ckk@cmu-cs-g.ARPA (Chris Koenigsberg) (05/28/85)
Well, Madonna is playing in Pittsburgh tonight and I wish I could go but
the tickets sold out for the Arena in a couple of hours. I don't
want to talk about the music, I am just glad that some women are
becoming mega-superstars on an equal footing with men. And I
loved the movie she made too.
The more successful role-models that young girls have while growing up,
the healthier their outlook on life will be, I think. And the more
informed choices they'll be able to make later on.
Chris Koenigsberg
ckk@cmu-cs-g.arpa, ckk@cmu-itc-linus.arpa
{ucbvax, rochester}!cmu-cs-pt!{cmu-cs-g, cmu-itc-linus}!ckk
Support N.O.W. and the Campaign to Save WOMEN'S Lives!arnold@ucsfcgl.UUCP (Ken Arnold%CGL) (05/30/85)
In article <273@cmu-cs-g.ARPA> ckk@cmu-cs-g.ARPA (Chris Koenigsberg) writes: >I am just glad that some women are >becoming mega-superstars on an equal footing with men... > >The more successful role-models that young girls have while growing up, >the healthier their outlook on life will be, I think. A woman who wears a belt-buckle that says "Boy Toy" and plays up on adolescent wet dreams to make a buck is hardly my idea of a role model I'd like MY daughter to emulate. I don't know about yours. Success is more than just money; I'd rather my daughter emulate Joan Baez or Ronnie Gilbert or Grace Slick (without the early drug dependency problems, thank you). Ken Arnold
jmsellens@watmath.UUCP (John M Sellens) (05/30/85)
In article <273@cmu-cs-g.ARPA> ckk@cmu-cs-g.ARPA (Chris Koenigsberg) writes: >I am just glad that some women are >becoming mega-superstars on an equal footing with men. > >The more successful role-models that young girls have while growing up, >the healthier their outlook on life will be, I think. And the more >informed choices they'll be able to make later on. Madonna? A role-model? She's a marketing gimmick, with all her peek-a-boo bras (I just said that for effect) and singing about "like a virgin" when she's writhing around on the floor. Madonna is not a person, therefore she can not be a role model. She is something that was created, either by her or someone else, to feel a perceived gap in the market. Her voice is okay, and some of the songs are pretty good pop songs, but a role model? (Earth to Chris: Is anyone home? Chris to Earth: Nope) (Sorry - cheap shot - couldn't resist :-) ) ( Now please be aware that I know nothing about the *real* Madonna, she could be a very intelligent and interesting person, or she could be a bimbo being manipulated by someone else. I'm referring to the media Madonna, not the Madonna that is a real person. ) John
rdz@ccice5.UUCP (Robert D. Zarcone) (05/30/85)
> Well, Madonna is playing in Pittsburgh tonight and I wish I could go but > the tickets sold out for the Arena in a couple of hours. I don't > want to talk about the music, I am just glad that some women are > becoming mega-superstars on an equal footing with men. And I > loved the movie she made too. > > The more successful role-models that young girls have while growing up, > the healthier their outlook on life will be, I think. And the more > informed choices they'll be able to make later on. > My only experience with Madonna is her videos (which, in my humble opinion, stink). I don't have a daughter, but if I did I don't think I would want her to have a "slut-like" role model. It's not her "wierdness" (I love Cyndi Lauper) but it's the blatent sexuallity. I thought the whole point of the "womens movement" was to get them off of their backs and into the board rooms? Teaching young women to be "sex-kittens" isn't going to do that. *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***
sigma@usl.UUCP (Spiros Triantafyllopoulos) (06/01/85)
In article <273@cmu-cs-g.ARPA> ckk@cmu-cs-g.ARPA (Chris Koenigsberg) writes: >Well, Madonna is playing in Pittsburgh tonight and ... >... >The more successful role-models that young girls have while growing up, >the healthier their outlook on life will be, I think. And the more >informed choices they'll be able to make later on. > >Chris Koenigsberg HA! Role Models? You assume that there are role models that are good to be followed? Like the young smiling yuppie types advertising detergents in the tube? I am ONLY 25, was raised with the role-types of the late 60's (everything in Greece is 10 years late until 1982, where we caught up :-)) and the great music of the 60's and early 70's. I did not get anyone's stereotype role, and I am glad I did not. Sheepish people turn my stomach even more than the promoters... How much of the stuff we see in net.women (rape, clothing, high-heels, sexism, etc) originate from trying to attach people to stereotypes? As far as the outlook is concerned, only excessive consumerism develops, NOTHING else. (except air-headness, of course....) Down with stereotypes! Spiros
hua@cmu-cs-edu1.ARPA (Ernest Hua) (06/01/85)
