Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.PCS 1/10/84; site ahutb.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!drutx!ahuta!ahutb!dls
From: dls@ahutb.UUCP (d.l.skran)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: update on bathing suit
Message-ID: <617@ahutb.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 1-Apr-85 17:27:16 EST
Article-I.D.: ahutb.617
Posted: Mon Apr  1 17:27:16 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 2-Apr-85 07:35:29 EST
References: <1362@decwrl.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Information Systems Labs, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 25

REFERENCES:  <1362@decwrl.UUCP>

The best approach here is to focus on the source of
offense:

1)the use of sex to sell goods.

2)the implicit assumption that engineers are men.


If you object to (1)the only satisfactory add will
not involve sex in any way.


If you object to (2), an add that featured both men and
women in bathing suits could be put together in such as
way that a)it appealed to both men and women,
and b)it did not imply disrespect for either sex.


I suggest that you might bring the second possibility to
the attention of computer dynamics.

Dale Skran,
speaking only for himself