bessie@moo.cow.com (Red Meat) (06/08/91)
Greetings. I'm starting at the basic level, for the benefit of those folks who haven't wasted a lot of time reading through the entire three feet of system manuals. Try this ftp -n merlin.cs.purdue.edu user anonymous root@merlin.cs.purdue.edu cd pub/mac/tmp binary prompt mget * Hope you're disk doesn't get full. In summary: there are a lot of pornographic pictures available to anyone on the DARPA Internet who can run the "ftp" program. What does this mean? Your tax dollars are being used to transfer around pictures of women having sex with animals! Your tax dollars are bing used for transporting bondage and domination pitcures of women! I don't know about you, but I know that I don't like to see that kind of thing in the computer room when I walk in. the 2 single worst sites are: l.cc.purdue.edu shambhala.berkeley.edu /tmp/.jrs (Beastiality) Then a host of fun sites: quiche.cs.mcgill.edu uwm.edu (128.89.7.2) /tmp merlin.cs.purdue.edu /pub/mac/tmp watnow.waterloo.edu zurich.ai.mit.edu This stuff is disgusting.
mjm@ahimsa.intel.com (Marjorie Panditji) (06/11/91)
Regarding the sexually explicit or nude pictures available for viewing on computers, I do believe that such pictures, whether of men or women (or assorted barnyard animals) are not appropriate for work. In fact, these pictures probably fall under the "hostile environment" category of sexual harassment. If a person has to work in an environment which displays this type of picture, I believe they have grounds for complaint and even legal action if nothing is done after they complain. I don't know what is considered the work environment, e.g., pictures inside someone's office vs. those displayed in a common work area. However, I believe that if you have to go into a person's office in order to do your job then their office is considered part of your work environment. Getting back to the gifs, if they are displayed in some area you have to work in, or are available from computer owned by your company, I think that would count as hostile environment. Note that you can complain about sexual harassment whether you are male or female. Check out the March 18, 1991 issue of BusinessWeek, Legal Affairs column, for an interesting article about sexual harassment in the workplace. Now for a little sarcasm: C'mon, boys, if you really want to jack-off at work, why not get something with a little better resolution than your computer screen? There are plenty of slick, glossy mags you can buy at adult bookstores that would be more of a turn-on. You could keep them in your desk, or take them to the men's room for more privacy (hard to drag your computer with you into the men's room). That is, if you simply can't survive for 8 or 9 hours without it (I mean, otherwise, you could just wait until you got home, right?). On a more serious and curious note: Does anyone know why people display these pictures at the office? I have seen a few women displaying pictures, too, so it is not only men who do this (although men seem to be in the majority and their pictures seem to be more, uh, graphic). I don't want to discuss whether it is morally "right" or "wrong" (although there may be legal consequences, as I mentioned above, if it is perceived as sexual harassment). I just don't understand the benefit. It would seem to be more enjoyable, and would lead to more productive work, to get your turn-ons in private. Note that I am not asking why people enjoy these pictures, I am asking why they enjoy them *at work*. On the other hand, the motive may be something else. For example, men may do it to intimidate women (perhaps to claim their personal territory?), and women may do it as "revenge" or to show men how it feels to be displayed (or even for the same reasons as men, I don't know). Perhaps these pictures are displayed for "artistic" reasons? :-) I'm making no claim to know the reasons. I'm curious what others think. Any thoughts on this? Any studies on pin-ups in the workplace? -- Marjorie Panditji mjm@ahimsa.intel.com -or- uunet!intelhf!ahimsa!mjm Disclaimer: I do not speak for Intel and Intel doesn't speak for me.
mjm@ahimsa.intel.com (Marjorie Panditji) (06/11/91)
(oops--last article was sent before I was finished editing it) I meant to point out at the start of my article that I'm not sure whether the first article was a joke or not (with an address like bessie@cow.moo or something like that?). However, there were some serious followup articles in soc.women. Also, the comment about not liking to see them in the office hit home to me since I know that there are laws against sexual harassment in the workplace. The point about displaying them in an office environment or using company resources to store them was the point I was addressing. I hope that was clear from the article. -- Marjorie Panditji, Intel Corporation mjm@ahimsa.intel.com -or- uunet!intelhf!ahimsa!mjm Disclaimer: I do not speak for Intel and Intel doesn't speak for me.
