Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!aero!zorch.SF-Bay.ORG From: xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) Newsgroups: soc.feminism Subject: Re: Bring On the Dancing Girls... Message-ID: <1990Jul12.042716.7623@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> Date: 12 Jul 90 04:27:16 GMT References: <1990Jul2.212210.11819@athena.mit.edu> Sender: nadel@aerospace.aero.org Organization: SF Bay Public-Access Unix Lines: 50 Approved: nadel@aerospace.aero.org wdstarr@athena.mit.EDU (William December Starr) writes: >The following article appeared on page 35 (section 1, part 2) of the >Sunday 1 July 1990 New York Times: [...] > MINNEAPOLIS -- The University of Minnesota has banned its dance >line from men's athletic events because the performances "sexually >stereotyped" them. The women said they should decide that for >themselves. [...] > The dancers greeted the announcement with "shock, anger and >sadness," the coach, Andrea Lilleberg, said. "We feel we're >intelligent enough women to know when we're considered objects." [...] > For five years, the line has been part of the men's athletic >department, which paid part of its budget. Last year, the department >spent $9,300 for the line, which had total expenses of $12,000. >Dancers made up the difference by appearing at dance clinics. Without >university sponsorship, the line will finance itself, as it did before >the department adopted it. Haven't we seen this before? A dance line needing an audience to appreciate their work, and glad to perform before an audience where that performance gains them financial support as well, support not offered by the other performances, is told: "We won't allow you to do this, because _we_know_ you are suffering exploitation, even if you do not." And the group suffers and dies to suit the perceptions of others who may never have experienced the exhileration of an audience screaming their appreciation, who have never suffered repeated rejection trying to find a place to perform, who have never suffered financial distress trying to keep a marginal arts group going. The analogy to the "exploitation" claim from $150K per year rising women executives about the girly magazine layouts that pay a $6000 a year secretary three years' wages for two or three days work is pretty direct. "Exploitation" is pretty easy to pronounce when you're not hungry. Bleah. I think I'll go join C.O.Y.O.T.E. Kent, the man from xanth. -- In times of crisis you can always depend on that lass to reveal hidden depths of indifference. -- Andy Capp