Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: $Revision: 1.6.2.16 $; site ada-uts.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!ucbvax!decvax!yale!ada-uts!richw
From: richw@ada-uts.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Orphaned Response
Message-ID: <20800008@ada-uts.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 7-Oct-85 11:29:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: ada-uts.20800008
Posted: Mon Oct  7 11:29:00 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 12-Oct-85 16:46:42 EDT
References: <1095@teklds.UUCP>
Lines: 13
Nf-ID: #R:teklds:-109500:ada-uts:20800008:177600:532
Nf-From: ada-uts!richw    Oct  7 11:29:00 1985


That's Dworkin and McKinnon (not sure about the latter's spelling though).

At least I hope her name's McKinnon.  She was interviewed on WBCN's
"Sunday Review".  I didn't hear most of it, unfortunately, but was
interested in her analogies with laws having to do with libel and/or
slander.  My question is: if women, personally or as a group, feel
horribly mis-represented, slandered, whatever, aren't existing laws
enough?  Why treat pornographic literature specially?

These are an honest questions, not flames...

-- Rich Wagner