___________________________________________________________________________ > From: rdz@ccice5.UUCP (Robert D. Zarcone) > > My only experience with Madonna is her videos (which, in my humble opinion, > stink). I don't have a daughter, but if I did I don't think I would want > her to have a "slut-like" role model. It's not her "wierdness" (I love > Cyndi Lauper) but it's the blatent sexuallity. I thought the whole point > of the "womens movement" was to get them off of their backs and into the > board rooms? Teaching young women to be "sex-kittens" isn't going to do > that. The ideal thrust of the women's movement is to eliminate the social restrictions of a women in the traditional society. (Of course, I am not saying that it has turned out to be this way. I am just saying that the goal was supposed to be this.) If I have a daughter, I would not really care if she wanted to be a "sex-kitten". Your usage of the term seem to show some traditionalist views that you might hold; to the effect of "if you hate just being allowed to do this, then do that, but don't do the other". Women, simply by their natural physiology, tend to be physically weaker and less agile. (For example, their center of mass is lower.) I might restrict my daughter's activities if her actual physical abilities are not sufficient for whatever the activities call for. I cannot justify to myself restricting my daughter simply because she is female. Incidentally, Madonna's reputation largely rests upon her "sex-kitten"-style image. But, so do a lot of performers. I really do not see how you can single out Madonna for that. ___________________________________________________________________________ Live long and have sex-kittens! Keebler { hua@cmu-cs-gandalf.arpa }
jamcmullan@wateng.UUCP (Judy McMullan) (06/03/85)
--- >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!) --from the sssstickkky keyboard of JAM ...!{ihnp4|clyde|decvax}!watmath!wateng!jamcmullan
jimi@SCINEWS.UUCP (Jim Ingram/Todd Jones) (06/04/85)
> In article <273@cmu-cs-g.ARPA> ckk@cmu-cs-g.ARPA (Chris Koenigsberg) writes: > >I am just glad that some women are > >becoming mega-superstars on an equal footing with men... > > > >The more successful role-models that young girls have while growing up, > >the healthier their outlook on life will be, I think. > > A woman who wears a belt-buckle that says "Boy Toy" and plays up on > adolescent wet dreams to make a buck is hardly my idea of a role model > I'd like MY daughter to emulate. I don't know about yours. Success is > more than just money; I'd rather my daughter emulate Joan Baez or > Ronnie Gilbert or Grace Slick (without the early drug dependency problems, > thank you). > Ken Arnold Good point, Ken. My impression is that Madonna is *not at all* in charge of her career or her marketing scheme. Her popularity is the work of the (male-dominated) entertainment industry, that will dress someone up in a gorilla suit if it will sell records, posters, lunchboxes, etc... Madonna is a product of sexist imaginations. Do not give her any credit for her image. It wasn't her idea. Flame away, pseudo-feminists! -Todd Jones {decvax,akgua}!mcnc!rti-sel!scirtp!todd
rdz@ccice5.UUCP (Robert D. Zarcone) (06/05/85)
> > not really care if she wanted to be a "sex-kitten". Your usage of the > term seem to show some traditionalist views that you might hold; to the > effect of "if you hate just being allowed to do this, then do that, but > don't do the other". Women, simply by their natural physiology, tend I'm not sure I really understand what you mean by your quote, but I don't think "traditionalist views" have that much to do with my opinion. If someone writhes at my feet and makes sexual movements and gestures, and "speaks" (sings) sexual come-ons to me, I think I can assume that they are interested in sex with me (strippers aside). > for. I cannot justify to myself restricting my daughter simply because > she is female. I didn't say anything about restricting females. I said I would rather see my ficticious daughter becoming something because of her merits as a person, not because she can act like an easy mark. > > Incidentally, Madonna's reputation largely rests upon her "sex-kitten"-style > image. But, so do a lot of performers. I really do not see how you can > single out Madonna for that. I answered the original posting, which was about Madonna. I didn't "single her out". My views apply to others who would be the same way. *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***
todd@SCINEWS.UUCP (Todd Jones) (06/05/85)
> --- > > >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 ***
sean@ukma.UUCP (Sean Casey) (06/06/85)
I didn't see a Madonna video until I had heard her first couple
of hits, one of which was 'Borderline'. I like her songs, and now
that I've seen her videos, think she is cute. As for being "slut-
like" or "sex-kitten", those are subjective attitudes applied by peo-
ple influenced by the prevailing attitude of our society.
