From: owner-precious-things-digest@smoe.org (precious-things-digest) To: precious-things-digest@smoe.org Subject: precious-things-digest V2 #11 Reply-To: precious-things@smoe.org Sender: owner-precious-things-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-precious-things-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk X-To-Unsubscribe: Send mail to "precious-things-digest-request@smoe.org" X-To-Unsubscribe: with "unsubscribe" as the body. precious-things-digest Monday, January 13 1997 Volume 02 : Number 011 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Prof Widow is No 1 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Prof Widow is No 1 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Re: Playboy Prof Widow (REMIX) is No 1 [Fwd: tori on loveline] Shine/Boseys Atlanta Records Show/Tori and her Mask ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 13:54:57 -0500 From: Sam Free <106247.2224@compuserve.com> Subject: Prof Widow is No 1 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! *********************************** Professional Widow just went UP to number ONE !!!!!!! in the UK charts Can you believe it?! ************************************* Sam London ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 13:54:57 -0500 From: Sam Free <106247.2224@compuserve.com> Subject: Prof Widow is No 1 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! *********************************** Professional Widow just went UP to number ONE !!!!!!! in the UK charts Can you believe it?! ************************************* Sam London ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 14:55:03 -0600 From: "Mr. Jim" <_james@sava.gulfnet.com> Subject: Re: Playboy Richard Holmes wrote: Richard> Whoa, I must have touched a nerve here! Didn't mean to step Richard> on anyone's toes, and I think everyone's entitled to their Richard> opinion! My apologies to *you*. It was not my intent to be the flame-thrower here; I just felt like there was a little too much anti-Playboy sentiment being expressed as if they were the enemy of all women, and I never saw ONE posting offering an alternate take, so I rectified that. It wasn't so much a reaction to you, but to the *views* which you expressed which seem to be falling in-line with the other words we've all read thus far on this topic on this list. The reply was *really* to all who share the sentiments which you and Mike (& everybody else) expressed, which I think are on the less-correct (oh me, Mr. PC ) side of this issue. Richard> I don't want to incite a flame fest - I was rather impressed Richard> with the handling of this topic on the list. I didn't think Richard> what I said was *that* radical or obnoxious, really. What you said was neither radical nor obnoxious. My reaction may have been a little obnoxious, though it was written in a somewhat humorous spirit. I don't flame -- I react, and usually in a good-humored manner. Richard> and since tori is so involved with anti-abuse efforts, Richard> well, I didn't think my opinion would be that off-base Richard> (or controversial) for discussion. Playboy certainly doesn't contribute to the abuse of women. Playboy glamourizes and glorifies women, celebrates women. Women are [1]NEVER shown in explicit sexual situations, never portrayed as the victim (or oppressor, for that matter), never de-humanized in any way. There *are*, however, other magazines which very-much *do*, imho, de-humanize the ,,,ahem, models, and it's pretty sad to think that there actually are consumers for this material (but there are). Anyhow, the point of all this is that there ARE some really disgusting magazines out there, and that Playboy isn't one of them. Playboy is like Esquire with photos of nude women. > Playboy is not a special peeve or my personal devil, it is > simply part of the cultural philosophy I choose to reject, as > are many of the other things James mentioned (e.g., Soldier of > Fortune, MTV, VH1). I see Playboy as an *example* of the > philosophies, stereotypes, and indoctrination which I reject. > I see artists like Tori as breaking cultural indoctrination, > seeking sources of deep inspiration and sharing them with > their fans. Perhaps you'll want to read the Playboy philosophy. It is at: http://www.playboy.com/forum/philosophy/pp.html or http://www.playboy.com/faq/PBFAQ/pp.txt Actually, these are just a bunch of excerpts, but maybe they'll will have an impact on your negative perceptions of the mag, and its philosophy. Me> > If Playboy magazine makes you uncomfortable in any way I urge Me> > you to get over it and find something actually *worthy* of Me> > your discomfort. _True Action Detective_ anyone? How about Me> > _Fangora_? Or _Soldier of Fortune_? Richard> There is always a greater atrocity; "Don't sweat the little Richard> things" is the mantra used to maintain the status quo. That is very true - there *is* always a greater atrocity and we all have to poise ourselves somewhere along that continuum. I wonder... what is the ultimate good? What is the ultimate evil, that act or deed which is soooo wicked that there can be no greater atrocity than this? Good <-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-> Evil MikeWhy> My female friends can't even walk down the street without MikeWhy> harassment and "Hey Baby" yelled out constantly...I think MikeWhy> this mag contributes to this objectification of women as MikeWhy> only sex objects. Me> > Bullshit! Perhaps I should have said "Bolderdash!" or "HORSE-feathers!" or "Poppy-cock!" (we'll, maybe not "poppy-cock"....). Me> > I'm *ABSOLUTELY* certain that this phenomenon would not be Me> > even *REMOTELY* affected by whether or not there existed a Me> > Playboy magazine. Further clarification: Playboy doesn't objectify women as "only sex objects." It celebrates that aspect along with many other aspects of human existence. Playboy, as a media outlet, couldn't be a better friend to women, at least those who appear in the magazine; they are treated like queens. Me> > Sorry. Find a new (_real_) enemy. Playboy isn't it. Richard> Alas, I don't need to *find* an "enemy". They are often Richard> uninvited. I will say that as far as "the media" is Richard> concerned, it is a chicken-and-egg effect. A new entity cannot be your enemy until you define it as such. At some point, you (for example) *decided* that Playboy was the enemy, yes? Richard> It is not precisely correct to state