[Winona Online Democracy]
Dwayne, a comment on the first two questions you put to Terry. The third does not seem relevant to his comment unless we deal with an enormous number of variables. I've put your questions/comments in quote marks.
1. Dwayne: "Do you think there is a legitimate and serious reason for a "Respect My
Testicles" button? Beyond a low kind of humor, which is found on many
t-shirts today, is there a deeper purpose or real social problem the
message is trying to make people aware of or help solve? Put another way,
is the button you described simply trying to make people laugh or is it
trying to make people aware of a serious problem? The button that Carrie
is wearing is not a joke."
Roy: If the image constituted a metaphor for a serious issue, such as a man's bringing attention to cancer (Tom's example) or to perceived harmful characterization of men in situation comedies or to advocacy of more consideration for men in divorce proceedings, it would have a strong purpose, whether the assumption behind its use was valid or not. Despite the strong purpose, it could still produce snickering or anger or shock because for most observers the relationship of a testicle to the intended meaning would be elusive. In Carrie's case, the problem is that for most people the button she wore elicited either humor or anger because they did not see the underlying meaning of the metaphor "I Love My Vagina." Even if they felt no shock or anger, many felt it to be bizarre. Sometimes a metaphor can be strong within a particular group but have negative connotations among people who have no acquaintance with the underlying idea. Thus for you, her button was not a joke or source of anger. For me it was not a joke or source of anger. But for many others it was a joke or a source of anger. It is unfortunate, but public mention of sexual organs do flummox many people and often produce anger or the "low kind of humor" you referred to with regard to Terry's example of testicles. That is why the high school principal and the central office administration were concerned over the issue in relation to school activities. I personally would have avoided any restrictions on the girls' buttons, but I wouldn't be na�ve enough to assume that people would understand and embrace the underlying social meaning of the metaphor. Would the message eventually come out over time? Perhaps, but the wording could submerge swift understanding, much less agreement.
2. Dwayne: "Would you admit there is a difference in how our society treats and
views the male and female bodies? What is considered off limits or
shameful?"
Roy: Of course people view the female and male bodies as different from each other. They are different. "Males" and "females" alone would be understandable. But "bodies"? The issue of abortion would hardly be relevant in the context of Terry's remarks. Do you have in mind some religion or religions? If you regard television and films, which both create and reflect a good portion of public attitudes on sex and morality, as indicative of "society," you would undoubtedly realize that the unclothed female body is much more likely to be shown than the male body. Does that mean the male body is more "shameful" or "off-limits" than the female body? I'm sure this assumption would not conform to your intended meaning, but you might clarify your questions. I feel that your wording reflects some sort of a conceptual box and therefore I may be missing your point.
Roy Nasstrom
_______________________________________________
This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy
All messages must be signed by the senders actual name.
No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list.
To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit
http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona
Any problems or suggestions can be directed to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact page at
http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org
