From: payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne)
Subject: Re: Secretly Wishing... (was:Feminist Jokes)
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 03:31:33 GMT

In article <BxB58z.1qu@news.cso.uiuc.edu> jchason@s.psych.uiuc.edu (Julie Chason) writes:
>payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
>
>>In article <Bx8EA6.CpM@news.cso.uiuc.edu> jchason@s.psych.uiuc.edu (Julie Chason) writes:
>
>(...........stuff deleted................)
>
>>>>I would like to point out the many claims made of Playboy and porn. Or should
>>>>we make a parallel claim and say that women are being brainwashed by the
>>>>romance novels? This would seem as valid as the other brainwashing claims.
>>>
>>>Or maybe they simply reinforce prevailing cultural values?  
>
>>If you do not like them, I suspect that you will be unwilling to buy them
>>and read them, regardless of whether or not they reinforce prevailing 
>>cultural values. 
>
>??????? I'm not sure what your point is.  
>My point is that I doubt they brainwash.  I doubt porn brainwashes either.
>Is your point that people wouldn't buy them if they didn't already buy into
>these cultural values?  Thats the point I was trying to make. | 
                                                               | 
Yes, that was my point.                                        |
                                                               |
>>>                                                             In which case 
>>>they would provide a gauge of the fantasies of women who read them and buy 
>>>their notions without criticism.  It's blanket characterizations I object to.
>>>Some of us grew out of the habit at about the age of 17; I presume others 
>>>never acquired the habit.

[...]
 
>>>>>                               And even if all such novels were written by
>>>>>women, and a majority of women read these articles, then this does not mean
>>>>>that whatever is contained in these novels reflects the True and Natural 
>>>>>Contents of the minds of women.
>>>> 
>>>>No, of course not. But it is still a valid question to ask exactly what
>>>>it does mean. These novels must be fullfilling some need of the women
>>>> who read them.                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 
>>>>>Julie
>>>
>>>Ok, now we're getting somewhere. I took your original post to mean that 
>>>because women read books in which the hero rapes the heroine, women want to 
>>>be raped.  Now it sounds like your open to a different interpretation.
>
>>My original post made no mention of rape, nor has any subsequent post.
>>Roberts Shaeffer's post made this connection, I have not addressed it.
>> 
>>>I think most of the people who followed-up were right on the mark.  
>
>>I belive that I originally mentioned this topic, in response to the
>>porno-imbalance thread, and in a rape-free context. It was dropped
>>from the thread without a single comment.
>
>>Now I am incorrectly given ownership of the rape thread, and the 
>>follow-up posters get credit for the topic I introduced, as I introduced
>>it. Thanxs.
>
>Sorry, I looked back at the beginning of the thread, and no, you did not
>introduce the topic.

I did not introduce the topic in this thread, that is correct. I can
probably hunt up the original post if you want. 

The topic was re-introduced by Robert Shaeffers post.
 
>>>The rape scenario has to do with avoiding responsibility for sex rather than 
>>>wanting to be dragged into the bushes and forced.
>>>
>>>The sub-genre I used to read (quite a while ago) was the historical romance
>>>novel.  From what I remember, there seems to be two basic rape scenarios.
>>>One I'll call 'raped by a rake.'  The rake isn't really a bad guy; he's just 
>>>misunderstood, maybe tormented, something of a Beverly Hills 90210 Luke, only
>>>probably more muscular.  Maybe he's a Viking, or a rebel baron.  Sooner or 
>>>later he'll cry, beg forgiveness, and will marry his victim.
>>>
>>>How many women whose husbands abuse them say he is always sorry afterward?
>
>>This has a strong resemblance to one of those blanket characterizations.
>
>I don't have any references, but I understand this is a common pattern in
>abusive relationships.  It was really the women I was commenting upon, although
>I can see this is not clear from what I wrote.  
 
OK, and this was also mentioned in another post.
  
[...]

>>I tried to read a romance novel years ago, but I could not finish it. I do
>>not really recall why. But the above seems to be a validation of the notion
>>of romantic love.
>
>Yes.  And it is unrealistic and unfortunate.  I wonder how many people have
>been disappointed because the men/women in their lives haven't lived up to
>the expectations taught them in books and magazines (men are heros, women 
>are hot and pliant).

I suspect that anyone who gets their expectations from books and magazines
is going to be dissapointed. Those compatibility questionnaires in womens
magazines come to mind. Reality can be quite exciting IMHO.
 
>You probably couldn't finish the book because it was trash.
 
That would do it. 
 
>>>"Some day my prince will come...."
>>>                Snow White.
>>> 
>>>Julie
>>>(thats not a .sig up there) 
>>>>Rich
>>>>payner@netcom.com
>>rich again

again

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