falk@peregrine.eng.sun.COM (Ed Falk) (06/12/91)
In article <1991Jun11.155757.17816@aero.org> mjm@ahimsa.intel.com (Marjorie Panditji) writes: >... Getting back to the gifs, if >they are displayed in some area you have to work in, or are available >from computer owned by your company, I think that would count as hostile >environment. If they're where you are likely to be faced with them, like a pinup calendar on a wall, then yes, I could easily see someone being bothered. I disagree that their mere availability harms anybody any more than the knowledge that some bookstore somewhere has pornography on the shelves. I am reminded of Robert Bork's position on birth control. He argued that since some people were offended by the idea that someone somewhere was using birth control, the state had a right to ban its use. >On the other hand, the motive may be something else. For example, men >may do it to intimidate women (perhaps to claim their personal >territory?), I think you're reaching here. I think men just like to look at women. I'd say that men are more visually oriented than women (who instead prefer to read romance novels), but that's likely to attract flames from women who *are* visually oriented. >may do it as "revenge" or to show men how it feels to be displayed (or >even for the same reasons as men, I don't know). Perhaps these >pictures are displayed for "artistic" reasons? :-) I think you're reaching here too, although I'll agree that I've rarely seen women who kept male pin-ups around to just plain look at. Usually it's a desire for parity. Just today I was told by a woman friend "Well, if there's pictures of naked women on that machine, I hope there's an equal number of naked men too!" The only pinup picture I ever personally scanned into a computer was a Playgirl centerfold which I scanned in at the request of an admin who wanted to make it the background screen on one of her co-worker's workstations. >Any thoughts on this? Any studies on pin-ups in the workplace? Actually, the only kind of workplace I've ever seen that has a lot of pinups are places like auto repair shops. Here at Sun it's pretty rare -- usually confined to calendars in loading docks or the occasional woman-in-bathing suit screen background. I don't know how long the admin's friend mentioned above kept her Playgirl background, but I'm told she was pleased with it. As for me, the only background images I ever use are satelite pictures. -ed falk, sun microsystems sun!falk, falk@sun.com In the future, somebody will quote Andy Warhol every 15 minutes.
bcp@CS.CMU.EDU (Benjamin Pierce) (06/12/91)
| Does anyone know why people display these pictures at the office? I | have seen a few women displaying pictures, too, so it is not only men | who do this (although men seem to be in the majority and their | pictures seem to be more, uh, graphic). I don't want to discuss | whether it is morally "right" or "wrong" (although there may be legal | consequences, as I mentioned above, if it is perceived as sexual | harassment). I just don't understand the benefit. It would seem to | be more enjoyable, and would lead to more productive work, to get your | turn-ons in private. Note that I am not asking why people enjoy these | pictures, I am asking why they enjoy them *at work*. | | On the other hand, the motive may be something else. For example, men | may do it to intimidate women (perhaps to claim their personal | territory?), and women may do it as "revenge" or to show men how it | feels to be displayed (or even for the same reasons as men, I don't | know). Perhaps these pictures are displayed for "artistic" reasons? My guess is that they're mostly for effect on folks passing through the office... not necessarily to intimidate, but to tell passersby something about the person that works there -- that he's a certain kind of cool, that he lives fast and loose, gets into bucking square company/university policy, or whatever. Two prominient occupants of my bookshelves are a bright yellow teddy bear and two long rows of math books with obscure-sounding titles. The intention behind this display doesn't seem much different, except that I'm working to present a different picture than the guy with the pinup. Benjamin Pierce
dan@cubmol.bio.columbia.EDU (Daniel Zabetakis) (06/13/91)
In article <1991Jun11.155757.17816@aero.org> mjm@ahimsa.intel.com (Marjorie Panditji) writes: > > >On a more serious and curious note: > >Does anyone know why people display these pictures at the office? It may be because the workplace is the only place they have access to these things. I'm a grad student, and my only access to computers is the various public areas in my department. I agree that it is very bad to display these pictures in an area where others are expected to work. I find that I have no trouble viewing them at my convienince without letting anyone else see them. If you see them displayed, it's because someone wants you to see it. Of course, my immediate coworkers have all seen many of these pictures. That would be six women and two men. They all showed a natural curiosity when they heard that such things existed. In fact, one of them who hadn't seen any before came to me yesterday while I was working on the computer and said "I want to see your pornography". Fine. No, I do not jerk off at the office. I can't say for sure why people want computer images like this. Of course, on an iris the resolution can be quite good. And as I always say: pornography expands to fill the space alloted for everything else. DanZ
