Equal Opportunity Objectification
Laura Haywood-Cory
bugging me. I know that either "Realms of Fantasy" or "Fantasy and Science
Fiction" sold my name/mailing address, because I've started getting
unsolicited catalogs for sf-ish stuff.
One of them, "Fantasy Gifts," really pissed me off: Granted, they had a
few things I might want, but the catalog was FULL of half-naked
gigantic-breasted women, and not a young, virile, nearly-naked male
figurine to be found! The only males in the catalog, in fact, were
wrinkly, old, fully-clothed wizards.
I don't think it's morally wrong to display half-naked chicks (or human
women, either), but it bugs me when men aren't given the same chance to be
turned into sex objects. I have a similar reaction to stores that carry
"Playboy" but not "Playgirl." Does this bug anyone else?
-Laura
--
Laura Haywood-Cory
Research Triangle SF Society - http://www.rtsfs.org
Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill - monthly sf meetings
Trinoc-coN - http://www.trinoc-con.org
the Triangle's sf conference, 9/29-10/1/2000
Loren Joseph MacGregor
>I don't think it's morally wrong to display half-naked chicks (or human
>women, either), but it bugs me when men aren't given the same chance to be
>turned into sex objects. I have a similar reaction to stores that carry
>"Playboy" but not "Playgirl." Does this bug anyone else?
Yes.
-- LJM
Loren Joseph MacGregor
>lgha...@email.unc.edu (Laura Haywood-Cory) wrote in
><8ms4s1$66t$1...@news2.isis.unc.edu>:
>>I don't think it's morally wrong to display half-naked chicks (or
>>human women, either), but it bugs me when men aren't given the same
>>chance to be turned into sex objects. I have a similar reaction to
>>stores that carry "Playboy" but not "Playgirl." Does this bug anyone
>>else?
>Yes.
>--
> mrw
NB: We are not the same person. I put the -- and my initials are on the
same line, and in all caps.
-- LJM
John Hasler
> The only males in the catalog, in fact, were wrinkly, old, fully-clothed
> wizards.
Obviously, their focus groups have told them that the typical female
Fantasy Gifts customer is turned on by wrinkly, old, fully-clothed wizards.
Perhaps I should start attending cons again (without my wife, of course).
> I have a similar reaction to stores that carry "Playboy" but not
> "Playgirl".
They stock what sells.
--
John Hasler
jo...@dhh.gt.org
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
Lydia Nickerson
<lgha...@email.unc.edu> wrote:
> Now that I've well and truly delurked, here's something that's been
> bugging me. I know that either "Realms of Fantasy" or "Fantasy and Science
> Fiction" sold my name/mailing address, because I've started getting
> unsolicited catalogs for sf-ish stuff.
>
> One of them, "Fantasy Gifts," really pissed me off: Granted, they had a
> few things I might want, but the catalog was FULL of half-naked
> gigantic-breasted women, and not a young, virile, nearly-naked male
> figurine to be found! The only males in the catalog, in fact, were
> wrinkly, old, fully-clothed wizards.
>
> I don't think it's morally wrong to display half-naked chicks (or human
> women, either), but it bugs me when men aren't given the same chance to be
> turned into sex objects. I have a similar reaction to stores that carry
> "Playboy" but not "Playgirl." Does this bug anyone else?
Oddly, though I'm primarily heterosexual, I prefer to look at naked
women. They have more interesting curves, to my eyes. They type of guy
I think looks really sexy is fully clothed and has a pocket protector.
If you take off his clothes, you remove his primary sexual attractors.
--
Lydia Nickerson
Dulciculi Aliquorum
Rachael Lininger
I beg to differ.
Rachael
--
Rachael Lininger | "Victrola homes are happiest."
rac...@dd-b.net | --Atlantic Monthly, 1922
Leroy Berven
"Laura Haywood-Cory" <lgha...@email.unc.edu> wrote
>
> I don't think it's morally wrong to display half-naked chicks (or human
> women, either), but it bugs me when men aren't given the same chance to be
> turned into sex objects. I have a similar reaction to stores that carry
> "Playboy" but not "Playgirl." Does this bug anyone else?
Of _course_ it's discriminatory. As with most such situations, I suspect
the cause is (as usual) primarily an economic one: the perception that the
"average" female is rather less likely than the "average" male to respond
positively (i.e., by spending money) upon encountering sexually exciting /
erotic / pant-pant-barenekkid pictures of whatever gender excites the viewer
the most. If using photos of hunky, near-naked men in Burpo Beer ads placed
in Ladies' Home Journal correlated with quadrupling the quantity of Burpo
Beer bought by women, you could bet we'd see a lot more of that sort of ads
in any locale likely to be scanned by female human eyes. Conversely, the
reason our eyes aren't assulted many times daily by the masculine analog of
the Swedish Bikini Team is that this type of advertising Doesn't Work as a
cost-effective means of Selling Stuff to Women. (The jury is still out on
the "Arbor Mist" crapola wine beverage commercials . . . )
And, as my wife commented repeatedly to me a few years ago while we were
strolling through the "red light" district of Amsterdam, she also felt quite
discriminated against, with none of the "merchandise" on display there being
of interest to her . . .
--
Leroy F. Berven
ber...@wolfenet.com
Margaretewelsh
>
>I don't think it's morally wrong to display half-naked chicks (or human
>women, either), but it bugs me when men aren't given the same chance to be
>turned into sex objects. I have a similar reaction to stores that carry
>"Playboy" but not "Playgirl." Does this bug anyone else?
>
>-Laura
yes
mew
Mary Kay Kare
> I don't think it's morally wrong to display half-naked chicks (or human
> women, either), but it bugs me when men aren't given the same chance to be
> turned into sex objects. I have a similar reaction to stores that carry
> "Playboy" but not "Playgirl." Does this bug anyone else?
>
Oh geez. I've been complaining about this in art shows and masquerades
for *years*. I want naked dancing boys dammit! (Preferably smart ones,
but, hey, I'm adaptable.)
MKK
--
Member:
fwa
Evil Elitist Fannish Conspiracy
RASFF Fire, Usage, and Whinge Brigade
Worldwide TAFF Cabal (there is no cabal)
Tom Galloway
Hmm. Wonder if there's much of a market for condoms that resemble pocket
protectors?
tyg t...@netcom.com
Loren MacGregor
>
> In article <8ms4s1$66t$1...@news2.isis.unc.edu>, Laura Haywood-Cory
> <lgha...@email.unc.edu> wrote:
>
> > I don't think it's morally wrong to display half-naked chicks (or human
> > women, either), but it bugs me when men aren't given the same chance to be
> > turned into sex objects. I have a similar reaction to stores that carry
> > "Playboy" but not "Playgirl." Does this bug anyone else?
> >
> Oh geez. I've been complaining about this in art shows and masquerades
> for *years*. I want naked dancing boys dammit! (Preferably smart ones,
> but, hey, I'm adaptable.)
I wanted George Barr's painting of George Takei.
-- LJM
Lucy Kemnitzer
He'll do just fine, with ot without clothes, I imagine. There's
really no shortage of beautiful men to display, only, when people
do get into displaying them, they seem to think that what I want
to look at is a Ken doll with a basket, when actually, I want to
look at actual men.
Lucy Kemnitzer
Marilee J. Layman
I don't know, but I must mention that I've made custom bead & leather
pocket protectors before. I'm pretty sure they've just had pens in
them.
--
Marilee J. Layman The Other*Worlds*Cafe
HOSTE...@aol.com A Science Fiction Discussion Group.
AOL Keyword: OWC http://www.webmoose.com/owc
Dorothy J Heydt
Mary Kay Kare <ka...@sirius.com> wrote:
>Oh geez. I've been complaining about this in art shows and masquerades
>for *years*. I want naked dancing boys dammit! (Preferably smart ones,
>but, hey, I'm adaptable.)
Strangely enough, I don't.
I am not interested in seeing any naked male except my husband,
and I don't even need to SEE him, I mean, if the light is out and
I can't see a thing I know he can get naked whenever required.
It takes all kinds. I know one lady who has been collecting
pictures of her male friends, from behind, wearing form-fitting
Renaissance tights and things. She likes buns. I can't figure
out why.
Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
djh...@kithrup.com
http://www.kithrup.com/~djheydt
Dorothy J Heydt
>Oddly, though I'm primarily heterosexual, I prefer to look at naked
>women. They have more interesting curves, to my eyes. They type of guy
>I think looks really sexy is fully clothed and has a pocket protector.
>If you take off his clothes, you remove his primary sexual attractors.
Hear, hear. The most important sexual organ, as everybody knows,
is the brain, but one doesn't want to LOOK at it.
A line from Adrienne Martine-Barnes's _The Dragon Rises_ floats
up into my mind: "Can there be any sillier-looking thing than an
undressed male? I don't know what the Creatrix was thinking of."
OTOH undressed women look pretty silly too, all lumps and bumps;
they simply have them in different places from where the men have
them.
Kip Williams
> >Lydia Nickerson <ly...@demesne.com> wrote:
> >>I think looks really sexy is fully clothed and has a pocket protector.
> >>If you take off his clothes, you remove his primary sexual attractors.
> >
> >protectors?
>
> I don't know, but I must mention that I've made custom bead & leather
> pocket protectors before. I'm pretty sure they've just had pens in
> them.
I always figured that Klingon nerds had spiked shirt-pocket
protectors.
(You know why Klingons developed that forehead lump between the
series and the movies? It was their new ship designs: doorways were
too low.)
--
--Kip (Williams)
amusing the world at http://members.home.net/kipw/
Dave Weingart
>OTOH undressed women look pretty silly too, all lumps and bumps;
>they simply have them in different places from where the men have
>them.
Dunno. I'm perfectly happy to look at undressed women.
--
73 de Dave Weingart KA2ESK Consonance 2001! Urban Tapestry!
mailto:phyd...@liii.com Mike Stein! Oh, yeah, and some guy
http://www.liii.com/~phydeaux named Dave Wein-something-or-other.
