Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!orion.oac.uci.edu!ucivax!gateway From: gannon@MDI.COM (Alden Gannon) Newsgroups: soc.feminism Subject: Re: Erotic images on display in the workplace Message-ID: <1991Jun13.204257.11866@MDI.COM> Date: 14 Jun 91 01:50:42 GMT References: <1991Jun13.155936.12964@aero.org> Organization: Motorola, Mobile Data Division - Seattle, WA Lines: 52 Approved: tittle@ics.uci.edu Nntp-Posting-Host: zola.ics.uci.edu In article <1991Jun13.155936.12964@aero.org> mjm@ahimsa.intel.com (Marjorie Panditji) writes: [Marjorie invites explanations why people display sexually arousing pictures in the workplace] >This is especially confusing since I think it is pretty >well known that these pictures can be offensive to some people and that >there are usually company guidelines about displaying these images to >prevent charges of sexual harassment. Well, I do not have any such pictures at work, but I see this as a matter of taste. I have a rather wide taste in visual arts (cubism, expressionism, impressionism, primitivism, ...) and display representative works from each of these genres in my home. Why? Two reasons. First of all, I like to look at them. Second, I believe guests gain a perspective of me by seeing the art I appreciate. A work for which I have no reproduction (but would like one) is Manet's "Dejeuner sur l'herbe" which features a reclining female nude. I would be surprised if a guest was offended by the piece, and would certainly not display it if I thought my guests would be offended. However, I fully admit that I appreciate the work for its daring assault on social norms; and in this case, that means depicting a female nude in a "proper" social cirumstance. Also, although Manet's nude is purposely unattractive (in the norms of the day), I also appreciate several nudes meant to achieve "perfect" feminine characteristics (in the eyes of the male artist), and I'm sure part of my attraction to these works is sexual. What I'm getting at is perhaps your workmates feel the same way about their pinups as I do about my Manet. They appreciate them (for sexual, aesthetic, or whatever reasons), and haven't considered the fact that they may be offensive to some. Indeed, I have seen male nudes (the David, for instance) that I find *very* aesthetically pleasing. So why should I automatically think women should be offended by my Manet? Perhaps your workmates hang pinups because they like them, and would be happy to remove them if they thought you were offended. >I hope that this is still related to soc.feminism. I think the tie in >is that there may be (are?) differences between men and women with regard >to displaying erotic/nude/sexually explicit images in the workplace. Perhaps, but I never claim to speak for *anyone* else, men or otherwise, in matters of taste. Removing offensive material from public places such as your workplace is a matter of courtesy that should apply to everyone regardless of gender. In my office, I have a large picture of Boris Badenov about to blow Bullwinkle Moose to little bits with a bomb (I'm a Rocky and Bullwinkle fan). If an animal rights activist complained sincerely, down it would come. -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alden B. Gannon, the Chaste. INTERNET: gannon%mdi.com@uunet.uu.net "Become who you are!" - F. Nietzsche. USENET: ..uunet!mdi.com!gannon