one in the non-PC camp?
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 01:39:06 GMT
Expires: Mon, 30 Nov 1992 05:00:00 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta
Keywords: A posse forms to the right...
Followup-To: alt.supermodels

In article <92313.174723IO21050@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> Hell ain't so bad.  I mean, look at this tan! <IO21050@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> writes:

Heh. More like golden brown and ready to serve?  8^)

Speaking of which.....

>This may seem rather naive, but I don't see the harm in a person
>looking at a picture of a person they find attractive, whether the

Unless the owner of the picture practices voodoo or witchcraft.

8^) (Oops, I almost forgot. What if the picture is of a witch?)
							^^^^^
And, pushing my luck here...substitute 'b' for 'w' in the above.

(If she recently dumped you, maybe you *will* be harmed by the
splinters of flying broken glass when you hurl her framed photo
across the room into her display case of treasured bric-a-brac)

Read on, it gets better (or worse, depending on how you think)...

>picture fits the "Madison Avenue Ideal" or not.  Is the Mona Lisa
>sexist?  What about the statue of David or the Venus de Milo?

Ahem. Or the Botticelli Venus, or the Madonna inflatable doll...

*wink*

Well, now, see here, to a PC mind there is evil lurking in *any*
representation of a persecuted group (e.g. women) that does not
conform to the PC definition of nonsexist, nondiscriminatory, and
so on. But to be nondiscriminatory, you have to have NO standards
and hence, no discrimination. So you cannot say that one person
is more beautiful, attractive, poised, elegant, etc. than another
person, without applying the faculty of discerning the difference
and then making a judgment. Unfortunately, we are *biologically*
programmed to make judgments, else our species would have died
out long ago. (Evolutionary biologists, please take note!)  8^)

And, in fact, we are *constantly* discriminating among various
degrees of many attributes and phenomena. So I am able to say
that _________ (insert name of favorite supermodel or beautiful
woman here) is more attractive than the "average" woman, for the
simple reason that statistically, many fellow humans (men *AND*
women) will be likely to agree with my assessment. Whether or not
this is true in any absolute, objective sense is irrelevant, and
it is possible to argue from the point of view that the social
matrix in which this assessment is made discriminates against a
good many of the women who are not viewed as favorably. Right?

Again, I have to say, TOUGH. Alpha males in primate groups are
never seen in the same light as the lesser members of the troop.
It holds true for humans, and in this case some female humans
have achieved their status on the basis of anatomy and facial
features, and are compensated financially for displaying their
natural gifts. So there is this hue and cry about objectification
and eating disorders and other psychobabble -- which, while it is
not perhaps utter rubbish, misses the point nonetheless. To wit:

>I feel quite certain that the average person from that time
>period didn't live up to the standards of beauty implied by
>these works of art.  Basically, what it comes down to is that

Precisely. Our speaker here is not naive, but very clearminded.

Unlike the people who are afflicted with the PC virus.  8^)

Then again, many people are reluctant to call advertising 'art.'
They would rather apply the term to the paint splatters of any of
several modern artists whose paintings command shocking prices.

>people will buy things they like to look at and stick them on

(mock horror)

Good heavens! Is this so obscure that it needs to be stated?

>their walls and other people have the right to be opinionated
>about it.  I happen to like pictures of Elle MacPherson, but
>I'd like to think that I'm not sexist.  Pictures of the

You are not sexist. You just happen to like pictures of Elle.

Hmmm....that's very Zen....see, how it reads:

"I like looking at pictures of Elle because I like looking at
 pictures of Elle."

(substitute the name of your favorite supermodel/whatever...)

It's so simple, isn't it? (And to *you* PC minds out there, it
would be even simpler if none of us had hormones or a sex drive,
since then there would be only aesthetic reasons for wanting to
look at pictures of nude or seminude humans). Do *you* get it?

Then again, there are poeple who like to look at pictures of nude
or seminude dogs, cats, horses, or whatnot. Go figure.  8^)

(Here I go again, offending every possible group there is...)

>Chippendale's models don't offend me either:  I'm pretty much
>uninterested in them.

Let me guess...maybe it's....

Because 1) you're heterosexual and 2) you're self-confident?

(Is an Elle calendar on a wall sexist if there's no one around to
 drool over it?) -- a Zen koan for this newsgroup!

*chuckle*

>I suppose what I'm saying is that everyone has a right to
>their own opinion.  Just don't be surprised when someone else
>forms their own opinion about yours.

Well, there *is* such a thing as a reasonable, *well-informed*
opinion, and there *is* such a thing as a *paranoid* delusion!

I practice what I preach - discernment and discrimination - here.

(For those who fail to detect my subtlety, I'm saying that to
insist an Elle calendar *causes* rape *is* being paranoid).

>Wouldn't it be nice if people would open their minds
>            before opening their mouths?

Yeah, but some people, when they open their minds, only garbage
gets in, and stays there. The ones who don't have discrimination
and discernment and acuity in their vocabularies. The PC minds.
Those who brazenly accuse non-PC minds of being unable to carry
out complex thought, when they themselves reveal this fatal flaw!

**********************THWUP* *TWANGGGGGG!***********************

Another arrow in the *heart* of the PC argument!

*********STOMP* *TWIST* *POUND* *YANK* *CRUSH* *JAB*************

That makes CatWoman, -wat-, me, and now you, in the non-PC camp!

The line forms on the right (pun very much intended)....

(BTW, I'm typing this on a Macintosh -- yeah, I'm yuppie scum!)

Not!

(Note to all netters: Take any or all of the above seriously at
your own risk. This is done only by experienced professionals;
do not attempt this in your own home. I will not be held liable
for any untoward consequences arising from your failure to heed
this advice. And, as always, remember...Your Mileage May Vary!)

Cheers,

Victor 8^)

(who's going to photograph his favorite *stunning* six-foot tall
fifteen year-old in a fashion show on Wednesday, in the evening)

Nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah...(children's laughter soundtrack)

Newsgroups: alt.supermodels,soc.women,alt.feminism,soc.men