ICQ 57055207 http://www.consonance.org
Laura Haywood-Cory
> Oh geez. I've been complaining about this in art shows and masquerades
> for *years*. I want naked dancing boys dammit! (Preferably smart ones,
> but, hey, I'm adaptable.)
I'm with you. Where do we get our naked dancing boys? :)
Dave Weingart
>I'm with you. Where do we get our naked dancing boys? :)
No costume is no costume.
Janice Gelb
>women. They have more interesting curves, to my eyes. They type of guy
>If you take off his clothes, you remove his primary sexual attractors.
>
I don't want to think about what you do with the pens
in the pocket protector...
***********************************************************************
Janice Gelb | The only connection Sun has with
janic...@marvin.eng.sun.com | this message is the return address.
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/8018/index.html
"Politics is show business for ugly people" -- James Carville
James Nicoll
Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
snip context
>
>It takes all kinds. I know one lady who has been collecting
>pictures of her male friends, from behind, wearing form-fitting
>Renaissance tights and things. She likes buns. I can't figure
>out why.
My hairdresser want to photograph me in the nude. At work.
Sadly, not because I am oozing studmuffinliness [She's not interested
in guys that way] but because I look like a real person. I think
it's just Art.
James Nicoll
--
"Sure, Len, just because something is old doesn't mean it's
engraved in stone. We know a lot more about entertainment now than they
did back then. Look at Lawrence Olivier! You think he was in any of
Shakespeare's original productions? No! They added him years later!"
John Kensmark
>
> In article <lydy-42D29E.2...@news.uswest.net>,
> Lydia Nickerson <ly...@demesne.com> wrote:
>> Oddly, though I'm primarily heterosexual, I prefer to look at
>> naked women. They have more interesting curves, to my eyes.
>> They type of guy I think looks really sexy is fully clothed and
>> has a pocket protector. If you take off his clothes, you
>> remove his primary sexual attractors.
>
> I beg to differ.
ObSmartAss: How often?
John Kensmark kensmark#hotmail.com
I Love You So Much, My Sister is Jealous
-- almost certainly not a real C&W song title
John Kensmark
> Of _course_ it's discriminatory. As with most such situations,
> I suspect the cause is (as usual) primarily an economic one:
> the perception that the "average" female is rather less likely
> than the "average" male to respond positively (i.e., by spending
> money) upon encountering sexually exciting / erotic /
> pant-pant-barenekkid pictures of whatever gender excites the
> viewer the most.
You're very largely correct, I agree, except that I think you need
to place maximal stress on the word "perception". The main economic
factor, here, is that advertisers aren't yet *good* at using more
explicit male sexual images to sell stuff.
> Conversely, the reason our eyes aren't assulted many times daily
> by the masculine analog of the Swedish Bikini Team is that this
> type of advertising Doesn't Work as a cost-effective means of
> Selling Stuff to Women.
A lot of that is technique. And women aren't the only target
audience. Have you happened to pick up a copy of GQ in the last
couple of years? Women looking for ads featuring half-naked men
might want to check GQ out. It seems to be undergoing a demographic
shift, and the editors are hedging all bets. (Not that I have a
problem with that.)
John Kensmark kensmark#hotmail.com
The heaviest object in the world is the body
of the woman you have ceased to love.
-- French Proverb
John Kensmark
> I don't think it's morally wrong to display half-naked chicks
> (or human women, either), but it bugs me when men aren't given
> the same chance to be turned into sex objects. I have a similar
> reaction to stores that carry "Playboy" but not "Playgirl." Does
> this bug anyone else?
Yep, but a lot of things bug me. Well, almost everything bugs me.
I am filled with scorn, although deceptively nice, considering.
Catalogs like this should try to make everyone happy, if you ask me.
One of the things that bugs me, actually, is a weird corollary,
what's sometimes call the Reverse Anthropological Philosophy.
Everyone used to make fun of "National Geographic" for showing all
those topless native women. I watch a lot of education TV, and it's
true--they used to show a *lot* of native breasts.
Nowadays, it very much seems (and not just to me) that that's died
down a lot, and instead we get naked native men. I often have
Discovery or TLC (educational cable channels) on while I'm working,
and they still do a lot of documentaries on remote tribes and
whatnot. More often than not, all the women will be wearing
T-shirts (despite having no other Western clothes), and the men will
be buck naked.
It's not the naked men who bug me (except for the ones with
piercings, etc, that are difficult to keep seeing on screen). It's
the idea that documentaries intentionally show male nudity as if to
make up for all that possibly gratuitous female nudity before.
John Kensmark kensmark#hotmail.com
Lovely female shapes are terrible complicators of the
difficulties and dangers of this earthly life,
especially for their owner.
-- George du Maurier
Kris Jones
>
> "Laura Haywood-Cory" <lgha...@email.unc.edu> wrote
> >
> > I don't think it's morally wrong to display half-naked chicks (or
> > human women, either), but it bugs me when men aren't given the same
> > chance to be turned into sex objects. I have a similar reaction to
> > stores that carry "Playboy" but not "Playgirl." Does this bug
> > anyone else?
>
> suspect the cause is (as usual) primarily an economic one: the
> perception that the "average" female is rather less likely than the
> "average" male to respond positively (i.e., by spending money) upon
> of whatever gender excites the viewer the most.
Somebody in the industry is experimenting with this, though. I saw
a tv commercial a few weeks ago that featured oiled, sun-drenched guys
with six-pack abs, nekkid except for very brief bikinis, being used
to sell menstrual pads.
--
Kris Hasson Jones
Not representing [insert current employer here] etc.
I prefer to receive email at sni...@pacifier.com if you care.
David G. Bell
<lydy-42D29E.2...@news.uswest.net>
ly...@demesne.com "Lydia Nickerson" wrote:
> In article <8ms4s1$66t$1...@news2.isis.unc.edu>, Laura Haywood-Cory
> <lgha...@email.unc.edu> wrote:
>
> > Now that I've well and truly delurked, here's something that's been
> > bugging me. I know that either "Realms of Fantasy" or "Fantasy and Science
> > Fiction" sold my name/mailing address, because I've started getting
> > unsolicited catalogs for sf-ish stuff.
> >
> > One of them, "Fantasy Gifts," really pissed me off: Granted, they had a
> > few things I might want, but the catalog was FULL of half-naked
> > gigantic-breasted women, and not a young, virile, nearly-naked male
> > figurine to be found! The only males in the catalog, in fact, were
> > wrinkly, old, fully-clothed wizards.
> >
> > I don't think it's morally wrong to display half-naked chicks (or human
> > women, either), but it bugs me when men aren't given the same chance to be
> > turned into sex objects. I have a similar reaction to stores that carry
> > "Playboy" but not "Playgirl." Does this bug anyone else?
>
> Oddly, though I'm primarily heterosexual, I prefer to look at naked
> women. They have more interesting curves, to my eyes. They type of guy
> I think looks really sexy is fully clothed and has a pocket protector.
> If you take off his clothes, you remove his primary sexual attractors.
The last time I tried to use my sexual attractors, I discovered that the
dilithium crystals were failing.
--
David G. Bell -- Farmer, SF Fan, Filker, and Punslinger.
Copyright 2000 David G. Bell
The right to insert advertising material in the above text is reserved
to the author. The author did not use any form of HTML in the above text.
Any text following this line was added without the author's permission.
Lydia Nickerson
Heydt) wrote:
> OTOH undressed women look pretty silly too, all lumps and bumps;
> they simply have them in different places from where the men have
> them.
Maybe it's too many visits to the art museum in Boston (the name of
which I cannot recall), but I am quite riveted by female beauty. Male
beauty is pleasant, but it's the female form I find transcendant. I
have been corrupted by Western culture. Oh, the misery! The patriarchy
of it all!
Mary Kay Kare
<jon...@bennetthartman.com> wrote:
> Leroy Berven wrote:
> >
> > "Laura Haywood-Cory" <lgha...@email.unc.edu> wrote
> > >
> > > I don't think it's morally wrong to display half-naked chicks (or
> > > human women, either), but it bugs me when men aren't given the same
> > > chance to be turned into sex objects. I have a similar reaction to
> > > stores that carry "Playboy" but not "Playgirl." Does this bug
> > > anyone else?
> >
> > Of _course_ it's discriminatory. As with most such situations, I
> > suspect the cause is (as usual) primarily an economic one: the
> > perception that the "average" female is rather less likely than the
> > "average" male to respond positively (i.e., by spending money) upon
> > encountering sexually exciting/erotic/pant-pant-barenekkid pictures
> > of whatever gender excites the viewer the most.
>
> Somebody in the industry is experimenting with this, though. I saw
> a tv commercial a few weeks ago that featured oiled, sun-drenched guys
> with six-pack abs, nekkid except for very brief bikinis, being used
> to sell menstrual pads.
Oh, I forgot to specify. My naked, or semi-naked if you must, dancing
boys should all have musculature more similar to cats than bulls. I don't
go for the Arnie type. It's those doggone skinny Jewish intellectuals....
Demian Phillips
>One of them, "Fantasy Gifts," really pissed me off: Granted, they had a
>few things I might want, but the catalog was FULL of half-naked
>gigantic-breasted women, and not a young, virile, nearly-naked male
>figurine to be found! The only males in the catalog, in fact, were
>wrinkly, old, fully-clothed wizards.
>
>I don't think it's morally wrong to display half-naked chicks (or human
>women, either), but it bugs me when men aren't given the same chance to be
>turned into sex objects. I have a similar reaction to stores that carry
>"Playboy" but not "Playgirl." Does this bug anyone else?
My wife has the same complaint about most things.
Where is the Chain mail Codpiece.
Phil Foglios xXxenophile Card game is fun and stuff but she says
"Where are the Penises!" since there is full frontal nudity on the
female side but the males who are nekkid and there to see always have
"something" covering the groin. (even if it's just an attachment)
--
+---------------------+-------------------------------------------+
|^_^ |Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty |
|Demian Phillips |five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I |
|PGP KEY ID 0x5BC4FCB4|finally won out over it. - Elwood P. Dowd |
Alison Hopkins
Graydon wrote in message ...
