HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hod@amazon.chem.columbia.edu (Hod Greeley)
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels,soc.women,alt.feminism,soc.men
Subject: Re: Entry level salaries (was: Re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?)
Date: 10 Nov 92 20:51:32 GMT
Article-I.D.: amazon.HOD.92Nov10155132
	<9NOV199210165558@mary.fordham.edu> <1992Nov9.200044.29801@panix.com>
Organization: Center for Biomolecular Simulation, Department of Chemistry,
	Columbia University

In article <1992Nov9.200044.29801@panix.com> gcf@panix.com (Gordon Fitch) writes:

   Xref: cucbs.chem.columbia.edu alt.supermodels:1553 soc.women:14414 alt.feminism:3825 soc.men:14343
From: lynch@ils.nwu.edu (Richard Lynch)
Subject: Re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?
Organization: The Institute for the Learning Sciences
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 17:45:40 GMT

In article <MITCHELL.92Nov8171426@rose.uchicago.edu> mitchell@cs.uchicago.edu writes:
>>>>>> "L" == Lib  <lib@cbnews.cb.att.com> writes:
>
>  L> Odd. I thought that the reason all the models were too slim for
>  L> their height was that such people photograph better, not that
>                                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>  L> Madison Avenue wants to portray it as an ideal. I don't
>  L> understand why they would want to do that. It's no doubt true
>  L> women see this as an ideal an try to emulate it just like men try
>  L> to emulate the Marlboro man and assorted types who drink beer.
>
>Sorry, but I'm missing something here.  What can you mean by
>"photograph better" that's not tied up with some notion of an ideal
>appearance, or at least a scale?

I believe it was meant to imply the old adage that one looks fatter in photos.
Thus, a thinner person would "photograph better", simply because the photo
would look more like the reality.
If true, this would be a reasonable objective goal.
[I'm not claiming that's the total reality of what's happening in the industry
now, of course.]
-- 
"TANSTAAFL"     lynch@aristotle.ils.nwu.edu
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels,soc.women,alt.feminism,soc.men
From: mitchell@cs.uchicago.edu (Mitchell Marks)
Subject: Re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?
Reply-To: mitchell@cs.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computer Science
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 23:14:25 GMT

>>>>> "L" == Lib  <lib@cbnews.cb.att.com> writes:

  L> Odd. I thought that the reason all the models were too slim for
  L> their height was that such people photograph better, not that
                                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  L> Madison Avenue wants to portray it as an ideal. I don't
  L> understand why they would want to do that. It's no doubt true
  L> women see this as an ideal an try to emulate it just like men try
  L> to emulate the Marlboro man and assorted types who drink beer.

Sorry, but I'm missing something here.  What can you mean by
"photograph better" that's not tied up with some notion of an ideal
appearance, or at least a scale?
--
Mitch Marks    mitchell@cs.uchicago.edu
Barbara celarent darii ferio  baroco camestres cesare festino  bocardo
darapti datisi disamis felapton ferison  bramantip camenes dimaris
fesapo fresison 
Xref: sparky alt.supermodels:1603 soc.women:19117 alt.feminism:3986 soc.men:18908
From: tjc50@juts.ccc.amdahl.com (Terry Carroll)
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels,soc.women,alt.feminism,soc.men
Subject: Re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?
Date: 9 Nov 92 19:10:03 GMT
Reply-To: tjc50@juts.ccc.amdahl.com (Terry Carroll)
Organization: Amdahl Corporation

In article <1992Nov6.150355.9849@rtf.bt.co.uk>, fletcher@rtf.bt.co.uk 
(Catherine Fletcher) writes:
> 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.

What a safe answer -- I think I'll use it all the time.  Let me restate:

"I'm not capable of presenting a coherent argument.  The reason for that is 
that you wouldn't understand it.  Therefore, we can dispense with the 
requirement for me to justify my position with any substantive data, and 
presume that I'm correct."

Nice trick, if you can get away with it.

Terry Carroll - tjc50@juts.ccc.amdahl.com - 408/992-2152
The opinions presented above are not necessarily those of a sound mind.
From: laposkymatth@bvc.edu
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels
Subject: Re: Penis Envy
Date: 8 Nov 92 20:21:42 CDT
Organization: Buena Vista College, Storm Lake, IA

