Huskies at the Playboy mansion and other info..

[rachel e devitt]

The connection between porn and violence towards women is a valid if
subtle one and it IS a problem, in my opinion.  Of course magazines like
Playboy do not directly influence or coerce naive little boys into
enacting violence on women.  However, the social acceptance and approval
of the overt objectification and commodification of women's bodies
contributes to the overall objectification and oppression of women in
general; hence a "rape culture" which normalizes and ignores or is
unaffected by daily violence against women.  I am not against erotica or
sex or graphic representation of sex, but the women in Playboy and (From
what i've seen and heard) at the Playboy Mansion (hello!  Hugh Heffner is
dating twins!) do not accurately represent many women or their sexuality
or eroticism, although we are often convinced it does, as
playboy-like porn is so widespread.  Furthermore, the positions women are
posed in, the plastic surgery had by many (often because they feel
compelled to do so), and the body type commodified and preserved for all
the world as a standard, as well as the innacurate or uneven
representation of a non-standard standard of sexuality, contributes to the
oppression, domination, commodification, and pigeon-holing of women and
the normalizing of such behaviior and the violence that so often
accompanies it by a patriarchal society.  The connection between porn (and
by porn, I mean male-created material, NOT erotica) and violence is made
often and more impressively than I have done in much feminist
theory.  That so much of the world's population (including many
feminists) is unaware of this connection just proves how normalized, how
subtle, how insidious it has become.  I say if the boys used school money
or were representing UW in any way, we should object.  Censorship of porn
is not the answer, but not acknowledging our own subjugation and
objectificaion isn't either. 

On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, 'hyperbolic' Ariel Federow wrote:

> Re: Playboy...
> 
> euhhhhh, I don't know. I don't agree with the idea that porn leads to
> violence against women at *all*; I think that bad porn is dumb and
> objectifying but porn, in and of itself, isn't A Big Bad Evil. 
> 
> is playboy bad porn? i don't know. it's not something i would look at, but
> it gets a lot of people off. soft-lit tits and ass aren't all *that* bad
> and satanic.
> 
> does playboy have a record of being terrible towards women? if it does, i
> would object. if NOT...i would object to objecting. if the boys want to
> visit playboy, i think that's pretty dumb (cuz there is better porn out
> there than soft-lit tits and ass and that kind of tourism strikes me as
> stupid) but it's not violent to women in and of itself. if Neuheisel was
> all about "yah, dude, let's get those bitches and fuck 'em good whether
> they like it or not..." i would say we pull a frat pig gang castrate on
> 'em. but since no....
> 
> my 2c, since i am A BIG FORGETFUL NINCOMPOOP and just blanked on the
> meeting in my post-dance soreness
> 
> --Ariel Federow: http://students.washington.edu/bean/
> "She didn't care if the words were weird, indulgent, pretentious, or
> honestly free.  Sometimes Lila just let herself look at a lot of ordinary
> things in a magnificent way."
> 	--Sarah Schulman
> 
> On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, ASUW Womens Action Coalition wrote:
> 
> > Hey everyone.
> > 
> > We had about 6 people show up at the meeting yesterday, which was
> > awesome... but are there people out there who aren't showing up because
> > Wednesday is a bad day?  There's still the possibility of moving the
> > meetings back to Tuesdays if that works better for everyone, but it seems
> > like Wednesdays received a popular response over the listserve.  We'll
> > meet again next Wednesday at 5 and gauge from there whether that's a good
> > meeting time.
> > 
> > At the meeting, we discussed numerous things, one of which was what WAC's
> > response should be to Coach Neuheisel's decision to bring the Husky
> > football players to the Playboy mansion during their stay in
> > Pasadena.  Some concerns raised at the meeting were that the promotion of
> > pornography and Playboy's commodification of women as sexual objects can
> > lead to violence against women and a perpetuation of an unrealistic body
> > image for women.  The decision at the meeting was to try to compose a
> > letter, signed not only by WAC but also by GBLTC and other campus groups
> > (maybe Campus Radical Women? VOX?) and send this letter to the Seattle
> > Times and P-I and the Daily.  In order for me to write this letter, I need
> > two things.  First of all, I need a general consensus from this listserve
> > supporting WAC's position that Neuheisel was wrong in bringing the players
> > to the mansion.  Second, I need people to send me ideas of what the letter
> > should entail.  Any ideas you could offer me would make this process much
> > easier.  I hope to have the letter composed by the middle of next week at
> > the latest.
> > 
> > Also... I have LOTS of Inga posters in my office to put up all over
> > campus.  If some of the WACers, specifically those that live in dorms
> > (Ellie? Michelle? Brittany?) and those that have classes on the Southern
> > end of campus, could come pick up some posters and help me hang them to
> > advertise, that would be so AWESOME.  I'm planning on hitting up the north
> > end of campus and Women's Studies this afternoon, but I could really use
> > some help getting these posters up.  I'll leave the posters in the office,
> > and although I won't be in on Friday, anyone can get a key from the SAO
> > office and pick them up.  Also, I have that thing of sidewalk chalk if
> > anyone's really motivated and wants to chalk up campus with Inga
> > advertisements.
> > 
> > One more thing... I received the brochures regarding Kirsten Anderberg's
> > presentation on Body Acceptance in the mail, and they are in my
> > office.  We can talk about that at the next meeting, but if you're
> > curious, you can come by and look them over.
> > 
> > Thanks, y'all.  Hope the first week back is going well for everyone!
> > 
> > Marci
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > *)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*
> > ASUW Women's Action Commission
> > University of Washington
> > Husky Union Building Rm.201
> > SAO 17 Box 352238
> > Seattle, WA 98195			
> > 
> > Phone: 206.543.1817	Fax: 206.685.4310
> > http://depts.washington.edu/~asuwomn
> > 
> > *)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*)*
> > 
> > 
> 
>