that "Playboy has absolutely Richard> nothing to do with this effect", just as it is not correct to Richard> state that Playboy caused it. But the effect is there, Richard> nonetheless. I don't agree (are you surprised?). Throughout the ages there have always been persons afflicted with wicked, evil thoughts who express them in the stereotypical construction-worker vs. attractive-female manner (or worse). Playboy isn't marketed to these people and doesn't speak to these people. Playboy neither teaches nor inspires its readers to behave improperly at any time. If anything, it inspires respect and admiration, with occasional cheesey-ness in its presentation. Richard> James, I apologize if I offended you in some way; it was Richard> unintentional. I was merely sharing an opinion. I understand. Me, too. Again, I am responding more to the concepts, as expressed by all those who posted on this topic, on P-T anyway, and not so much to you personally, even if I do single you out. Thanks to Mr. Doug for mentioning the RDT discussions on this topic. It's being properly debated there, as I read in the archives, which are at: http://www.mit.edu:8008/dragons-lair.mit.edu/rdt/ Toodles! _james ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ /whois _james *** _james is James Dixon <_james@sava.gulfnet.com> *** _james is a Radio Communications Systems Analyst/Technician *** _james lives in Savannah GA USA *** _james works predominately in Hilton Head SC (also USA) *** _james has been idle for ...pretty much all his life *** _james has a strange sense of humour ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Now Playing: Yellowjackets, _Mirage À Trois_ <><><> ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 20:05:39 +0000 From: Development Manager Subject: Prof Widow (REMIX) is No 1 >*********************************** >Professional Widow just went UP to number ONE !!!!!!! in the UK charts > >Can you believe it?! > >************************************* Not at all. (Because it is not true.) It's "PW: BT's Star Funkin' Remix" that's in the charts. I can't say that it has any connection with Tori Amos, for me. No offense, but it's complete crap. - -- Ken Tough Cornwall ken@objectech.co.uk United Kingdom ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Nov 1996 20:21:51 -0700 From: Zaedryn Meade Subject: [Fwd: tori on loveline] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - --------------642F2AAA1777 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'd really like to find this too, if anyone knows, please let me (and Jeannie) know. Thanks!! Zaedryn http://toriamos.home.ml.org http://toriring.home.ml.org http://zaedryn.home.ml.org - --------------642F2AAA1777 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Received: from Connect2 Message Router by chihuly.chihuly.com via Connect2-SMTP 4.20A; Sun, 12 Jan 1997 12:33:18 -0700 Message-ID: <39F3972F01D51400@chihuly.chihuly.com> Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 14:27:23 -0600 From: Jeannie Cook Sender: jlc9@netdoor.com Organization: CHIHULY To: torinews@chihuly.com Subject: tori on loveline MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Connect2-SMTP 4.20A MHS/SMF to SMTP Gateway Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="--------geoboundary" - ----------geoboundary Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Postage paid by:

- ----------geoboundary Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-disposition: inline Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit ok since i don't think i ever got a message saying exactly when/if tori will be on loveline, i'll ask again. does anyone know when/if she will be on? i'd REALLY like to tape this, and i can't seem to find a loveline guess linup on mtv's page. PLEASE let me know ASAP guys, if you know anything. thanks a bunch! jeannie jlc9@netdoor.com - ----------geoboundary-- - --------------642F2AAA1777-- ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 20:07:17 -0500 (EST) From: Little Earthquake Subject: Shine/Boseys Everone should go see the movie Shine! (If it's playing near you. It is a limited showing thing) It's a wonderful movie with great actors, a great story, ok sound quality. It's about a child prodigy piano player that suffers a nervous breakdown and recovers to play again. Not only does the story line relate (slightly) to Tori, they mention Bosendorfers. The guy plays on one at on point in the movie. (He also plays a Steinway and a Kawai.) It's also based on a true story which is another plus. They guy the actor portrays helped with making the movie. Bye! :) JEnn :):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):) :) :) :) "We never had to take any of it seriuosly, did we?"-Dagny Taggart :) :) -Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged :) :) :) :) "Next time I won't be so easy to read."-Jewel Kilcher :) :) :) :) "...These Little Earthquakes...doesn't take much to rip us into :) :) pieces..."-Tori Amos :) :) :) :):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 21:59:57 -0500 (EST) From: Little Earthquake Subject: Atlanta Records Show/Tori and her Mask Hi all! I went to the Atlanta record show today and pick up some way cool Tori stuff. I got the Tori and Her Mask CD bootleg. Ok, I didn't, but my friend Chris did and we have joint custody of the CDs. I also got a cool Keychain and a 7'Vinyl of God that has an accapella version on it. Anybody heard of this? I haven't listened to it. It's kinda hard w/out a record player. I also got issue #8 or 9 of the UK Fanzine. There was so much cool Tori stuff there. Some guy was selling an original Y Kant Tori Read? for $250.00. Um...are we overpriced or what? There was also a 12" vinyl of the Me and a Gun single. I think it was about $60. Oh, yeah, Chris also got Tori's Greatest hits promo CD. Well, enough from me. I'm just excited about my new Tori stuff. :):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):) :) :) :) "We never had to take any of it seriuosly, did we?"-Dagny Taggart :) :) -Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged :) :) :) :) "Next time I won't be so easy to read."-Jewel Kilcher :) :) :) :) "...These Little Earthquakes...doesn't take much to rip us into :) :) pieces..."-Tori Amos :) :) :) :):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):) ------------------------------ End of precious-things-digest V2 #11 ************************************