>On Thu, 10 Aug 2000 21:18:53 GMT,
>Demian Phillips <dem...@cmhcsys.com> scripsit:
>>Phil Foglios xXxenophile Card game is fun and stuff but she says
>>"Where are the Penises!" since there is full frontal nudity on the
>>female side but the males who are nekkid and there to see always have
>>"something" covering the groin. (even if it's just an attachment)
>
>the stuff is subject to siezure. (not that it isn't already, some
>places.)
>
Same in the UK, too. No erections allowed. Mind you, I went to a
Chippendales show a few years back, where they came damn close. <g>
Interestingly, all the women in the audience were dressed up to the nines.
I was rather amused by the *single* man sitting behind me - and then he
turned out to be their new choreographer!
Ali
Sue Mason
>
>"Laura Haywood-Cory" <lgha...@email.unc.edu> wrote
>>
>> I don't think it's morally wrong to display half-naked chicks (or human
>> women, either), but it bugs me when men aren't given the same chance to be
>> turned into sex objects. I have a similar reaction to stores that carry
>> "Playboy" but not "Playgirl." Does this bug anyone else?
>
>Of _course_ it's discriminatory. As with most such situations, I suspect
>the cause is (as usual) primarily an economic one: the perception that the
>"average" female is rather less likely than the "average" male to respond
>positively (i.e., by spending money) upon encountering sexually exciting /
>erotic / pant-pant-barenekkid pictures of whatever gender excites the viewer
>the most. If using photos of hunky, near-naked men in Burpo Beer ads placed
>in Ladies' Home Journal correlated with quadrupling the quantity of Burpo
>Beer bought by women, you could bet we'd see a lot more of that sort of ads
>in any locale likely to be scanned by female human eyes. Conversely, the
>reason our eyes aren't assulted many times daily by the masculine analog of
>the Swedish Bikini Team is that this type of advertising Doesn't Work as a
>cost-effective means of Selling Stuff to Women. (The jury is still out on
>the "Arbor Mist" crapola wine beverage commercials . . . )
>
>And, as my wife commented repeatedly to me a few years ago while we were
>strolling through the "red light" district of Amsterdam, she also felt quite
>discriminated against, with none of the "merchandise" on display there being
>of interest to her . . .
I can draw a naked or near naked woman and most men are happy with it.
Occasionaly they ask for bigger/smaller tits or a different hair
colour.
If I draw a naked or near naked man the women want him fatter/thinner,
taller/shorter, hairer/smoother, younger/older etc, etc, etc.
And the big debate is with willy or without willy.
I'm on a panel at Chicon about fan art and eroticism/porn.
I wonder if I should smuggle some of the rude stuff through customs?
Sue Mason
s...@arctic-fox.freeserve.co.uk
Dragons, unicorns and pagan designs in wood at
http://www.plokta.com/woodlore/
Morris M. Keesan
Lydia Nickerson <ly...@demesne.com> wrote:
...
>Maybe it's too many visits to the art museum in Boston (the name of
>which I cannot recall),
Museum of Fine Arts. <http://www.mfa.org/home.htm>
We're going this Sunday to see the big Van Gogh portrait
exhibition.
--
Morris M. Keesan -- kee...@world.std.com
http://world.std.com/~keesan/ -- latest set of baby pictures added 8/3/2000
Mike Scott
Mason) wrote:
>I'm on a panel at Chicon about fan art and eroticism/porn.
>I wonder if I should smuggle some of the rude stuff through customs?
I wouldn't try that with the cucumber picture, if I was you.
--
Mike Scott
mi...@plokta.com
PNN has frequently updated news & comment for SF fandom
http://www.plokta.com/pnn/
Thomas Womack
> Maybe it's too many visits to the art museum in Boston (the name of
> which I cannot recall)
The Museum of Fine Arts. Which has a large sign outside with its name in ALL
CAPS in conveniently movable-looking letters, so, given the number of
universities in Boston, has presumably been the Museum of Fire Ants more
than once.
Tom
P Nielsen Hayden
Alison Hopkins <fn...@dial.pipex.com> wrote:
>
>Graydon wrote in message ...
>>On Thu, 10 Aug 2000 21:18:53 GMT,
>>Demian Phillips <dem...@cmhcsys.com> scripsit:
>>>Phil Foglios xXxenophile Card game is fun and stuff but she says
>>>"Where are the Penises!" since there is full frontal nudity on the
>>>female side but the males who are nekkid and there to see always have
>>>"something" covering the groin. (even if it's just an attachment)
>>
>>Erect Penis = hardcore pornography, most places in NorAm, which means
>>the stuff is subject to siezure. (not that it isn't already, some
>>places.)
>>
>Same in the UK, too. No erections allowed.
Much worse in the UK, actually. Graydon verges on overstating the case for
"most places in NorAm." It's a patchwork of local ordinances and unresolved
issues, but by and large, the average is far, far, far more liberal in the
US than in the UK.
I've seen more than one study documenting the interesting fact that the
majority of Brits (1) believe Britain to be flooded with hard-core
pornography, and (2) are entirely unaware that, in fact, commercial British
pornography is startlingly tame by the standards of just about the entire
rest of the First World. The British imagination of pornography, evidently,
is far vivid than the actual product allowed by Britain's startlingly
draconian laws.
--
Patrick Nielsen Hayden : p...@panix.com : http://www.panix.com/~pnh
Jordin Kare
<mjla...@erols.com> wrote:
> On 10 Aug 2000 02:32:56 GMT, t...@netcom.com (Tom Galloway) wrote:
>
> >In article <lydy-42D29E.2...@news.uswest.net>,
> >Lydia Nickerson <ly...@demesne.com> wrote:
> >>I think looks really sexy is fully clothed and has a pocket protector.
> >>If you take off his clothes, you remove his primary sexual attractors.
> >
> >Hmm. Wonder if there's much of a market for condoms that resemble pocket
> >protectors?
>
> I don't know, but I must mention that I've made custom bead & leather
> pocket protectors before. I'm pretty sure they've just had pens in
> them.
Now I'm trying to shake this image of punk engineers with black leather
pocket protectors. And Ohm's Law tattooed on their arms....
Jordin
Geri Sullivan
>
> If I draw a naked or near naked man the women want him fatter/thinner,
> taller/shorter, hairer/smoother, younger/older etc, etc, etc.
> And the big debate is with willy or without willy.
>
> I wonder if I should smuggle some of the rude stuff through customs?
Remind me to point out the Odbert drawing that Judy Cilcain gave me when
we do the house tour. He got around the "what should he look like"
question by showing only a bit of his face and having the rest of him
hidden behind the woman in a mass of solid black ink.
The willies, though...heck, there's a *garden* of willies. Spurting willies.
You're also welcome to look through as many fanzines as you'd like for
examples of erotic fan art through the decades. Oh, and the "Explore the
shape of things to come" recruitment poster from the early days of
Minn-stf. It's another Odbert. You don't see posters like that on the
freebie tables anymore, let alone hanging in bookstores or libraries.
Geri
--
Geri Sullivan g...@toad-hall.com
David G. Bell
<lydy-5944D5.1...@news.uswest.net>
ly...@demesne.com "Lydia Nickerson" wrote:
> In article <Fz29J...@kithrup.com>, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
> Heydt) wrote:
>
>
> > OTOH undressed women look pretty silly too, all lumps and bumps;
> > they simply have them in different places from where the men have
> > them.
>
> Maybe it's too many visits to the art museum in Boston (the name of
> which I cannot recall), but I am quite riveted by female beauty. Male
> beauty is pleasant, but it's the female form I find transcendant. I
> have been corrupted by Western culture. Oh, the misery! The patriarchy
> of it all!
Anyone here heard of Bill Brandt who, back in the fifties, did a series
of photos of naked ladies? They barely seemed human, curled up, and
photographed with an extreme wide-angle lens. At times, they seem like
curiously curved pebbled, or pieces of driftwood, on a beach.
I'm not sure that it would have worked had they been men. The skin
textures seem different. The curves seem smoother.
They're also an instance of the difference between nakedness and nudity,
and between porn and art.
Mary Kay Kare
s...@arctic-fox.freeserve.co.uk (Sue Mason) wrote:
> If I draw a naked or near naked man the women want him fatter/thinner,
> taller/shorter, hairer/smoother, younger/older etc, etc, etc.
> And the big debate is with willy or without willy.
Oh definitely with. What I can decide is erect or non-erect--I like them
both ways.
>
> I'm on a panel at Chicon about fan art and eroticism/porn.
> I wonder if I should smuggle some of the rude stuff through customs?
>
Umm. Could you maybe recreate some of it after you get here?
Lucy Kemnitzer
>On Thu, 10 Aug 2000 21:18:53 GMT,
>Demian Phillips <dem...@cmhcsys.com> scripsit:
>>Phil Foglios xXxenophile Card game is fun and stuff but she says
>>"Where are the Penises!" since there is full frontal nudity on the
>>female side but the males who are nekkid and there to see always have
>>"something" covering the groin. (even if it's just an attachment)
>
>Erect Penis = hardcore pornography, most places in NorAm, which means
>the stuff is subject to siezure. (not that it isn't already, some
>places.)
Soft ones are cute, too, though.
Lucy Kemnitzer
Mary Kay Kare
jtk...@ibm.net (Jordin Kare) wrote:
Now there's a story idea for you.
Loren MacGregor
>
> I'm on a panel at Chicon about fan art and eroticism/porn.
> I wonder if I should smuggle some of the rude stuff through customs?
Would that I were going, but even so, my answer is yes.
-- LJM
VJBowen
>My wife has the same complaint about most things.
>Where is the Chain mail Codpiece.
