Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ucsfcgl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!bellcore!decvax!ucbvax!ucsfcgl!arnold
From: arnold@ucsfcgl.UUCP (Ken Arnold%CGL)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Madonna
Message-ID: <538@ucsfcgl.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 12-Jun-85 01:18:56 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucsfcgl.538
Posted: Wed Jun 12 01:18:56 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 15-Jun-85 06:12:24 EDT
References: <333@cmu-cs-edu1.ARPA> <1848@ukma.UUCP>
Reply-To: arnold@ucsfcgl.UUCP (PUT YOUR NAME HERE)
Organization: UCSF Computer Graphics Lab
Lines: 51

In article <1848@ukma.UUCP> sean@ukma.UUCP (Sean Casey) writes:
>     Someone posted a bulletin which,  summarized,  says  "I  wouldn't
>want  my  daughter to be like Madonna".  Assuming we are talking about
>easy sexual promiscuousity, the questions this person should be asking
>are  whether  such  a thing is desirable, and if is it indeed harmful.

I was one of the persons who responded, so let me clarify.  I rather
expect that my (hypothetical and hoped for) daughter will have sexual
partners and experience before she is married.  I did.  So did my
wife-to-be.  Why should I expect my daugther to be less than human?
Premarital sexual experience is not only unpreventable, but (I belive)
beneficial.  Since that is not the point of this discussion (I don't
think it is, anyway) I will just leave this for another time.

What Madonna characterizes is not sexual promiscuity per se, nor simply
sexuality.  What she does, as I see it, is to promote an image of
sexual subservience to male fantasy, rather than a sexuality of
equality.  I will repeat the example of her "Boy Toy" belt buckle,
which are now selling rather well.  I would rather my daughter thought
of herself not as a toy for boys, but as their equal, with a right to
choose how her sexuality and other attributes are used.  I had toys as
a boy (and still do), and I did (and do) what I choose with them.  A
"toy" is a bad image for a person to have of themselves or of other
people.

>     How about Elton John, who is quite gay?  I have friends who won't
>listen  to his music because of his sexual preference.  Their loss.  I
>don't give a ____ who he likes; I like his music. The really sad thing
>is  when  people try to force their prejudice on others, or hurt those
>they are prejudiced against.

I, too, like Elton John's music (well, starting with his "Caribou"
albumn, I start to get pretty selective about which songs I like).  I
know he is gay.  My children might be lesbian or gay, or may for a time
choose sexual partners who are of their own sex, and this bothers me
not at all.  I won't care whether they listen to a gay artist or anyone
else.  My problems with Madonna as a role model (and rememeber this
discussion started because some fan suggested she was a good one) is
not that she is a (presumably sexually active) heterosexual female, but
that her marketing image is strongly based on her image as a toy for
boys to play with.  I have not attempted to force my prejudice against
this kind of person as a role model on anyone, although if I have a
daughter, I will try and raise her not to be like this.

I have only argued for my beliefs, and you for yours, and I will thank
you and everyone else to remember that.  My prejudices may be wrong by
some absolute standard I am not aware of, and so may yours.  But if you
suggest that, by expressing them, I force people, you (unkowingly and
unintentionally I am sure) insult me by implying that I would force
people to agree with me against their will.  My opinions are strong,
but I do not force.  Your apology is accepted in advance.