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.
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.
Good questions, which I am not about to try and answer. The best
advice I could give is to make sure that anyone at that stage of their
lives be properly educated about what they are considering getting
into. By the time they are that old, it is nearly impossible to stop
them, short of keeping them on a chain. In my opinion, the best thing
to do is keep them informed sufficiently so that they will make make
the best decisions on their own.
--
- Sean Casey UUCP: {cbosgd,anlams,hasmed}!ukma!sean
- Department of Mathematics ARPA: ukma!sean@ANL-MCS.ARPA
- University of Kentuckyfeatures@ihuxf.UUCP (M.A. Zeszutko) (06/10/85)
From R. Zarcone: > I thought the whole point > of the "womens movement" was to get them off of their backs and into the > board rooms? Teaching young women to be "sex-kittens" isn't going to do > that. The whole point of the women's movement is to allow the individual a free range of choices. If a woman wants to celebrate her sexuality (and remain in control of it, not becoming a "boy toy"), I see nothing wrong with that. Some women like to be homemakers. Fine for them. Some women find careers in business fulfilling. Great. At such a time when men and women in our world are truly equal (dream on), then each individual can find out what works best in her/his own life, and follow it. -- aMAZon @ AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL; ihnp4!ihuxf!features
robertp@weitek.UUCP (Robert Plamondon) (06/10/85)
> > In article <273@cmu-cs-g.ARPA> ckk@cmu-cs-g.ARPA (Chris Koenigsberg) writes: > > >>A woman [Madonna] who wears a belt-buckle that says "Boy Toy" and plays up on >>adolescent wet dreams to make a buck is hardly my idea of a role model >>I'd like MY daughter to emulate. I don't know about yours. Success is >>more than just money; I'd rather my daughter emulate Joan Baez or >>Ronnie Gilbert or Grace Slick (without the early drug dependency problems, >>thank you). >> Ken Arnold This could almost be a re-run of the criticism of Mae West in the 1930s. How nostalgic! -- -- Robert Plamondon {ucbvax!dual!turtlevax,ihnp4!resonex}!weitek!robertp
arnold@ucsfcgl.UUCP (Ken Arnold%CGL) (06/12/85)
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.
gregbo@houxm.UUCP (Greg Skinner) (06/16/85)
WPLJ in NYC recently did a survey of whether or not people felt that Madonna
was a bad influence of their lives or their children's lives. The results
were that about 90% of the people liked her music and didn't feel she was a
bad influence.
Me, I just like to listen to her songs. I've seen practically all of her
videos, and even though she is sexually suggestive in some of them, I just
focus on her music mostly.
--
It's like a jungle sometimes, it makes we wonder how I keep from goin' under.
Greg Skinner (gregbo)
{allegra,cbosgd,ihnp4}!houxm!gregbo
gregbo%houxm.uucp@harvard.arpabet@security.UUCP (Bevette E. Davis) (07/12/85)
>Ask any DJ! She's the most laughable thing on the play-list, but they >keep playing her songs because the radio-doc's say that they should >(market research). What is there to laugh at? Madonna is a very talented woman. If you don't want to see her rolling on the floor showing off her belly then don't watch her videos. If you don't like her music don't buy her records. They keep playing her songs because there are people out there that like them. ME for one. >Yeh, she's a role model - actually a roll model (the kind with perforations >every 4 inches or so..). And let's not forget what she's done for >business at the various Thrift Shops around the country. >Thanks to Madonna, trash is finally getting to be vogue! Look at Cyndi Lauper! She wears more trash than anybody. I don't know which is worst her hairdos or her outfits. Don't get me wrong, I like Cyndi just as much as I like Madonna. The point is, Madonna is a very successful and indendent woman who's on her way to the TOP.