Er... I can think of at least three stores here in NYC that have chain mail
codpieces; and I know a number of people who make them, or can, and several men
who own them and wear them out dancing regularly. Given how cold chain mail is
when you put it on, I think it takes a brave man to wear one. (And we will not
even begin to talk about getting one's pubic hair caught in the links....)
--
Vijay Bowen vjb...@aol.com
A sense of humor is a state of grace.
Marilee J. Layman
wrote:
>In article <7if4psc4tq4janvh6...@4ax.com>, Marilee J. Layman
><mjla...@erols.com> wrote:
>
>> On 10 Aug 2000 02:32:56 GMT, t...@netcom.com (Tom Galloway) wrote:
>>
>> >In article <lydy-42D29E.2...@news.uswest.net>,
>> >Lydia Nickerson <ly...@demesne.com> wrote:
>> >>I think looks really sexy is fully clothed and has a pocket protector.
>> >>If you take off his clothes, you remove his primary sexual attractors.
>> >
>> >Hmm. Wonder if there's much of a market for condoms that resemble pocket
>> >protectors?
>>
>> I don't know, but I must mention that I've made custom bead & leather
>> pocket protectors before. I'm pretty sure they've just had pens in
>> them.
>
>Now I'm trying to shake this image of punk engineers with black leather
>pocket protectors. And Ohm's Law tattooed on their arms....
The black one was for an audio tech, and the brown one for a
pathologist. My friend Mark gave me the old leather samples from Lane
(they change every couple of years) and I use them to make the basic
pocket protector, and then bead a small rectangle to fit on the part
that goes over the pocket and sew it on.
I'm going to make myself one for Mark's wedding/costume party on
Halloween. I'm going as The Fairy Geekmother.
--
Marilee J. Layman The Other*Worlds*Cafe
HOSTE...@aol.com A Science Fiction Discussion Group.
AOL Keyword: OWC http://www.webmoose.com/owc
Tony Hursh
VJBowen wrote:
> On Thursday, 10 August 2000, Demian Phillips <dem...@cmhcsys.com> wrote:
>
> >My wife has the same complaint about most things.
> >Where is the Chain mail Codpiece.
>
> (And we will not
> even begin to talk about getting one's pubic hair caught in the links....)
>
Well, considering that I can't even tolerate those twisty metal watchbands......
This reminds me of an associate of mine who thought it'd be a good idea to use his
SOs Epilady to prep himself for a vasectomy, not fully understanding its mode of
operation.
VJBowen
>Well, considering that I can't even tolerate those twisty metal
>watchbands......
>This reminds me of an associate of mine who thought it'd be a good idea to
>use his
>SOs Epilady to prep himself for a vasectomy, not fully understanding its mode
>of
>operation.
*whimper* *cringe* SAFEWORD!
(This, mind you, comes from a woman who regularly undergoes Brazilian bikini
waxes. The Epilady is clearly a stfnal torture device.)
Paula Lieberman
news:slrn8p6fnu....@localhost.localdomain...
> On 10 Aug 2000 23:13:54 GMT,
> P Nielsen Hayden <p...@panix.com> scripsit:
> >On Thu, 10 Aug 2000 22:48:47 +0100,
> > Alison Hopkins <fn...@dial.pipex.com> wrote:
> >>Graydon wrote in message ...
> >>>the stuff is subject to siezure. (not that it isn't already, some
> >>>places.)
> >>>
> >
> >Much worse in the UK, actually. Graydon verges on overstating the case
for
> >"most places in NorAm."
>
> departments in Anglo NorAm where the XXXenophile folks can count on an
> erect penis _not_ being seized as pornography'; the letter of the law
> isn't often what the customs critters follow on these subjects, nor
> necessarily the local police.
Anthropology, archaeology, art history, and ithyphallic statues, the latter
depicted in lots of books with content and pictures about ancient Greece and
prehistoric Europe.... Those local authorities also would throw fits at
Indian art -- one Philcon I went over to the nearby museum, and there were a
couple rooms of stuff from around India. There was also a pamphlet
addressing, "-why is so much Indian art pornographic by US standards-" (The
last time I was in Boston's Museum of Fine Art, sitting on a pedestal was a
statue of male and female avatars of one of the Hindu deities in full
self-embrace down to minute anatomical detail.)
> This has the predictable effect on what they set out to market in the
> card game, although the actual comics have plenty.
Paula Lieberman
news:8ms4s1$66t$1...@news2.isis.unc.edu...
> Now that I've well and truly delurked, here's something that's been
> bugging me. I know that either "Realms of Fantasy" or "Fantasy and Science
> Fiction" sold my name/mailing address, because I've started getting
> unsolicited catalogs for sf-ish stuff.
>
> few things I might want, but the catalog was FULL of half-naked
> gigantic-breasted women, and not a young, virile, nearly-naked male
> figurine to be found! The only males in the catalog, in fact, were
> wrinkly, old, fully-clothed wizards.
>
> women, either), but it bugs me when men aren't given the same chance to be
> turned into sex objects. I have a similar reaction to stores that carry
> "Playboy" but not "Playgirl." Does this bug anyone else?
It's annoyed me for decades.
"Equal objectification only!"
Paula Lieberman
news:39921793...@home.com...
> Mary Kay Kare wrote:
> >
> > In article <8ms4s1$66t$1...@news2.isis.unc.edu>, Laura Haywood-Cory
> > <lgha...@email.unc.edu> wrote:
> >
human
> > > women, either), but it bugs me when men aren't given the same chance
to be
> > > turned into sex objects. I have a similar reaction to stores that
carry
> > > "Playboy" but not "Playgirl." Does this bug anyone else?
> > >
> > for *years*. I want naked dancing boys dammit! (Preferably smart ones,
> > but, hey, I'm adaptable.)
>
> I wanted George Barr's painting of George Takei.
Years ago, there was a Barr painting with the rather trite title of, "With
Naught Save Charm and an Iron Sword." Most of the women at the convention,
including me, wanted it. I got overbid by a -man- for the painting. Always
been irked about that....
>
> -- LJM
Paula Lieberman
John Hasler <jo...@dhh.gt.org> wrote in message
news:87vgxan...@toncho.dhh.gt.org...
> Laura writes:
> > The only males in the catalog, in fact, were wrinkly, old, fully-clothed
> > wizards.
>
> Fantasy Gifts customer is turned on by wrinkly, old, fully-clothed
wizards.
>
> Perhaps I should start attending cons again (without my wife, of course).
>
> > I have a similar reaction to stores that carry "Playboy" but not
> > "Playgirl".
>
Have they -tried- selling any hunky good "young, virile, nearly-naked male
figurine[s]" ?? I doubt it. They probably also don't want to know about
all the senior citizen women who like to watch "Walker, Texas Ranger,"
either, hurts their teensy ittybitty brains that have ossified bias currents
against any such thoughts....
Paula Lieberman
Dave Weingart <phyd...@liii.com> wrote in message
news:8muh5v$97h$1...@cedar.ggn.net...
> One day in Teletubbyland, Laura Haywood-Cory <lgha...@email.unc.edu>
said:
> >I'm with you. Where do we get our naked dancing boys? :)
>
> No costume is no costume.
Silly you! Didn't you see "dancing" in there? Even see the video of
Nuryev, was it, dancing, "Afternoon of a Faun"? While he wasn't naked, what
little he was wearing was skintight, and the dance he was doing, probably is
the stuff that various places ban. Dance happened to be -Art-. The "No
Costume is No Costume" rule came into existence from someone who -walked-
across the stage carrying a cup. I wasn't there, but the reports I had of
it indicated it was a plain walk, not interpretive Art (there's costuming
art, there's acting -- if you watch masquerades live or on tape, there are
entries which are all Costume, there are entries which are all or mostly
Acting, like e.g. "Disco Klingon" where two relatively young men in Klingon
masks that made for lousy costumes as Presentation Costumes, acted out a
skit which got them a major award IIRC), and there are those which have
theatrical Presence through both Costume and acting. "_The Lady Sif
Greeting Her Lord" or whatever it was, apparently had neither.
What was the line from Dune, something about "An Imperial Saudauker would
appear fully dressed in his dignity even without any clothing."
Paula Lieberman
news:jtkare-1008...@slip-32-100-148-227.wa.us.prserv.net...
> In article <7if4psc4tq4janvh6...@4ax.com>, Marilee J. Layman
> <mjla...@erols.com> wrote:
>
> > On 10 Aug 2000 02:32:56 GMT, t...@netcom.com (Tom Galloway) wrote:
> >
> > >In article <lydy-42D29E.2...@news.uswest.net>,
> > >Lydia Nickerson <ly...@demesne.com> wrote:
> > >>I think looks really sexy is fully clothed and has a pocket protector.
> > >>If you take off his clothes, you remove his primary sexual attractors.
> > >
> > >Hmm. Wonder if there's much of a market for condoms that resemble
> > >protectors?
> >
> > I don't know, but I must mention that I've made custom bead & leather
> > pocket protectors before. I'm pretty sure they've just had pens in
> > them.
>
> Now I'm trying to shake this image of punk engineers with black leather
> pocket protectors. And Ohm's Law tattooed on their arms....
The male equivalent of Pella, from _Tripoint_ ??!
>
> Jordin
Paula Lieberman
news:lydy-5944D5.1...@news.uswest.net...
> In article <Fz29J...@kithrup.com>, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
> Heydt) wrote:
>
>
> > OTOH undressed women look pretty silly too, all lumps and bumps;
> > they simply have them in different places from where the men have
> > them.
>
> Maybe it's too many visits to the art museum in Boston (the name of
> which I cannot recall), but I am quite riveted by female beauty. Male
Museum of Fine Arts, probably. You need to pay a visit to Symphony Hall,
where the statues are clothed women and nekkid males, and are part of the
acoustics, in one the most accoustically perfect performance halls in the
USA....
> beauty is pleasant, but it's the female form I find transcendant. I
> have been corrupted by Western culture. Oh, the misery! The patriarchy
> of it all!
