From: donyee@athena.mit.edu (Donald Yee)
Subject: Re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?
Keywords: clear thinking
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 20:01:51 GMT

In article <92Nov07.071947.29893@acs.ucalgary.ca> panlilio@acs.ucalgary.ca (Victor P. Panlilio) writes:
>In article <1992Nov6.032549.19539@wetware.com> diana@wetware.com (CatWoman ) writes:
>
>>I agree with wat and Kok-Yung are saying.  I am secure
>>enough in myself to know that the PICTURES of women on
>>a calendar are no more meaningful than the pictures of
>>cats I have on MY calendars.  Yes - I'd like more cats,
>
>Holy Toledo, Batman! Catwoman makes *more* sense than a whole
>lecture hall of PC-thinkers combined! Wow! What a revelation!
>
>>THIS has been my attitude - If I'm not that comfortable
>>with what <other person> has up, I can choose a couple
>>of options.  I can not look at it, if it is a situation
>>where that is possible; or if I am "forced" to look at
>>it due to it's placement - I can put up something next
>>to it that *I* want to see (and granted, I'll try to 
>>find something that will equally be disturbing to the
>>other person).  Then the ball is in THEIR court.  If 
>>they object - so will I.  If they don't, then I won't
>>either.
>
>>Diana
>
>Methinks Diana deserves a hearty round of applause for her most
>
>
>************************ A P P L A U S E ***********************
>
>sensible and balanced treatment of the issues here! Such clarity
>of thought is indeed rare, and I salute *Catwoman* for being so
>forthright as to declare her fundamental sense of security and
>self-esteem and avoiding the trap of muddleheaded PC thinking,
>wherein various conspiracy theories are bandied about with the
>flimsiest sort of empirical evidence...if there's any at all!
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
(stuff deleted all over the place-apparent by where the breaks are). 

>excess baggage. We can quote all the "statistics" we want to, but
>let me remind all, statistical evidence does not meet the most
>rigorous demands for demonstrating ANY kind of causality...

HEY, watch it, Victor, some of us *LIKE* math 8->

>know that *I* exist. If *I* decide to buy into the advertising
>hype, that's still *my* decision, and *I* can't blame others if
>I'm weak-willed or susceptible to persuasion, right? Laying the
>blame on some "system" or some "conspiracy" smacks of a certain
>type of moral vacancy and mental vacuity that afflicts so many in
>the name of Political Correctness, the be-all and end-all of this
>contemporary aberration we call modern critical thought. Sheesh!

>
>Victor 8^)
>
>(funny, there was food on my plate a minute ago.....hmmmm)
>
>*snicker* (not the candy)

Though in large part (mentally) I find Victor's arguments logical, he
seems to knee-jerk against the PC types as much as they do to him.
Maybe he dislikes statistics, but in some cases (occupational health,
epidemiology) it's good enough for the courts, and it certainly
doesn't hurt in a casino $-}.  His arguments are predicated on a
certain level of social Darwinism, i.e. only the strong deserve to
survive.  That does not go down too well with me, because it presumes
we all grow up in the same environment, and have *absolute* free will.
Let us say that as a child, your father beats up your mother all the
time.  To you that is perfectly normal.  Now, let's throw you into a
world that is perfectly free of judgement, i.e. beating women is not
frowned upon nor is it encouraged- it just happens sometimes and
noone says anything.  Give me a sample of 100 or 1000 or a million
such men, and I would bet a large sum of money that a significant
percentage of them would beat women.  Maybe all of these men made the
choice to beat women when looking at it on the surface, but Victor
seems to imply that this number would or should not be different if
society either encourages or discourages such behavior.

	I gave a rather extreme example, but societal pressures are
everywhere, and if Victor can say that he has never done anything that
he didn't want to do because of peer pressure, more power to him.  But
to hold EVERYBODY to that standard,  I would call him unsympathetic.
It seems to me that fashion and media images of women's bodies are a
rather arbitrary choice with a possible health impact (yo-yo dieting,
anorexia).  Although the causality may be difficult to prove, since
the choice IS so arbitrary, why not make it an image with healthier
consequences.  Perhaps this "thin and tall" thing will come to pass,
but in the meantime, the PC ravers serve a purpose- to make us realize
that things could be different and perhaps better.

don
to misquote the Osmonds
"I'm a little bit PC... and I'm a little bit Rock'n'Roll"