gnome@olivee.UUCP (Gary Traveis) (07/15/85)
> >Ask any DJ! She's the most laughable thing on the play-list, but they > If you don't want to see her rolling on the floor showing off her belly then > don't watch her videos. If you don't like her music don't buy her records. After the first time I saw them, I don't. > > They keep playing her songs because there are people out there that like them. > ME for one. > > >Thanks to Madonna, trash is finally getting to be vogue! > > Look at Cyndi Lauper! She wears more trash than anybody. I don't know > which is worst her hairdos or her outfits. Don't get me wrong, I like Cyndi > just as much as I like Madonna. The point is, Madonna is a very successful > and indendent woman who's on her way to the TOP. She's on her way to the top, no matter what it takes... great. Regarding Cyndi Lauper, I don't mind her stuff as much (after all she did do the ol' She Bop!) -- I don't like all of this Rock & Wrestling hype that she bought into... But that's because of my oppinion of "Pro Wrestling". As for the eyesore factor, you won't get any argument from me on that one! It does, however get the point across (She's so unusual)! What statement does Madonna's clothes symbolize? Boy toy! Since this is net.women, ask NOW (National Org. of Women) which they'd prefer as a role model, Madonna or Lauper. Gary
csdf@mit-vax.UUCP (Charles Forsythe) (07/15/85)
In article <923@security.UUCP> bet@security.UUCP (Bevette E. Davis) writes: >just as much as I like Madonna. The point is, Madonna is a very successful >and indendent woman who's on her way to the TOP. ...by subscribing to an image that society eats up. She represents the "sex for fun, power and profit" woman. The idea that a woman must use her body in order to sell any other talents she has disgusts me. The fact that this image is being glorified and copied in our society sickens me even more. I suppose if women want to behave that way, it's their problem. Did you wear a bikini to your job interview, Bevette? I don't think so, but Madonna's image suggests that it is a perfectly valid way of securing a job. See you at the TOP. -- Charles Forsythe CSDF@MIT-VAX "The Church of Fred has yet to come under attack. No one knows about it." -Rev. Wang Zeep
cat@tommif.UUCP (Catherine Mikkelsen) (07/17/85)
In article <418@olivee.UUCP>, gnome@olivee.UUCP (Gary Traveis) writes: > > Since this is net.women, ask NOW (National Org. of Women) > which they'd prefer as a role model, Madonna or Lauper. > > Gary I don't know about NOW (they seem much too involved nowadays in issues like nuclear energy to deal with *yawn* female role models (:-)) but I almost cancelled my (tenuous) subscription to MS magazine after Lauper was featured -- next to some ten-year-old kid -- as one of America's *best* (or one of those labels) women. Oy vey!! I mean, Geez. If I want to select some pop singer as a hot sh*t feminist figure, howzabout Martha Johnson (muffins fame)? Or Aretha?? Or even Tina Turner?! My personal favorite is Joplin, but she's not exactly current... AND BEFORE I get told to move this discussion to net.music (aaargh!! not Kate Bush!!!), back to the original topic: How many women out there are happy with: 1) NOW's current policies. 2) MS Magazine. I'm about ready to send my NOW dues money straight to Planned Parenthood, cancel my MS subscription, and stick to Car and Driver and the ACLU news. Suggestions?? Catherine Mikkelsen decwrl!greipa!tommif!cat
demillo@uwmacc.UUCP (Rob DeMillo) (07/20/85)
> > Look at Cyndi Lauper! She wears more trash than anybody. I don't know > which is worst her hairdos or her outfits. Don't get me wrong, I like Cyndi > just as much as I like Madonna. The point is, Madonna is a very successful > and indendent woman who's on her way to the TOP. Sorry, I don't have the annontation for the person who made the above posting. I do NOT intend this in anyway to be a slur on someone's musical tastes, but... ...there has been an article or two recently on the subject of making a superstar; an article that I do not totally disagree with. The thesis of the article is that Madonna, her music, and her image only exist because MTV wanted them to exist. They mass-hyped the airwaves with Madonna video, made the droges of MTV watchers think she was really neat, and a star is born. (Think about it, which came first, Madonna music on the airwaves, or Madonna images on MTV...) It's not so unusual a concept, nor an untried one. (One of the American TV Networks tried the very same thing in the 60's to compete with teh Beatles: it was called the Monkeys. The success was only marginal, but the principle is the same: don't have a star you can cash in on? Simple: make one.) Just a thought... -- --- Rob DeMillo Madison Academic Computer Center ...seismo!uwvax!uwmacc!demillo / =|-- = \ = [][][] "...I don't know what this thing does, but it's pointing in your direction."
nessus@mit-eddie.UUCP (Doug Alan) (08/18/85)
> From Rob Rosen > If you really want to hurt Madonna's career, just ignore her. Get a > couple million other people to ignore her, and watch her disappear. > If you really consider Madonna's act to be a problem, relish in the > fact that here is one of the very few problems that will go away if > you simply ignore it. I've tried to do that for network television for years and years. But it hasn't worked -- it's still there! And what about when Madonna disappears? She'll probably be replaced by something just as bad. It's always like that. "I hold the line -- The line of strength that pulls me through the fear" Doug Alan nessus@mit-eddie.UUCP (or ARPA)