>
> --
> Lydia Nickerson
> Dulciculi Aliquorum
Laura Haywood-Cory
> Oh, I forgot to specify. My naked, or semi-naked if you must, dancing
> boys should all have musculature more similar to cats than bulls. I don't
> go for the Arnie type. It's those doggone skinny Jewish intellectuals....
Is there a chance we're related somehow? :) One of my favorite ex-beaus
from college was my ideal of male beauty: strong but not bulging, blond
with brown eyes, light golden tan, about 5'10"--it still makes me drool to
think about him.
-Laura
--
Laura Haywood-Cory
Research Triangle SF Society - http://www.rtsfs.org
Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill - monthly sf meetings
Trinoc-coN - http://www.trinoc-con.org
the Triangle's sf conference, 9/29-10/1/2000
Laura Haywood-Cory
> Somebody in the industry is experimenting with this, though. I saw
> a tv commercial a few weeks ago that featured oiled, sun-drenched guys
> with six-pack abs, nekkid except for very brief bikinis, being used
> to sell menstrual pads.
Are you serious??? That's an odd use for lovely mostly-nekkid men, and I
feel strangely repulsed my the idea.
David Dyer-Bennet
> Anyone here heard of Bill Brandt who, back in the fifties, did a series
> of photos of naked ladies? They barely seemed human, curled up, and
> photographed with an extreme wide-angle lens. At times, they seem like
> curiously curved pebbled, or pieces of driftwood, on a beach.
Yes. Quite famous, of course.
> I'm not sure that it would have worked had they been men. The skin
> textures seem different. The curves seem smoother.
The skin textures are partly, I believe, because photographers seek
out different types of skin in men and women. I'm not so clear there
are big differences in actual men and women. Also perhaps that women
working as models go to a lot of trouble to keep their skin like
that.
The curves really are smoother, though. There are more curves on the
body, and the heavier subcutaneous fat layer smoothes things more.
> They're also an instance of the difference between nakedness and nudity,
> and between porn and art.
I'd object to a distinction between porn and art; something can be
both.
--
Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon
Bookworms: http://ouroboros.demesne.com/ SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b
David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / dd...@dd-b.net
John Hasler
> Have they -tried- selling any hunky good "young, virile, nearly-naked
> male figurine[s]" ?
If they haven't someone else probably has. If no one has, perhaps it is
time for someone to try it. You, for example.
> They probably also don't want to know about all the senior citizen women
> who like to watch "Walker, Texas Ranger," either, hurts their teensy
> ittybitty brains that have ossified bias currents against any such
> thoughts....
Another business opportunity for you.
--
John Hasler
jo...@dhh.gt.org (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI
David G. Bell
<3993faae...@news.freeserve.co.uk>
s...@arctic-fox.freeserve.co.uk "Sue Mason" wrote:
> I can draw a naked or near naked woman and most men are happy with it.
> Occasionaly they ask for bigger/smaller tits or a different hair
> colour.
>
> If I draw a naked or near naked man the women want him fatter/thinner,
> taller/shorter, hairer/smoother, younger/older etc, etc, etc.
> And the big debate is with willy or without willy.
>
> I'm on a panel at Chicon about fan art and eroticism/porn.
> I wonder if I should smuggle some of the rude stuff through customs?
Just have a fan waiting on the US side of the line with a pad of paper.
Patrick Connors
: In article <7if4psc4tq4janvh6...@4ax.com>, Marilee J. Layman
: <mjla...@erols.com> wrote:
: > On 10 Aug 2000 02:32:56 GMT, t...@netcom.com (Tom Galloway) wrote:
: >
: > >In article <lydy-42D29E.2...@news.uswest.net>,
: > >Lydia Nickerson <ly...@demesne.com> wrote:
: > >>I think looks really sexy is fully clothed and has a pocket protector.
: > >>If you take off his clothes, you remove his primary sexual attractors.
: > >
: > >Hmm. Wonder if there's much of a market for condoms that resemble pocket
: > >protectors?
: >
: > I don't know, but I must mention that I've made custom bead & leather
: > pocket protectors before. I'm pretty sure they've just had pens in
: > them.
: Now I'm trying to shake this image of punk engineers with black leather
: pocket protectors. And Ohm's Law tattooed on their arms....
: Jordin
H'mmm..
Hall Costume?
Hall costume.
Baycon next for sure.
(Can't make ChiCon; I'm still paying for numerous small disasters in June.
Sigh.)
- Pat Connors, Computer Oracle Punk.
Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604
> On Thursday, in article
> <3993faae...@news.freeserve.co.uk>
> s...@arctic-fox.freeserve.co.uk "Sue Mason" wrote:
>
> > I can draw a naked or near naked woman and most men are happy with it.
> > Occasionaly they ask for bigger/smaller tits or a different hair
> > colour.
> >
> > If I draw a naked or near naked man the women want him fatter/thinner,
> > taller/shorter, hairer/smoother, younger/older etc, etc, etc.
> > And the big debate is with willy or without willy.
> >
> > I'm on a panel at Chicon about fan art and eroticism/porn.
> > I wonder if I should smuggle some of the rude stuff through customs?
>
> Just have a fan waiting on the US side of the line with a pad of paper.
>
What size? (I was going to say "things are bigger over here", but
that would be a bit of a straight line (as is that, too), and might be
considered as denigrating our UK brethern).
73, doug
Sue Mason
>On Thu, 10 Aug 2000 21:18:53 GMT,
>Demian Phillips <dem...@cmhcsys.com> scripsit:
>>Phil Foglios xXxenophile Card game is fun and stuff but she says
>>"Where are the Penises!" since there is full frontal nudity on the
>>female side but the males who are nekkid and there to see always have
>>"something" covering the groin. (even if it's just an attachment)
>
>Erect Penis = hardcore pornography, most places in NorAm, which means
>the stuff is subject to siezure. (not that it isn't already, some
>places.)
Ah, so bringing the picture of the angle being given a hand job by the
succubus might be a bad idea...
That was the one the Blackpool police had a shop remove from the
window. Though they should have had more sense than to put it in the
blessed window in the first place.
Though the (slightly) more tasteful 'When faced with temptation
succumb' - which is the same two characters in a different pose -
might make it across with me.
Both have been shown in UK artshows without any ladies fainting in the
isles or any children being corrupted beyond redemption.
Sue Mason
s...@arctic-fox.freeserve.co.uk
Dragons, unicorns and pagan designs in wood at
http://www.plokta.com/woodlore/
David G. Bell
paal@REMOVE_gis.net "Paula Lieberman" wrote:
> Lydia Nickerson <ly...@demesne.com> wrote in message
> news:lydy-5944D5.1...@news.uswest.net...
> > In article <Fz29J...@kithrup.com>, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
> > Heydt) wrote:
> >
> >
> > > OTOH undressed women look pretty silly too, all lumps and bumps;
> > > they simply have them in different places from where the men have
> > > them.
> >
> > Maybe it's too many visits to the art museum in Boston (the name of
> > which I cannot recall), but I am quite riveted by female beauty. Male
>
> Museum of Fine Arts, probably. You need to pay a visit to Symphony Hall,
> where the statues are clothed women and nekkid males, and are part of the
> acoustics, in one the most accoustically perfect performance halls in the
> USA....
I find myself remembering the gadgets on the Humber bridge, intended to
damp out unwanted vibrations, which can be described as two spheres with
a stiff rod between.
Mike Scott
Mason) wrote:
>Ah, so bringing the picture of the angle being given a hand job by the
>succubus might be a bad idea...
That depends. Is it a cute angle?
--
Mike Scott
mi...@plokta.com
PNN has frequently updated news & comment for SF fandom
http://www.plokta.com/pnn/
Del Cotter
Laura Haywood-Cory <lgha...@email.unc.edu> wrote:
>I don't think it's morally wrong to display half-naked chicks (or human
>women, either), but it bugs me when men aren't given the same chance to be
>turned into sex objects. I have a similar reaction to stores that carry
>"Playboy" but not "Playgirl." Does this bug anyone else?
I'm not usually one of rasfw's "the market will always come through"
Objectivist Fanboyz, but in this one case, I do suspect that the reason
they're not in the catalogue is that you and your fellow afficionadas
don't make a big enough market segment to make it worth their while.
If I'm wrong, then Sue Mason is looking at an unoccupied and potentially
very lucrative niche.
--
. . . . Del Cotter d...@branta.demon.co.uk . . . .
JustRead:nty:JonathanRabanBadLand:EricIdleTheRoadToMars:JohnBarnesApocalypse
s&Apostrophes:MichaelConeyHelloSummerGoodbye:WalterMMillerJrStLeibowitz&TWHW
ToRead:IainBanksWhit:DorothyDunnettTheGameOfKings:SMStirlingAgainstTheTideOf
Chris Malme
<fjr8pskkgea6miukr...@4ax.com>:
>On Fri, 11 Aug 2000 18:52:07 GMT, s...@arctic-fox.freeserve.co.uk (Sue
>Mason) wrote:
>
>>Ah, so bringing the picture of the angle being given a hand job by the
>>succubus might be a bad idea...
>
>That depends. Is it a cute angle?
Now, you're just being obtuse.
Chris
John Kensmark
>
> In article <7if4psc4tq4janvh6...@4ax.com>, Marilee
> J. Layman <mjla...@erols.com> wrote:
>
>> On 10 Aug 2000 02:32:56 GMT, t...@netcom.com (Tom Galloway) wrote:
>>
>>> In article <lydy-42D29E.2...@news.uswest.net>,
>>> Lydia Nickerson <ly...@demesne.com> wrote:
>>>> I think looks really sexy is fully clothed and has a pocket
>>>> protector. If you take off his clothes, you remove his
>>>> primary sexual attractors.
>>>
>>> Hmm. Wonder if there's much of a market for condoms that
>>> resemble pocket protectors?
>>
>> I don't know, but I must mention that I've made custom bead &
>> leather pocket protectors before. I'm pretty sure they've just
>> had pens in them.
>
> Now I'm trying to shake this image of punk engineers with black
> leather pocket protectors. And Ohm's Law tattooed on their
> arms....