In article <QexjTwa00iUyI6D9MM@andrew.cmu.edu>, Lee Edward Daza <ld2i+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
> 
> Excerpts from netnews.alt.supermodels: 3-Nov-92 Re: Elle McPherson in
> the n.. by DAVE@cch.coventry.ac.uk 
>>In article <1992Oct31.023513.17318@eecs.nwu.edu> kaufman@eecs.nwu.edu (Michael
>> L. Kaufman) writes:
>>>csg188@cch.coventry.ac.uk (DAVE) writes:
>>>>I bet you are all virgins, who spend all day reading playboy ...
>>>
>>>Not at all, I had a pretty hot date with your mom last night.
>>>
>> 
>>She told me you only lasted 5 seconds!
>>It was the worst fuck of her life!
>> 
>>p.s. the word is 'mum' not 'mom' - can't you yanks learn to spell.
>> 
>>        p.p.s. hand jobs don't count!
>> 
>> 
>>                BIG DAVE (ask YOUR mum why I am called that!!!)
> 
>    
>     I assume that you chose to respond to this insult because you
> couldn't quite grasp Rob's reply. Really, you should stop believing that
> the entire world suffers from penis envy like yourself. I wonder, can
> your mind register anything greater than a 'Mine's bigger than yours'
> contest?
> 
> 
	As I see it if you have a penis then you are going to envy someone 
else's.  Men are cursed in this way and no amount of societal change or 
personal soul searching can remove the fact that as our basic nature we 
promote competition.  Of course having a penis doesn't excuse any man from 
acting like a dick but this really isn't the forum for a discussion of 
sexism now is it.
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels,soc.women,alt.feminism,soc.men
From: steinman@me.utoronto.ca (David Steinman)
Subject: Re: The Beauty Myth (was:Re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?)
Organization: UofT Mechanical Engineering
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 16:41:58 GMT

krw@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (keith.r.smith) writes:

>>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.

>A plot?  Are you sure that you didn't mean to put a "smiley" in there?

No, sadly, there is a faction out there, ostensibly led by Naomi Woolf, 
which truly believes that the fashion/advertising industries are being
manipulated by men with the express purpose keeping women insecure.
Ms. Woolf is an extremely intelligent woman, but is ever so paranoid.  Her
theories are dangerously close to the paranoid conspiracy theories of 
the Kennedy fanatics.

>>My suggestion is to change the subject of is branch of discussion to 
>>something like The beauty myth

>Okay by me!

I have a great Naomi Woolf story.  She was being interviewed by John
Stossel of (I believe) ABC's Primetime Live.  After a round of questions,
he noted that she was an attractive woman, and then proceeded to insinuate
that perhaps her looks had helped her get published (and, I suppose, become
a talk-show fixture).  Her eyes widened, she smiled, and very nicely asked
if he was serious.  Quite possibly the dumbest question ever asked by an
interviewer.  She handled herself quite well.  And she really is quite an
attractive woman (which helps put to rest the "ugly-lesbian" theory of
feminism).  She's just a wee bit paranoid.
--
Dave!
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels,soc.women,alt.feminism,soc.men
From: krw@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (keith.r.smith)
Subject: The Beauty Myth (was:Re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?)
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 15:08:01 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.100954.601@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de> y0000028@rzab0.rz.tu-bs.de (Kielhorn) writes:
>
>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 
I guess that 95% of men look like the "Marlboro Man" or your favorite male
lead in any of a number of action/adventure films......

>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.

This "size thing" is cyclical.  Back in the 20's (and possibly 30's as well)
thin women were idealized, in the 40's and 50's it was full figured women,
and from the 60's on, it has been thin women again.  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.
>
>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.

A plot?  Are you sure that you didn't mean to put a "smiley" in there?
>
>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

Okay by me!
>
>(I recall a book with a similar title written by Naomi Wolf (Woolf?))
>
>Axel Kielhorn
>TU-Braunschweig
>y0000028@rzab0.rz.tu-bs.de
> 


Xref: sparky alt.supermodels:1723 soc.women:19366 alt.feminism:4219 soc.men:19116
From: srp@cgl.ucsf.edu (Scott R. Presnell)
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels,soc.women,alt.feminism,soc.men
Subject: Re: Self Appreciation (was: Re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?)
Date: 11 Nov 92 21:38:29 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: UCSF Computer Graphics Lab

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.

That's really a pretty condicending, elitist attitude.

I'm not saying the problem isn't real, I think it is somewhat valid.  My
point here is that there are hunkster men in lots of magazines too - I
notice them - I look at them - and then I look at myself and there is a
substantial difference - moreover I hear and see women make comments and
cast glances indicating they soemtimes think about men in a corresponding
fashion, and sure, I want to look like the hunks *some*...

...but I don't let it define who I am (or am not) and I don't go around
telling people that they "cannot understand" what it's like not living up
to a model's image.  Give me a break.

Besides, you don't have to read Vogue - I don't.

>i hope your message is not for us to "stop whining, if you just tried harder, 
>you'd become CEO/earn more money/feel better about yourself."  No, I'll 
>just go back to my room that my parents filled with stuffed animals rather
>than erector sets, do my home ec homework, iron my mini skirt and polish
>my heels that impede my ability to even walk, and play with my Barbie that 
>reinforces my belief that "math is hard."

