NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/alt/supermod/1980

Text File | 1992-11-18 | 5.8 KB | 124 lines

Newsgroups: alt.supermodels
Path: sparky!uunet!caen!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.columbia.edu!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Jeff Eldredge)
Subject: Re: Calendars and Brains
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (The Network News)
Nntp-Posting-Host: beefheart.cc.columbia.edu
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Columbia University
References: <[e-mail]>
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 23:02:55 GMT
Lines: 109

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Victor P. Panlilio) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] writes:
> >Models -- yeah, they might have incredibly high IQ's, know how to solve
> >differential equations, and hold conversations in seventeen different
> >languages.
> >
> >BUT......they're apparently not perceptive enough to get out of a
> >profession that perpetuates ridiculous stereotypes and standards, not
to
>                  ^^^^^^^^^^
> Says you. If there is no demand, there will be no supply. Since
> there is *lots* of demand, then the vast majority of people who
> like to see this sort of thing must then be ridiculous, following
> your simple logic. Do we not like to look at "attractive" fellow
> humans? Or am I alone in thinking that "beauty" appeals to many
> people? Your value judgment smacks of PC intolerance of the most
> myopic and misguided variety.

Whoa, whoa, whoa.  Aren't we just a wee bit quick on the anti-"PC"
trigger?  That's beautiful the way anything these days can be attacked as
"PC" and the criticism is accepted carte blanche, merely because someone
is "clever" enough to know the terminology.  This is what I also call PC,
but it stands for "positively cowardly."

Moreover, who is talking about "simple logic" here.  Well, geez, if
there's enough demand for it (or is there?....is there just simply enough
MONEY for it???), then, hey, it must be beneficial to mankind.  We spend,
therefore we ARE!  That's so complex!

>We may as well deface the Louvre.

Yeah, that's JUST what I was thinking, because, you know, tearing down the
Louvre is so similar in its political implication to attempting to make a
statement on all of the money that is wasted on advertising and marketing
and other bullshit and thinking about what other interesting and
life-saving causes we could re-direct these resources to.  I see the
connection....it's clear.  Yeah, I like pretty faces, and I like people
who are physically fit and who shower.  But, you know, there ARE quite a
few women and men out there in the US of A (not just the "PC" ones) who
think that modelling, as we know it, is not delivering such a hot message
to our young women (and MEN!).

>
> >mention being a cornerstone in the evil industry of advertising.  Or
>
> Another hasty, and misguided, value judgment, IMHO. Without the
> "evil" industry of advertising, car buyers might not become aware
> of things such as anti-lock brakes, airbags, and better tires.
> Computer users might not be informed of new server-based utility
> programs that detect and prevent virus infections. Contact lens
> wearers might not know about "new, improved" polymers that allow
> more oxygen to to pass through to the cornea. Ordinary people
> might not hear of a health plan that would serve them better.
>
> And so on. So please, take your PC myopia and shove it. If you
> don't like advertising, turn the page or change the channel!

Yow.  Oooh.  That hurt.  Apparently, nothing is open to question.  The
concept of advertising, the rationale behind it, is not too, too difficult
to grasp.  I think I get it.  So, I guess I'm just supposed to swallow it
whole in its present incarnation, whether I like or not.  Oh, right.  I'm
supposed to look the other way.  Look, you talk about PC, and then you say
I have no right to criticize the advertising industry.  Sorry Bud.  I'm
not the only non-brain-surgeon who has come up with the brilliant idea
that we waste far too much money on advertising and market research and
god knows what other little scientific tools they have to shove junk down
our throats.  Yeah, I want to have access to information.  Yeah, I want
people, corporations, and government to disseminate it.  BUT, why is it
that the majority of money and time is invested on selling something at
the expense of not even bothering to check whether or not that something
is crappy?

>
> >possibly they just don't care to get out of it.  The discussion earlier
> >mentioned the sin of ENVY.  Well, here's a case of the one called
GREED.
>
> Isn't a person GREEDY for wanting to *be* at Columbia University
> when there may be many others who deserve to go there instead?

Isn't a person GREEDY for living in Canada, when the could be living in
Somalia?  Tee-hee.

>
> *snicker*
>
> Spare us your pious platitudes. Left-wing intellectualism wears
> awfully thin around this ex-revolutionary. Been there, done that.
>
> Victor
> (who is *thoroughly* allergic to PC thinking of *any* sort)

Oh, excuse me, Mr. enlightened ex-revolutionary.  Since you have already
researched the topic so thoroughly, I guess it would be a complete waste
for me in any way to critique the behavior of our mass or popular culture.
Thanks so much for saving me the energy.  You are obviously the expert in
this field.

God, I'm so left-wing.....particularly since I think that corporate
America is fucked up.  That's such a radical concept.

Please, please, continue to espouse your impressive knowledge of the term
PC, because it's such an incredibly useful way of shooting down any random
idea that shows the slightest bit of antagonism towards mainstream USA
God-fearing, Cindy Crawford-loving culture

And take some allergy pills, will you?