Dunno about the tattoos, but I've seen leather pocket protectors in
stationery stores. I've never seen anyone wearing one.
Um, regardless of how one interprets that last sentence.
John Kensmark kensmark#hotmail.com
The email of the species is more deadly than the mail.
John Kensmark
>
> In article <Fz29J...@kithrup.com>, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy
> J Heydt) wrote:
>
>> OTOH undressed women look pretty silly too, all lumps and
>> bumps; they simply have them in different places from where
>> the men have them.
>
> Maybe it's too many visits to the art museum in Boston (the name
> of which I cannot recall),
The Museum of Fine Arts? The Gardner?
> but I am quite riveted by female beauty. Male beauty is
> pleasant,
So I've been told.
> but it's the female form I find transcendant. I have been
> corrupted by Western culture.
Me too, and I'd just like to thank everyone who made it possible.
> Oh, the misery! The patriarchy of it all!
Who was it who said:
Modern art is what happens when male artists stop looking at
girls and persuade themselves that they have a better idea.
I can't remember, but this is what I've often secretly thought and
not-so-secretly said.
John Kensmark kensmark#hotmail.com
A Wisconsin psychiatrist was accused of malpractice by one of
his patients...who claimed he had convinced her that she had
120 separate personalities, including that of a duck, and then
billed her health-care provider for $300,000 for group therapy.
-- TV Guide
Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604
> What size fan?
>
Yes, we want her to be happy.
73, doug
Vicki Rosenzweig
GMT:
>
>Who was it who said:
>
> Modern art is what happens when male artists stop looking at
> girls and persuade themselves that they have a better idea.
>
>I can't remember, but this is what I've often secretly thought and
>not-so-secretly said.
>
A card I cherish is sitting on my monitor; the image is a Georgia
O'Keefe. I'll admit it's not actually a picture of a naked woman--
though many of O'Keefe's flowers are quite sexual--but neither is
some of the pre-modern art I admire (in particular, I'm quite fond
of the Hudson River School).
--
Copyright 2000 Vicki Rosenzweig. Permission to insert links when
displaying is available for $100 per link. Use in this fashion
constitutes acceptance of these terms. v...@redbird.org
r.a.sf.f faq at http://www.redbird.org/rassef-faq.html
Vicki Rosenzweig
>On Thu, 10 Aug 2000 22:41:01 GMT, s...@arctic-fox.freeserve.co.uk (Sue
>Mason) wrote:
>
>>I'm on a panel at Chicon about fan art and eroticism/porn.
>>I wonder if I should smuggle some of the rude stuff through customs?
>
>I wouldn't try that with the cucumber picture, if I was you.
The risk isn't getting it into the US--they probably won't even
look at your luggage, and almost certainly will okay it, as long
as there are no children involved--it's that you may not be
able to take it home with you.
Avram Grumer
<kens...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> Who was it who said:
>
> Modern art is what happens when male artists stop
> looking at girls and persuade themselves that they
> have a better idea.
Someone who's missed out on a lot of modern art paintings and sculptures
of girls by male artists.
--
Avram Grumer | av...@grumer.org | www.PigsAndFishes.org
If music be the food of love, then some of it be the Twinkies of
dysfunctional relationships.
Mitch Wagner
<7if4psc4tq4janvh6...@4ax.com>:
>On 10 Aug 2000 02:32:56 GMT, t...@netcom.com (Tom Galloway) wrote:
>
>>In article <lydy-42D29E.2...@news.uswest.net>,
>>Lydia Nickerson <ly...@demesne.com> wrote:
>>>I think looks really sexy is fully clothed and has a pocket protector.
>>>If you take off his clothes, you remove his primary sexual attractors.
>>
>>Hmm. Wonder if there's much of a market for condoms that resemble pocket
>>protectors?
>
>I don't know, but I must mention that I've made custom bead & leather
>pocket protectors before. I'm pretty sure they've just had pens in
>them.
Do guys still wear pocket protectors? Really?
I recently came to the conclusion that the current mark of the geek is not
pocket protectors, but rather elecronic gadgets attached to the belt. At
times I wear THREE: PalmPilot, mobile phone, and retractable earpiece for
the mobile phone.
--
Mitch Wagner
Loren Joseph MacGregor
>db...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk ("David G. Bell") writes:
>> On Thursday, in article
>> <3993faae...@news.freeserve.co.uk>
>> s...@arctic-fox.freeserve.co.uk "Sue Mason" wrote:
>>
>> > I can draw a naked or near naked woman and most men are happy with it.
>> > Occasionaly they ask for bigger/smaller tits or a different hair
>> > colour.
>> >
>> > If I draw a naked or near naked man the women want him fatter/thinner,
>> > taller/shorter, hairer/smoother, younger/older etc, etc, etc.
>> > And the big debate is with willy or without willy.
>> >
>> > I'm on a panel at Chicon about fan art and eroticism/porn.
>> > I wonder if I should smuggle some of the rude stuff through customs?
>>
>> Just have a fan waiting on the US side of the line with a pad of paper.
>What size? (I was going to say "things are bigger over here", but
>that would be a bit of a straight line (as is that, too), and might be
>considered as denigrating our UK brethern).
What size fan?
-- LJM
Jim Toth
>mi...@plokta.com (Mike Scott) wrote in
><fjr8pskkgea6miukr...@4ax.com>:
>
>>Mason) wrote:
>>
>>>Ah, so bringing the picture of the angle being given a hand job by the
>>>succubus might be a bad idea...
>>
>>That depends. Is it a cute angle?
>
>Now, you're just being obtuse.
Right.
--
Jim Toth
jjt...@vcu.edu
Timothy A. McDaniel
>wrote:
>>Now I'm trying to shake this image of punk engineers with black leather
>>pocket protectors. And Ohm's Law tattooed on their arms....
>
>pathologist.
I wackyparsed it as "the brown one for a proctologist".
--
Tim McDaniel is tm...@jump.net; if that fail,
tm...@us.ibm.com is my work account.
"To join the Clueless Club, send a followup to this message quoting everything
up to and including this sig!" -- Jukka....@hut.fi (Jukka Korpela)
Timothy A. McDaniel
John Kensmark <kens...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>[GQ] seems to be undergoing a demographic shift
Oh, is GQ branching out into the straight market?
There's a reason some have called it _Gay Quarterly_ for years.
Marilee J. Layman
>mjla...@erols.com (Marilee J. Layman) wrote in
><7if4psc4tq4janvh6...@4ax.com>:
>
>>On 10 Aug 2000 02:32:56 GMT, t...@netcom.com (Tom Galloway) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <lydy-42D29E.2...@news.uswest.net>,
>>>Lydia Nickerson <ly...@demesne.com> wrote:
>>>>I think looks really sexy is fully clothed and has a pocket protector.
>>>>If you take off his clothes, you remove his primary sexual attractors.
>>>
>>>Hmm. Wonder if there's much of a market for condoms that resemble pocket
>>>protectors?
>>
>>I don't know, but I must mention that I've made custom bead & leather
>>pocket protectors before. I'm pretty sure they've just had pens in
>>them.
>
>Do guys still wear pocket protectors? Really?
Yeah, they do. I think it depends on the type of work you do.
--
Marilee J. Layman The Other*Worlds*Cafe
HOSTE...@aol.com A Science Fiction Discussion Group.
AOL Keyword: OWC http://www.webmoose.com/owc
John Kensmark
>
> Quoth John Kensmark <kens...@my-deja.com> on Fri, 11 Aug 2000
> 22:51:12 GMT:
>
>>
>>
>> Modern art is what happens when male artists stop looking at
>> girls and persuade themselves that they have a better idea.
>>
>> and not-so-secretly said.
>>
> A card I cherish is sitting on my monitor; the image is a Georgia
> O'Keefe. I'll admit it's not actually a picture of a naked woman--
> though many of O'Keefe's flowers are quite sexual--but neither is
> some of the pre-modern art I admire (in particular, I'm quite fond
> of the Hudson River School).
I like a lot of O'Keefe's stuff, that I've seen. I also like a lot
of surrealism, and quite a bit of abstract sculpture. But most
abstract art I've seen hasn't seemed interesting, or very clever, or
like art. Oddly, making abstract art bigger or more interactive
often impresses me more. Not always, but often. I guess I'm a
little simple that way.
John Kensmark kensmark#hotmail.com
Psychics will lead the police to your body.
-- alledged fortune cookie message
Lydia Nickerson
<t...@womack.net> wrote:
> "Lydia Nickerson" <ly...@demesne.com> wrote
>
> > Maybe it's too many visits to the art museum in Boston (the name of
> > which I cannot recall)
>
> The Museum of Fine Arts. Which has a large sign outside with its name in
> ALL
> CAPS in conveniently movable-looking letters, so, given the number of
> universities in Boston, has presumably been the Museum of Fire Ants more
> than once.
Hey, give me a break. I was last there 20 years ago. It was a fixture
of my childhood, an important part of my family's annual pilgrimage to
Boston, my parents' home town.
The Museum of Fire Ants deserves some kind of award, I'd say. Perhaps
the "Iowa City Easily Acquired Outdoor Chartpak Award." U of I had all
their signs done in a Chartpak font that you could, no shit, buy at the
University Book store. And many did.
--
Lydia Nickerson
Dulciculi Aliquorum
Randolph Fritz
>
>I like a lot of O'Keefe's stuff, that I've seen. I also like a lot
>of surrealism, and quite a bit of abstract sculpture. But most
>abstract art I've seen hasn't seemed interesting, or very clever, or
>like art. Oddly, making abstract art bigger or more interactive
>often impresses me more. Not always, but often. I guess I'm a
>little simple that way.
>
Scale is very important; it makes a big difference if you can walk
into it or play with it.
By the way, I have recently found out that 50s US abstract expressionism
was promoted by...wait for it...the CIA. Really. I begin to suspect
that part of the reason people felt so disconnected from art in the
second half of the 20th century is that a lot of art was promoted for
reasons that had very little to do with its actual artistic value. :(
R.