Are you trying to tell me that little boys don't have a favorite stuffed
aninal? I did - and I know other boy's who did too.

Some of the most attractive women to me were those that took metal shop and
auto shop with me in HS.  I enjoyed working with them.  We solved problems
together.  From me at least, people *gain* respect in a gender independent
fashion.

-- 

	- Scott Presnell (srp@cgl.ucsf.edu)
From: kettler@pierre.mit.edu (KETTLER, THOMAS R.)
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels
Subject: Re: Elle McPherson in the nude on an upcoming TV show.
Date: 9 Nov 92 04:11:00 GMT
Organization: MIT Lab for Nuclear Science
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1

In article <Bx4ur6.Cy9@cck.coventry.ac.uk>, csg188@cch.coventry.ac.uk (DAVE)            writes...
> 
> 
>		BIG DAVE (ask YOUR mum why I am called that!!!)

I didn't have to. It was obvious that the big was dealing with your ego. In 
fact, I ssuspect that you don't wear ten-gallon hats since they would be 
ten-gallons too small for your head.

					Sincerely yours,

					Thomas Kettler
From: josh2+@pitt.edu (Joseph H Alarcon)
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels
Subject: Paulina
Date: 9 Nov 92 23:30:05 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


	Does anyone know if Paulina still lives in Greenwich with Ric Ocasek,
and if so, more or less around what area? ...because I have a friend that
lives in long island, and says he saw Paulina with Ric at a restaurant called
Balducci's.  

	Does Paulina get along with Ric's children?

	Also, is she going to continue her acting career after her last movie Her Alibi?
	I'll appreciate any response. Thanks
						Joe








Xref: sparky alt.supermodels:1525 soc.women:18897 alt.feminism:3772 soc.men:18711
From: gkl@tse.uucp (Geoff Loker x656)
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels
Subject: Re: RE : Madchen Amick
Date: 8 Nov 92 23:16:18 GMT
Organization: Toronto Stock Exchange

>In article <1d4gluINNaf7@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> cf542@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Julio Richard Laredo) writes:
>>
>>Madchen was also the female lead in the USA movie, "I'm Dangerous
>>Tonight."  She spent a couple of minutes frolicking in her 
>>underwear.  'Twas nice.

Does anyone have any additional information on this movie, such as when it
was done, who made it, etc.?  Also, does anyone know where they got the story
for the movie?

Thanks.
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels
From: lawson@mdc.com (Jim Lawson)
Subject: Re: Info on Barbie Benton wanted
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 02:11:45 GMT
Organization: MDSSC-SSD
Reply-To: Lawson%ssdvax.decnet@lbgwy.mdc.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

She appeared in the movie "Deathstalker"

--
Jim Lawson	Lawson%ssdvax.decnet@lbgwy.mdc.com
		Alt:	Lawson@netsun.mdc.com or Lawson@mdcbbs.com

Opinions/Comments expressed here are my own and no one elses !!
From: williamt@athena.Eng.Sun.COM (Dances with Drums)
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels
Subject: Re: nude in playboy - dumb question
Date: 12 Nov 1992 01:24:25 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems Inc., Mountain View, CA
Reply-To: williamt@athena.Eng.sun.com (Dances with Drums)
NNTP-Posting-Host: athena

In article <1992Nov11.003225.16464@neb> jim@neb (Jim Hood) writes:
>Since it was identified as THIS MONTHS playboy....
>If you check the Message-ID line
>-> Message-ID: <1992Nov10.105251.26701>
>It quite clearly states what month/year it is.
---
	So is that the November issue that came out 2 months ago, the
December issue that came out a few weeks ago, or the January issue
that may have been released early?  

	Magazine months don't necessarily equate to calendar months.


>-jim

-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
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels
From: good@pixar.com (Craig Craig, Bo-Baig, Banana-Fana Fo-Faig, Me-My-Mo-Maig, Craig.)
Subject: Re: What is with some of these models we see today?
Organization: Pixar - Pt. Richmond, CA USA
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 09:18:42 GMT

In article <1992Nov4.125551.8610@ac.dal.ca> egilmour@ac.dal.ca writes:
:I would like to know what is going on with the modelling agencies and all of the
:decidedly ugly models that are appearing in Vogue and on the runways these days.
:...  But what about Giselle, Kristen McMenemy, and Linda Evangelista?  
:They have some terribly ugly faults, and I thought models were supposed to be
:virtually faultless.  

I don't think that people in the business have such unrealistic expectations,
including the models.  Christie Brinkley once fielded such a question in a TV
interview.  She said that she has lots of faults, "I just don't tell anybody
what they are."

