To the Daily:
Underlying Lara Hamza's ("Social norms to blame for objectification of women," 4/2/97) response to my arguments about pornography ("Anti-Playboy letters make questionable assumptions," 3/31/97), is a strong assumption: "There is nothing questionable about the fact that even today, women are not taken as seriously as men and they still don't have the power men so wrongly abuse - and this is largely due to the harmful effects of pornography which eroticizes keeping women subordinate to men."
While few would question that women are not taken as seriously as men in today's society, can we really attribute sexism in our culture to pornography? Can we really say that the power imbalances and injustices that exist in our society are "largely " due to pornography? And can we hope, as implied by Hamza's argument, that the elimination of pornography will reduce the amount of sexism in our culture?
Sexism is endemic in our culture, and arises from a number of places. Some of these include the wide matrix of educational structures, both formal and informal, that spread folk notions and myths about the superiority of men over women. People are t aught, in their day-to-day experiences, to believe as "common sense" that women are not as rational as men, not as good at science or logic, that they are "naturally" supposed to be primarily caregivers for children, and so on.
With these other beliefs in place, is it any surprise that some men react to pornography the way they do? No - but the problem isn't in the pornography itself, but the pre-existing ideas people take to it.
To say that people should not be allowed to display anything that they are proud of - be it physical, social or intellectual - is merely reactionary conservativism. It is saying, "What I want to flaunt about myself is better than what you want to fl aunt about yourself." To say that pornography involving women contributes to "the objectification of all women" is to speak to a problem that is not inherent in pornography itself. If you want to correct the problem, attack it at its heart - the edu cational systems and widespread cultural beliefs about the inferiority of women. Attacking the institution of pornography is simply an excuse for prudery.
Greg Stevens
Rackham
I think that the anti-Playboy warriors out there need to help me out on a question that's been bugging me: Why should I not be able to enjoy whatever it is that I might experience by viewing a naked woman's body? Why should I not have the option to choose if I want to thumb through a Playboy for its pictures of women, or articles on health, or saucy political commentary? Is it because you are offended by the content of the magazine? Or because you feel hurt by the e xplicit crimes committed by Playboy? Does it make you uncomfortable to know that men look at the "objects" on those airbrushed pages of a men's publication just for their leisurely arousal? Since when do any of these public voicings of concer n for the good of our society stand as a basis for discontinuation of any publication? We're not talking about near-universal evil or gutwrenching sleaze like child porn or something.
At this point many are angrily whispering out the corner of their mouths, "We're not saying Playboy should be banned, we're just speaking out against the evils and societal degradation it promulgates."
To this I say, "Great!" I agree with half the things you say. Just come up with a more stable and less humane and more constitutional argument for why Playboy is bad.
Paul Bhasin
School of Music
As an LSA student, I applauded Miller's rallying against a similar attitude toward a liberal arts education in a previous column. Yet it now seems to me that this live-and-let-live attitude was nothing more than convenient to that particular argume nt. You're absolutely right, James. Bullshit is bullshit. And so is your reactionary attitude about "new" music, especially when your "long and distinguished tradition" isn't even long at all. Please get some perspective.
By the way, Eric Clapton recently released a techno album. It looks like Miller will have to find a replacement for those Cream records when he wants to hide under his bed.
Warren Lapham
LSA senior
Obviously, Schimpf and I have very different views of feminism. This is perfectly acceptable, because even two self-identified feminists will have differing views of the movement. However, Schimpf's column only proves her ability to uncritically and unquestioningly accept mainstream media's traditionally negative stereotype of feminism. Oddly enough, Schimpf herself even realizes that the mainstream view of feminism is only a label that has been attached to the movement. What she fails to reco gnize is that this label has been created and propagated by those who will most benefit from feminism's failure. As women gain power in this society (however tenuous those gains often are) men in turn are forced to relinquish some of theirs. The ma instream political and cultural establishment, as well as the conservative right, have a lot to gain by discrediting the feminist movement and its many accomplishments. Schimpf plays right into their hands.
Schimpf asserts that real women (not feminists) are now "ready to be successful based on brilliance and creativity, not simply because they are women" and that "the playing field has changed since the feminist movement launched in the '60s." Not onl y does Schimpf ignorantly fail to recognize that the feminist movement is several hundred years old, but she completely ignores the fact that the feminist movements brought about the very changes about which she writes. Schimpf's argument is bafflin g because she argues that the feminist movement should be about what it is already about. Feminists work every day to improve the cultural, political and economic conditions under which women live, so that the "brilliance and creativity" of individu al women can be recognized by our society. Perhaps if Schimpf challenged herself to go out and learn firsthand about the work that the feminist movement is currently doing, instead of simply accepting the tired, stereotypical, anti-woman arguments continuously rehashed by the right, she might discover that she is more of a feminist than she thinks she is.
Jaime Nass
University alumna