Ray Radlein
>
> Hmm. Wonder if there's much of a market for condoms that resemble
> pocket protectors?
After a fashion, they *are*.
- Ray R.
--
**********************************************************************
"LOS ANGELES: A city of millions; thousands more are born each day.
Some in maternity wards, some in creche incubators. The Artificial
ones don't have civil rights, but they still need the law. That's
why they turn to me. My name is Friday. I carry a badge."
-- Robert A. Heinlein's "Dragnet"
Ray Radlein - r...@learnlink.emory.edu
homepage coming soon! wooo, wooo.
**********************************************************************
Ray Radlein
>
> Now I'm trying to shake this image of punk engineers with black
> leather pocket protectors. And Ohm's Law tattooed on their arms....
I'm picturing a guy with a series of colored bands -- gold, silver,
red, brown -- tatooed around his biceps. He has brass knuckles and a
stilletto. He fights for The Resistance.
Ray Radlein
>
> A card I cherish is sitting on my monitor; the image is a Georgia
> O'Keefe. I'll admit it's not actually a picture of a naked woman--
I saw a snippet of a porn flick a while back that involved a woman
painting an orchid on a sketch tablet; as the camera moved in a bit,
you gradually became aware that the orchid actually *was* female
genitalia, surrounded by painted-on petals. Discernably
three-dimensional, and reacting to the touch of the paintbrush, but
still on an apparently flat canvas.
Very surrealistic, and I was immensely glad that they used O'Keefe's
orchids for their inspiration, rather than her cattle skulls.
Sue Mason
<fa...@panix.com> wrote:
>73, doug
It's okay, Doug, I'll be bringing my own pad.
I can be a bit fussy about the paper I draw on - I like a particular
French paper mill which produces a slightly off white, not too smooth
finish.
Though I have been known to doodle on *anything* not fast enough to
get out of my way.
It occurs to me that I will be flying into San Francisco, a city I
associate with a cosmopolitan attitude to such things as pretty boys
not wearing much.
And most of my pictures are no more rude than Tom of Finland.
Should I bring a Tom of Finland postcard book to auction for Taff? (
keep a couple in stock as inpromptu pressies).
Or are they ten a penny in the US?
Sue Mason
Malme) wrote:
>mi...@plokta.com (Mike Scott) wrote in
><fjr8pskkgea6miukr...@4ax.com>:
>
>>On Fri, 11 Aug 2000 18:52:07 GMT, s...@arctic-fox.freeserve.co.uk (Sue
>>Mason) wrote:
>>
>>>Ah, so bringing the picture of the angle being given a hand job by the
>>>succubus might be a bad idea...
>>
>>That depends. Is it a cute angle?
>
>Now, you're just being obtuse.
>
>Chris
Oh, bugger off the pair of you!
I fart in your general direction :-p
Sue Mason
wrote:
>Quoth Mike Scott <mi...@plokta.com> on Thu, 10 Aug 2000 23:45:50 +0100:
>
>>On Thu, 10 Aug 2000 22:41:01 GMT, s...@arctic-fox.freeserve.co.uk (Sue
>>Mason) wrote:
>>
>>>I'm on a panel at Chicon about fan art and eroticism/porn.
>>>I wonder if I should smuggle some of the rude stuff through customs?
>>
>>I wouldn't try that with the cucumber picture, if I was you.
>
>The risk isn't getting it into the US--they probably won't even
>look at your luggage, and almost certainly will okay it, as long
>as there are no children involved--it's that you may not be
>able to take it home with you.
Oooh. I see red!
If they tried that I would get an overwhelming urge to stand there in
customs and start drawing slobbering great erect willies at them.
If I bring any rude pictures to the US, they'll get sold in the Taff
auction at Chicon.
But this attitude makes me sick.
Excuse me, but I feel the need to go and do something obscene with a
technical pen and some good drawing paper.
Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604
> On 11 Aug 2000 13:58:31 -0400, Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604
> <fa...@panix.com> wrote:
>
> >db...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk ("David G. Bell") writes:
> >
> >> On Thursday, in article
> >> <3993faae...@news.freeserve.co.uk>
> >> s...@arctic-fox.freeserve.co.uk "Sue Mason" wrote:
> >>
> >> > I can draw a naked or near naked woman and most men are happy with it.
> >> > Occasionaly they ask for bigger/smaller tits or a different hair
> >> > colour.
> >> >
> >> > If I draw a naked or near naked man the women want him fatter/thinner,
> >> > taller/shorter, hairer/smoother, younger/older etc, etc, etc.
> >> > And the big debate is with willy or without willy.
> >> >
> >> > I'm on a panel at Chicon about fan art and eroticism/porn.
> >> > I wonder if I should smuggle some of the rude stuff through customs?
> >>
> >> Just have a fan waiting on the US side of the line with a pad of paper.
> >>
> >
> >What size? (I was going to say "things are bigger over here", but
> >that would be a bit of a straight line (as is that, too), and might be
> >considered as denigrating our UK brethern).
> >
> >73, doug
>
> It's okay, Doug, I'll be bringing my own pad.
> I can be a bit fussy about the paper I draw on - I like a particular
> French paper mill which produces a slightly off white, not too smooth
> finish.
> Though I have been known to doodle on *anything* not fast enough to
> get out of my way.
>
> It occurs to me that I will be flying into San Francisco, a city I
> associate with a cosmopolitan attitude to such things as pretty boys
> not wearing much.
> And most of my pictures are no more rude than Tom of Finland.
>
> Should I bring a Tom of Finland postcard book to auction for Taff? (
> keep a couple in stock as inpromptu pressies).
> Or are they ten a penny in the US?
>
I have no idea. I hope someone else can answer this.
73, doug
Kip Williams
>
> Quoth John Kensmark <kens...@my-deja.com> on Fri, 11 Aug 2000 22:51:12
> GMT:
>
> >
> >Who was it who said:
> >
> > Modern art is what happens when male artists stop looking at
> > girls and persuade themselves that they have a better idea.
> >
> >I can't remember, but this is what I've often secretly thought and
> >not-so-secretly said.
> >
> O'Keefe. I'll admit it's not actually a picture of a naked woman--
> some of the pre-modern art I admire (in particular, I'm quite fond
> of the Hudson River School).
I thought you were going to say you had a picture -of- O'Keefe.
Didn't Stieglitz use her as a model early on?
--
--Kip (Williams)
amusing the world at http://members.home.net/kipw/
Kip Williams
> By the way, I have recently found out that 50s US abstract expressionism
> was promoted by...wait for it...the CIA. Really. I begin to suspect
> that part of the reason people felt so disconnected from art in the
> second half of the 20th century is that a lot of art was promoted for
> reasons that had very little to do with its actual artistic value. :(
Easy to hide a bug in, because nobody was inclined to look closely
at it?
Kip Williams
>
> Jordin Kare wrote:
> >
> > Now I'm trying to shake this image of punk engineers with black
> > leather pocket protectors. And Ohm's Law tattooed on their arms....
>
> I'm picturing a guy with a series of colored bands -- gold, silver,
> red, brown -- tatooed around his biceps. He has brass knuckles and a
> stilletto. He fights for The Resistance.
He dreams of returning home... to Violet...
Tony Hursh
Kip Williams wrote:
> I thought you were going to say you had a picture -of- O'Keefe.
> Didn't Stieglitz use her as a model early on?
>
Yes. I have a book with some of these, including a really wonderful one of
her hands.
--
Causality violation: Universe dumped.
Tony Hursh Department of Computer Science,
http://www.cs.uiuc.edu Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Lucy Kemnitzer
Fritz) wrote:
>In article <3994F486...@my-deja.com>, John Kensmark wrote:
>>
>>I like a lot of O'Keefe's stuff, that I've seen. I also like a lot
>>of surrealism, and quite a bit of abstract sculpture. But most
>>abstract art I've seen hasn't seemed interesting, or very clever, or
>>like art. Oddly, making abstract art bigger or more interactive
>>often impresses me more. Not always, but often. I guess I'm a
>>little simple that way.
>>
>
>Scale is very important; it makes a big difference if you can walk
>into it or play with it.
>
>By the way, I have recently found out that 50s US abstract expressionism
>was promoted by...wait for it...the CIA. Really. I begin to suspect
>that part of the reason people felt so disconnected from art in the
>second half of the 20th century is that a lot of art was promoted for
>reasons that had very little to do with its actual artistic value. :(
>
I'm sorry, I just sort of doubt this. I say this as a person who
adores Socialist Realism, mind you.
http://www.artlex.com/ArtLex/a/abstractexpr.html
Lucy Kemnitzer
Laura Haywood-Cory
> I don't remember exactly as I was gobsmacked at the very concept, but
> I seem to remember the guys were different heights and the pads come
> in different sizes ("because we don't all want the same thing" or
> such). The pads were never onscreen, only refererred to in the
> vocals.
Weird. I mean, yes, I'd love to see more attractive, mostly naked men
advertising things, or being used as models for fantasy statues (sort of
like Boris Vallejo's artwork, but maybe a few not-so-muscled men), but the
idea of mostly naked men being used to advertise mensutral products? Ugh.
BTW, I love XXXenophile; I have the first 5-6 issues. My favorite cover is
from #1, the guy getting into a Godzilla suit, while a naked girl, with
tall buildings in strategic places, lays on the bed.
-Laura
--
Laura Haywood-Cory
Research Triangle SF Society - http://www.rtsfs.org
Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill - monthly sf meetings
Trinoc-coN - http://www.trinoc-con.org
the Triangle's sf conference, 9/29-10/1/2000
David G. Bell
<nvd9psss2p4eeblm0...@4ax.com> v...@redbird.org
"Vicki Rosenzweig" wrote:
> Quoth Mike Scott <mi...@plokta.com> on Thu, 10 Aug 2000 23:45:50 +0100:
>
> >On Thu, 10 Aug 2000 22:41:01 GMT, s...@arctic-fox.freeserve.co.uk (Sue
> >Mason) wrote:
> >
> >>I'm on a panel at Chicon about fan art and eroticism/porn.
