nessus@mit-eddie.UUCP (Doug Alan) (07/22/85)
> From: seb@mtgzz.UUCP (s.e.badian) > I think Madonna has a great deal going. She knows exactly how to get > everyone hot and spend money on her albums and concerts. No one would argue that she's raking in the dough. But by this argument, the Mafia has a great deal going too. I wouldn't do what Madonna is doing no matter how wealthy it would make me! > I've heard Madonna give interviews and she's no gum-chewing, "boy > toy" idiot. She has a gimmick and she's playing it to the hilt. We should all have the highest respect for those who find a gimmick and play it to the hilt, shouldn't we? This sort of stuff is great for society! Right! > She plays on sexuality. She plays on the fact that sex is still taboo. And thus perpetuating that sex is taboo and all the unhealthy hang-ups about sex people have. This is good? > She represents raw sexuality. She picks no bones about it. She represents fetishistic sexuality, rather than natural healthy sexuality. > What does her appeal say about teenagers? That they're being imprinted with an unhealthy and undesirable view of sex. > And there is no denying that both Jackson and Madonna have strong > images, images specially crafted to appeal to today's teenagers raised > on MTV. These people are in it to make money, not corrupt our nation's > youth. It's amazing how much flak they generate. That's right! Music should be a calculated product. Not an art form! > And besides, I don't really care a heck of a lot if Madonna's pictures > got into Playboy and Penthouse. There's nothing wrong with nudity. One can present a healthy and natural image with one's cloths on or off. And one can present an unhealthy, fetishistic image with one's clothes on or off. Madonna does the latter with her clothes on and (I presume) with her clothes off. > I don't think she's a bad role model for young women. She's > independent, she knows what she wants and knows how to get it. Perfect for the yuppie culture, huh? Who cares about integrity? > She's not the typical sex toy since she knows what she's doing and is > controling her life by playing off the weakness men have for her. How beneficial a role model! Just what we need! A whole generation of manipulative bitches/bastards! > I'm really quite sick of the stink over Madonna. I'm really quite sick of Madonna, and hope she soon fades into the obscurity she so richly deserves. > I'm quite sick about how people can draw some pretty nasty conclusions > about a woman's soul based on a few pictures in some lousy magazine. My conclusions about Madonna were formed long before this stink about nude pictures. And if anything, they represent the very least of her faults. "Manipulation, the danger signs" Doug Alan nessus@mit-eddie.UUCP (or ARPA)
john@moncol.UUCP (John Ruschmeyer) (07/25/85)
]From: nessus@mit-eddie.UUCP (Doug Alan) ]Message-ID: <4757@mit-eddie.UUCP> ]Organization: MIT, Cambridge, MA ] ]> From: seb@mtgzz.UUCP (s.e.badian) ] ]> And besides, I don't really care a heck of a lot if Madonna's pictures ]> got into Playboy and Penthouse. ] ]There's nothing wrong with nudity. One can present a healthy and ]natural image with one's cloths on or off. And one can present an ]unhealthy, fetishistic image with one's clothes on or off. Madonna does ]the latter with her clothes on and (I presume) with her clothes off. Oddly enough, the nude photos in both Playboy and Penthouse are extremely tame. Unlike the Vanessa Williams pictorials which had some shock value, the Madonna photos seem little more than classic, b&w, photographic nudes. You could probably find stronger images in the art section of your local B.Dalton Bookseller or at a museum. Despite all the hype, there are no crotch shots, sexual devices, etc. Actually, if you were looking for "bad" images, the only ones I could see were some concert photos at the beginning of the Penthouse pictorial. The real pity about the nudes is why she did them in the first place- she needed the money! It seems that at the time all her assets were tied up in survival. (You know, food, shelter, etc.) On the other hand, I don't think that she needs to have any shame about this part of her past. -- Name: John Ruschmeyer US Mail: Monmouth College, W. Long Branch, NJ 07764 Phone: (201) 222-6600 x366 UUCP: ...!vax135!petsd!moncol!john ...!princeton!moncol!john ...!pesnta!moncol!john Silly quote: Little boy, I don't care if your dog can talk. Please tell him this is a TARDIS, not a "Way-Back Machine".