Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site SCINEWS.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!mcnc!rti-sel!SCINEWS!todd
From: todd@SCINEWS.UUCP (Todd Jones)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Madonna
Message-ID: <117@SCINEWS.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 5-Jun-85 16:16:59 EDT
Article-I.D.: SCINEWS.117
Posted: Wed Jun  5 16:16:59 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 10-Jun-85 06:46:05 EDT
References: <273@cmu-cs-g.ARPA> <841@ccice5.UUCP> <2469@wateng.UUCP>
Organization: SCI Systems, Research Triangle Park, NC
Lines: 27

> ---
> 
> 	>I thought the whole point of the "womens movement" was to get them
> 	>off of their backs and into the board rooms?
> 
> Uhhhh, not quite. It sounds as if you have your ideas about the women's
> movement from the popular press. If you are interested, try reading some
> of the feminist magazines and newspapers or well-known feminist books.
> You will find that there is a lot more to feminism than the popular media
> stereotype of an executive mother. While it is of great benefit to women with
> the right talents to be able to move into areas that used to be "men-only"
> (and that includes welders and miners as much as executives) the women's
> movement also wants recognition and respect for the work women do already.
> That is why you sometimes hear proposals of wages for housework or proposals
> for pension plans for women doing non-salaried work, etc.
> As for sexuality -- naturally there is a tremendous range of feelings about
> sexual matters but I think all feminists would like to see the "double
> standard" disappear. When that day comes I expect Madonna won't be any more
> of a "slut" than Mick Jagger. (They can BOTH be sluts!)

Mick Jagger *is* a slut.

> 
>    --from the sssstickkky keyboard of JAM
>    ...!{ihnp4|clyde|decvax}!watmath!wateng!jamcmullan

*** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***