> >>I wonder if I should smuggle some of the rude stuff through customs?
> >
> >I wouldn't try that with the cucumber picture, if I was you.
>
> The risk isn't getting it into the US--they probably won't even
> look at your luggage, and almost certainly will okay it, as long
> as there are no children involved--it's that you may not be
> able to take it home with you.
Hell, yes, I remember the difference between coming off the ferry in
Holland, and the return to Hull, when I went to Confiction. It wasn't a
feeling of personal animosity, but a sensation of organised and
institutional suspicion.
Maybe it comes from not having a land border.
Anyway, UK Customs & Excise have a bad rep for siezing stuff which is
legal within the UK, but they don't think it's legal to import.
Cucumber?
--
David G. Bell -- Farmer, SF Fan, Filker, and Punslinger.
Copyright 2000 David G. Bell
The right to insert advertising material in the above text is reserved
to the author. The author did not use any form of HTML in the above text.
Any text following this line was added without the author's permission.
Randolph Fritz
>>
>>By the way, I have recently found out that 50s US abstract expressionism
>>was promoted by...wait for it...the CIA. Really. I begin to suspect
>>that part of the reason people felt so disconnected from art in the
>>second half of the 20th century is that a lot of art was promoted for
>>reasons that had very little to do with its actual artistic value. :(
>>
>
>I'm sorry, I just sort of doubt this. I say this as a person who
>adores Socialist Realism, mind you.
>
I was pretty surprised to find this out; I've been studying and have
been suitably blown away.
As for examples...at the outset let me stress that I am *not* a historian;
I have tried as best as possible to pick reliable sources, but I am
relying heavily on secondary sources, largely books and essays written
by participants after the events discussed, and my net-trained intuition
as to their reliability. And I have cites only for a few major ones.
It is possible that this account is entirely incorrect; but it is one I
do believe. I'm going to start out with an account of this in the pre-WW
II European Communist movement, because that is what my recent argument
with Patrick led me to study, and because there's an important figure
who seems to have been overlooked, but this not just about communism--my
original example, after all, was the CIA, and, as far as I know, every
20th-century political group of any size put their oar in.
I have a lot of respect for the burst of creativity that came from
European left in the 20s, before Stalin, and the Third International
working for him, stomped it flat. BUT--a lot of this was done for
propaganda purposes. There is a very famous Kathe Kollwitz charcoal
entitled *Hunger*, showing a starving mother and child. It is, without a
doubt, a wonderful piece of art. But it was published as part of a "feed
the starving children of the Revolution" campaign which was on behalf
of the Third International as a device whereby the International could
take credit for feeding the Russians. The organizer was a remarkable man
named Willi Muenzenberg, of whom more anon. Babette Gross, Muenzenberg's
widow, states in her biography of Muenzenberg that the campaign only
accounted for about 5% of the food which was sent to Russia; most of
it came from the United States under the auspicies of Herbert Hoover.
(Surrealism in history.)
Muenzenberg: anti-militarist, anarchist, socialist, communist, editor,
publisher, producer, activist, propagandist. Muenzenberg was, so far as
I can tell, one of the media greats of the 20th century and, because of
his peculiar history, not nearly as well known as he deserves. He pops
up in many of biographies of European left intellectuals; Arthur Koestler
worked for him in Paris, I believe, writing anti-fascist propaganda.
The copy of Gross' bio I found at the University of Oregon library is
sitting in my hotel room, so I can't give you chapter and verse on this,
but here's a few of his accomplishments that I remember: organizer of
the International Youth Brigades, the hunger campaign, the Western release
of *Battleship Potemkin*, publication and propangandizing of the common
version of the history of the Reichstag Fire, and the recruiting of the
International Brigades in the Spanish Civil War. He used a version of
the phrase "old enough to fight, old enough to vote" as a youth left
organizer in pre-WWI Germany; he may have coined it. (Gross gives a cite
but does not give him credit for coining the phrase.) Ultimately, his
body was found hanging from a tree in France months after he died.
It seems likely that Stalin had him killed.
Muenzenberg influenced art; he could hardly have done otherwise,
publishing and distributing so much of it. But Muezenberg was unusual
among the Communist publishers in having taste and talent--I think
Gross says that the International resented they way his projects
paid for themselves and theirs did not. :) The International itself
published much in the idiom invented, I believe, by Lenin, now called
politically correct. The Soviet writer's union, was very effective
at flattering non-Russian writers into writing supportive works, and
out-and-out subversion.
And, Muezenberg wasn't the only one--he was just the most successful.
There were a whole group of fascists, including the organizers of
the German-American Bund (a 30s Nazi subversive organization--I have
heard that Adolph Coors, Jr. was a member), there was the CIA, there
was Bertram Wolfe's (a lapsed Communist and later Reaganite) Voice of
America, and I don't know who-all else.
So there you have it--Patrick, this is partial answer to where the
anti-patriotism of the left came from; it had a 19th century history,
but Muenzenberg seems to have been the man who stamped it onto 20th
century leftism, with help from other Communist organizations.
I regret to say that the histories of this have not yet been written, at
least in English; most of the books I could find on this were right-wing
polemics, with a few reasonable books. For anyone who wishes to research
this, I advise great caution--the history of propganda is, naturally,
thick with propaganda. Yet such histories would be invaluable both for
simple understanding and for the study of what one might call political
memetics. From the viewpoint of our own little corner of literature, I
speculate--but speculate only!--that part of the reason for the rejection
of the fantastic in 20th century literature was the rejection of it as
impractical as political propaganda.
Randolph
Very short and incomplete bibliography:
Bellant, Russ, *The Coors Connection: How Coors Family Philanthropy
Undermines Democratic Pluralism*. Boston, MA : South End Press, c1991.
The view on the right.
Crossman, R. H. S. (Richard Howard Stafford), editor, *The God That
Failed*. New York : Harper & Row, 1949. Accounts of what it felt like
to be courted and sometimes seduced by the Communists by Louis Fischer,
André Gide (edited by E. Starkie), Arthur Koestler, Ignszio Silone,
Stephen Spender, and Richard Wright. Very much like cult conversion
stories in tone, but by some of the great writers of the period.
Gross, Babette, *Willi Münzenberg. Eine politische Biographie. Mit
einem Vorwort von Arthur Koestler* Stuttgart, Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt
[1967]. The German original (I haven't read it), with a biliography of
Muezenberg's own writings.
--, *Willi Münzenberg: A Political Biography*, transl. Marian Jackson.
[East Lansing] Michigan State University Press, 1974.
P Nielsen Hayden
Randolph Fritz <rand...@cyber-dyne.com> wrote:
>So there you have it--Patrick, this is partial answer to where the
>anti-patriotism of the left came from; it had a 19th century history,
>but Muenzenberg seems to have been the man who stamped it onto 20th
>century leftism, with help from other Communist organizations.
This is all entirely fascinating, but it still seems like a view from thirty
thousand feet up. I grew up among "leftists," and the only "anti-
patriotism" I recall was a dislike of the way the right habitually
wrapped itself in the flag, and of the tendency of (for instance) schools to
identify "patriotism" with, oh, supporting the war in Vietnam.
We were always clear about what real patriotism is and why it's valuable.
For instance, I was always taught to respect military people and the
sacrifices entailed in that choice. We were big on patriotic holidays like
the Fourth. One of the icons of my youth was Woody Guthrie. Where is this
vaunted "anti- patriotism" in his work? Did he simply miss the telegram
from Herr Muezenberg?
--
Patrick Nielsen Hayden : p...@panix.com : http://www.panix.com/~pnh
Laura Haywood-Cory
> (This, mind you, comes from a woman who regularly undergoes Brazilian bikini
> waxes. The Epilady is clearly a stfnal torture device.)
Even just reading about a Brazilian bikini wax makes me cringe. It's bad
enough plucking my eyebrows.
Vicki Rosenzweig
GMT:
>In article <3994F486...@my-deja.com>, John Kensmark wrote:
>>
>>I like a lot of O'Keefe's stuff, that I've seen. I also like a lot
>>of surrealism, and quite a bit of abstract sculpture. But most
>>abstract art I've seen hasn't seemed interesting, or very clever, or
>>like art. Oddly, making abstract art bigger or more interactive
>>often impresses me more. Not always, but often. I guess I'm a
>>little simple that way.
>>
>
>Scale is very important; it makes a big difference if you can walk
>into it or play with it.
>
>By the way, I have recently found out that 50s US abstract expressionism
>was promoted by...wait for it...the CIA. Really. I begin to suspect
>that part of the reason people felt so disconnected from art in the
>second half of the 20th century is that a lot of art was promoted for
>reasons that had very little to do with its actual artistic value. :(
>
I'd love to see the evidence for that.
--
Copyright 2000 Vicki Rosenzweig. Permission to insert links when
displaying is available for $100 per link. Use in this fashion
constitutes acceptance of these terms. v...@redbird.org
r.a.sf.f faq at http://www.redbird.org/rassef-faq.html
Doug Wickstrom
<r...@learnlink.emory.edu> excited the ether to say:
>Jordin Kare wrote:
>>
>> Now I'm trying to shake this image of punk engineers with black
>> leather pocket protectors. And Ohm's Law tattooed on their arms....
>
>I'm picturing a guy with a series of colored bands -- gold, silver,
>red, brown -- tatooed around his biceps. He has brass knuckles and a
>stilletto. He fights for The Resistance.
Well, he maybe fights in that capacity until he gets inducted
into the army.
Web designer and other computing geeks wanted,
Minneapolis, Minnesota. E-mail for details
on getting past the HR department.
Doug Wickstrom
<r...@learnlink.emory.edu> excited the ether to say:
>Very surrealistic, and I was immensely glad that they used O'Keefe's
>orchids for their inspiration, rather than her cattle skulls.
The skulls would have been ... squickfull.