flaps@dgp.toronto.EDU (Alan J Rosenthal) (06/14/91)
mjm@ahimsa.intel.com (Marjorie Panditji) writes: >Does anyone know why people display these pictures at the office? I can speak to this as a man who has been approached by men attempting to share pictures. I think that it's mostly "male bonding".. Women are supposed to be disgusted at these pictures and men are supposed to leer cooperatively. Men point them out to other men and nudge them and try to get the other men to leer, thus mutually re-affirming their manliness and non-homosexuality. >men may do it to intimidate women (perhaps to claim their personal >territory?) There is certainly also something to this. Ed Falk's posting about the locations of posted pictures was interesting. A small group of engineers I know used to contain one (1) woman. When she moved on to another job, the pictures went up. It looked as if the remaining people wanted to guard against the future hiring of more women, but I don't know the real motive. >and women may do it as "revenge" or to show men how it feels to be >displayed Men may orchestrate women's displaying of pictures of men too. One of the gimmicks of a completely awful and right-wing Toronto newspaper is to display a colour photograph of a scantily-dressed woman each day on page three. Women complaining about this are referred to the black&white male equivalent on a page numbering in the 100s. ajr
farmerl@handel.cs.colostate.EDU (lisa ann farmer) (06/16/91)
>| turn-ons in private. Note that I am not asking why people enjoy these >| pictures, I am asking why they enjoy them *at work*. >| >| On the other hand, the motive may be something else. For example, men >| may do it to intimidate women (perhaps to claim their personal >| territory?), and women may do it as "revenge" or to show men how it >| feels to be displayed (or even for the same reasons as men, I don't >| know). Perhaps these pictures are displayed for "artistic" reasons? It may not be the motive but when you are in a "work" situation those GIF's are intimidating to me. It especially makes me tense at night in the lab (I am a student) when I know I will have to walk out to my car or bike alone. If I think someone has those GIF files displayed I will not ask for help from them. This happened while I was working with a partner on a group project - someone sent a GIF to his screen and this embarrassed both of us. When someone sent one to my screen I was pissed off, enough so that I wrote a letter to the sys admin asking that they do something about it. I have made the point to many people since then that people would not bring in Playboy or Hustler to the lab so why is it appropriate to display those same pictures on a computer screen. The part about women doing it as "revenge". When I first brought this up to a friend, he told me to get some male pictures and send them to the people that were sending them to mine. This doesn't solve the problem in my eyes - it just says that if you can do it so can I. I think it is rude anyways to be sending pictures to others screens. Lisa farmerl@handel.cs.colostate.edu "If people want to make war they should make a colour war and paint each other's cities up in the night in pinks and greens." Yoko Ono (_Louder than Words_)
U23700%uicvm.uic.edu@ohstvma.acs.ohio-state.EDU (06/18/91)
I agree with one of the ideas expressed, that society oppresses a
healthy, shameless enjoyment of sexuality and erotica. At least, I
certainly find that few women are vocally direct about their appreci-
ation of sex, sexuality, erotica, and the differences between the
genders. If you are a woman -- as I am -- and you work with men -- as
I do -- what you wear, what you say and what you use to decorate your
work space do not just *define your personality*, they also determine
or otherwise influence *what will be done to you*, or *how you will be
treated*. Without making any judgement calls about it, I feel that this
is a fact which some men may overlook. For example, because I work with
men, and because I (perhaps naively) thought that I could be honest and
direct about my appreciation of sex and men (as humans and potential
sex partners), I am included in conversations which I would rather not
hear, and my personal private activities have been inquired about, as
well as alluded to in double-entendres. I don't like this. This did
not change when my boyfriend and I -- who work together with the others
-- went "public" about our relationship. (He, by the way, was not one
of the few who made thinly disguised passes at me by way of double-
entendre). We both find it a bit difficult to deal with, as he gives
me very much freedom to lead my own life, have my own opinions, and
speak my mind.