Modeling is as much skill and attitude as it is looks.  The way models are
presented is always at the whim of the clients' and photographers' latest idea
of what's "in".  Slight changes can make a person look like a completely
different person.  There's no reasonable way to judge the complete gamut of
possible looks from a model by a handful of photographs.

		--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!
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels,soc.women,alt.feminism,soc.men
From: 891666t@dragon.acadiau.ca (Trish Turliuk)
Subject: Re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?
Organization: Acadia University
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 19:28:51 GMT

lynch@ils.nwu.edu (Richard Lynch) writes:

>In article <1992Nov7.172739.14097@dragon.acadiau.ca> 891666t@dragon.acadiau.ca (Trish Turliuk) writes:
>>lynch@ils.nwu.edu (Richard Lynch) writes:
>>
>>>In article <1992Nov6.030057.28538@dragon.acadiau.ca> 891666t@dragon.acadiau.ca (Trish Turliuk) writes:
>>
>>
>>I *do* consider this a sexist issue and if the flip side of this coin bothers
>>you, welcome yourself into reverse-sexism.

>Guess I was too abrupt.
>Since the problem (if there is one) exists for both men and women; it is not
>strictly a sexist issue, it's more of a humanist issue was what I should have
>said.  Then, again, I think of reverse-sexism as a nonsense word.  sexism is
>sexism regardless of who's getting hurt.  And, if it's going both ways, it's

>not sexism at all...or at least it's a very wierd form of sexism.

I do believe it's sexism. Oxford: "prejudice or discrimination against
people (esp. women) because of their sex". My saying "reverse" is in
compliance with the "esp. women". I agree that it's a goofy phrase, but I
don't think "humanist" cuts it either. How about plain ol' "sexual
discrimination" ? (AH, language..AH, communication)


>PS:  The thought that you put at the bottom is nice, but the PC crowd will soon
>point out that even if you don't think *all* women are saints and *all* men
>evil, how come you expressed it that way?  Are you trying to imply that women
>are better than men, but there are some exceptions?

I'm trying to avoid the feminist Essentialist viewpoint. I find that
the generalizations that I opposed are often prevalent feelings among
feminists (JMHO) and I disagree so I merely negated it. 

Trish



Xref: sparky alt.supermodels:1570 soc.women:19013 alt.feminism:3884 soc.men:18824
From: williamt@athena.Eng.Sun.COM (Dances with Drums)
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels,soc.women,alt.feminism,soc.men
Subject: re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?
Date: 7 Nov 1992 16:33:19 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems Inc., Mountain View, CA
Reply-To: williamt@athena.Eng.sun.com (Dances with Drums)
NNTP-Posting-Host: athena

>From: kytan@mantra.fia.dmg.ml.com (Kok-Yong Tan)
>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?  :-)
---
	Yes.  I have noticed this.  Generally women who are very self-confident
don't care about such pictures, while those with insecurities usually
do in proportion to their insecurity level.

-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
Xref: sparky alt.supermodels:1788 soc.women:19521 alt.feminism:4366 soc.men:19241
From: kanga.caltech.edu!magney (Michael Agney)
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels
Subject: Re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?
Date: 8 Nov 1992 23:19:42 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: itchy.caltech.edu
Originator: magney@itchy

In article <23764@galaxy.ucr.edu> starbuck@ucrmath.ucr.edu (starbuck)  
writes:
> Sexuallity is deep, much deeper than femininst thought.  The feminist  
only
> considers her position which is more often than not on her "personal" 
> preceptions.  She often will make the fact fit the theory without regard
> to truth.  This is such a case.

Just a friendly reminder:  Don't tar all feminists with the same brush,
the way you might accuse feminists of doing the same to men.

--
/---------------------------------------------------------\
| Michael Agney          | "Well, if we were to build a   |
|                        |           giant badger..."     |
|                        |    - Monty Python and the      |
| magney@cco.caltech.edu |      search for the Holy Grail |
\---------------------------------------------------------/
-- 
/---------------------------------------------------------\
| Michael Agney          | "Well, if we were to build a   |
|                        |           giant badger..."     |
|                        |    - Monty Python and the      |
Xref: sparky alt.supermodels:1664 soc.women:19213 alt.feminism:4089 soc.men:18985
From: s_wilkin@csd.uwe.ac.uk (Simon)
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels,soc.women,alt.feminism,soc.men
Subject: Re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?
Date: 10 Nov 92 11:45:50 GMT
Organization: Tree Of Woe, Bristol
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

Of course no company wants to employ an all female workforce.
Efficiency be damned, women are not taken seriously in business.
(that was a sweeping generalisation)

If you can change the attitudes of businessmen the world over then go for it.

Oh and Catherine, can you mail me an explanation of the difference between
the 2 sorts of calendar because I'm only an inferior male and leaps of
deduction are obviously beyond me.

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