In fact, a lot of sexual banter goes on in my work environment. The
kind there is the most of -- this may be surprising, it certainly was
to me -- is mock-homosexual banter between *men*. Say we are ordering
lunch out, and my boyfriend orders a jumbo hotdog. Lots of ribbing will
then follow, from his fellow male coworkers: "Ooooh, John, you love that
jumbo *meat*, don't you?" someone will tease, and then my boyfriend will
answer in the same vein: "Ooh, yeth, Jim, and yourth ith the betht!" Now,
apparently, this is perfectly normal (I mean, it's been going on ever since
I started, and I've been here now almost 3 years, and only been his girl-
friend for 1 and 1/2). It goes on between the other guys, too. Now, I
have a wacked out sense of humor. But it just never occurs to me to say
something to a man, in a work situation, about what he may or may not
be endowed with or does in private. These things have been said to me.
(I have a fairly large breast size). I don't know exactly how to respond
to these things, except to say, "I don't think that's relevant" or "That
is not a subject for discussion", and wind up looking/sounding like a
real killjoy, or stick in the mud, or whatever -- basically killing the
light-hearted but overtly sexual bantering.
What causes a problem, too, is the fact that my boyfriend would like
to stand up for me occasionally, and tell whoever it is that he shouldn't
be verbally bugging me about some things (I guess in a protective boyfriend
way), but he often hesitates, to let me fight my own battles whenever I
can. Usually I do, but sometimes I am so thrown for a loop, that I am
speechless, or hurriedly change the subject. It seems that by having a
beer with the boys after work, and making it generally known that I am
not disgusted by talk of sex, gender, sexuality, erotica, the *guys* have
decided that I *want* to hear about these things, right in the middle of
a work situation. Obviously, there's something wrong with the equation
there. Because I am not opposed to other people or myself enjoying erotica
does not mean I want to talk about it. Especially not in a work situation.
I *do* find it distracting, not because I get so excited or anything like
that, but because I feel degraded sometimes when allusions are made about
how I'll never need breast augmentation. Not because I feel my breasts are
too big, or ugly, or anything, but because the minute *anyone* says anything
about that, all eyes are on my breasts -- and then, looking everywhere but
me. It makes me the center of attention not as a human, not as a conversa-
tionalist, not as an employee, but as a pair of tits. I would never do or
say something to any man, in a work environment with many women in it, to
make everyone's eyes zoom in on his clothed genitals, deliberately inviting
speculation about them and talking about it. I don't think that would be
a very nice thing to do.
Another example: once, when eating lunch, one guy (the one who most
often says these types of things) Rob had accidentally started eating
my boyfriend's meatball sandwich (which had peppers, or no peppers, or
something different from Rob's meatball sandwich). My boyfriend came into
the room where we were all lunching together, rummaged through the unclaimed
food, and found Rob's sandwich, and looked at the one Rob was eating, and
said "Hey, you're eating my meatballs!" To which Rob replied "No I'm not,
that's Liz' job!", smiling. I was sitting there eating at the time. I
must have looked hurt, because he apologized, but I just had no idea how
to respond to that. I mean, I don't feel degraded when I do have oral sex
with my boyfriend, but that doesn't mean I want to talk about it with a
bunch of *men* who I don't really know personally, or have it talked about
as if I'm not there, even when I am. That *is* degrading. But I also don't
want it to seem like I think the idea is disgusting or repellant, because
I don't! How can I affirm that I find a wide variety of human sexual behavior
to be fun and enjoyable, as opposed to shameful, dirty, sinful, immoral, etc.,
without becoming an object? I feel that I should make it (somewhat) known
that not all women view enjoyment of erotica or pornography as a morally
inferior thing to do. I think there are way too many "morally superior"
women out there, as it is, helping to oppress women like Madonna.
This is why, even though I like some erotica, I would not like display
GIFs of men on my screen. It would be taken less, I think, as an aspect
of my personality than it would be taken as a symbol of nymphomania, or
open invitation for propositions. It, quite simply, would denote what can
and can't be done to me and said to me. Some men that I work with don't
seem to think that way, but the fact that some do means to me that I
shouldn't risk it. Consequently, I am less open about my affirmation of
human sexuality than I used to be. And my boyfriend and I do look at
erotic GIFs together in the workplace -- *after* work, and when we are
alone.
Officially, our workplace policy is that display of sexual material
in the work place constitutes sexual harassment. Because of this, there
has only been one incident where I was working with a guy who happened
to be looking at erotic GIFs. I didn't run and tell my supervisor, but
she found out by catching him in the act, and he did get chewed out. I
guess it's only this one guy who really does all this stuff, and I don't
even think it's because he's an ass -- he's not a jerk in any other way,
and I think he probably has a good heart. I don't want to oppress any-
body, myself. But it's because of unthinking behavior like his, and the
possibility of getting embroiled in something even more difficult and
possibly damaging, that I for one am glad that there is legislation of
this kind. One person who responded on this thread said that she didn't
want to display male GIFs in "revenge" because then she'd be doing just
what they were doing. In actuality, she (or I) wouldn't be doing what they
(men) are doing. Because if men display stuff like this in a work environ-
ment where it is "ok" to do so, those men are making a statement about
how they feel, *not* about how they expect to be treated.
Also, I have no problem with photos or GIFs of nudes (male or female)
but doesn't it depend where you draw the line? I.e. what if the nudity
of a woman includes her genitalia in the photograph? I mean, if someone
has a male nude, one can see his genitals just fine (excpet for fig leaves,
I guess). Is a crotch shot of a woman automatically more "erotic" or "X-
rated" because a part is exposed which is normally hidden when standing,
or sitting? What about a male nude with an erection? Is that automatically
more "erotic" or "pornographic"? And what about actions? Is a photograph
of a sexual act automatically "erotic" instead of being just nude? (For
example, a male nude holding his own erection, a female nude with her
hand(s) on her own genitals or breasts). These are all things I'm trying
to puzzle out, on my own, about how I feel about erotica and pornography.
I know that there is a general assumption among many feminists that
pornography humiliates and degrades. I am not sure how I feel about it
myself. If I enjoy it, does that mean I am buying into the degradation
of women? If I am not disgusted by it, should I be? This is all so
confusing!fap@crosfield.co.UK (felix power) (06/19/91)
>>and women may do it as "revenge" or to show men how it feels to be >>displayed > This reminds me of my last office, where there were a lot of images of women around the place. Telling people they made me feel uncomfortable and that I`d rather they weren`t there did no good at all. (Interestingly at least one older woman who'd`ve mortally offending if you'd have said you thought she was gay used to have them up too.) But as soon as I chopped up "Playgirl" and pinned a couple of pics on my wall they all came down, never to reappear! Felix (By the way I'm female even if I am called Felix!)
nanook@eskimo.celestial.com (Robert Dinse) (06/20/91)
In article <14952@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>, falk@peregrine.eng.sun.COM (Ed Falk) writes: > In article <1991Jun11.155757.17816@aero.org> mjm@ahimsa.intel.com (Marjorie Panditji) writes: > >On the other hand, the motive may be something else. For example, men > >may do it to intimidate women (perhaps to claim their personal > >territory?), > > I think you're reaching here. I think men just like to look at women. > I'd say that men are more visually oriented than women (who instead > prefer to read romance novels), but that's likely to attract flames > from women who *are* visually oriented. I have to agree with this. I like to look at women, I am certainly not interested in intimidating anyone. The company I work for, US West, though would consider it inappropriate so I have a nice sterile (ie, devoid of any hint of humanity) work position which I sincerely dislike. > >may do it as "revenge" or to show men how it feels to be displayed (or > >even for the same reasons as men, I don't know). Perhaps these > >pictures are displayed for "artistic" reasons? :-) > I think you're reaching here too, although I'll agree that I've rarely > seen women who kept male pin-ups around to just plain look at. There are a number of women where I work that do, funny thing if we >men< did it, it would be "non-pluralistic", and we'd be forced to remove said offending material, but it's ok for women. Typical double-standard we are expected to live with. Personally, I don't find it offensive (as a male) or intimidating, but I don't view it the same as women seem to view pin-ups. Women I have talked to about the subject seem to indicate that they feel it's an indication on the part of men that they are expected to look like that and if they can't live up to those expectations then they aren't worthwhile human beings. I do not feel the same way about male pin-ups, Ie, I, as a male, don't feel any obligation to "live-up" to that standard, I understand that it's unrealistic to expect the entire population to look like a movie star/model/hunk. What I don't understand (and I'd love to here some feminine insite on this one) is why women feel this way? > Usually it's a desire for parity. Just today I was told by a woman > friend "Well, if there's pictures of naked women on that machine, I > hope there's an equal number of naked men too!" This isn't the case where I work, we have a double standard whereby it's ok for women and not for men to put up pin-ups. I'd be happy to have parity, but if I bitched about the existing situation at most it would get the women's pin-up's removed and I have no desire to spoil someone elses environment even though I can't have mine the way I might like to have it. I keep hoping that eventually they'll allow telecommuniting and then I can have it any way I please! nanook@eskimo.celestial.com