0 OPINION -1 Page 4 Tuesday, February 14, 1984 The Michigan Dail A 'Contest fosters negative female w The following was written by Marcene Root, Roxanne Frieden- .Ms, Paula Rust, Chris Alhambra, Karl Monsma, and Irene Padavic. Wistful. Glamorous. Sultry. In- nocent. These are the words that describe what women can become if they purchase the new perfume called "Marilyn Monroe". And those are the images of women fostered in our eplture every time something happens life the Marilyn Monroe look-alike con- test. "Good clean fun" the promoters at Michigan Theatre claimed. "Movies Aren't sexist" one Marilyn Monroe iqak-alike contestant argued. We disagree. It isn't fun at all to go- t hough life being judged largely by our I ks. Marilyn didn't like it, and neither 1we. Movies are sexist when they por- kay women as scatter-brained idiots '4o exist purely for the pleasure of ,en. ,-,Wistful? You bet women are wistful, ,b-ingon as men make an extra 41 cents on tie dollar over women. In fact, this dif- Erence has increased since 1955 when mien made only 36 cents on the dollar more than women. Working women are still concentrated primarily in the lower haying sectors of the economy, the .lerical and service fields which offer jw levels of security, few or no 1bnefits, and less resistance to in- flation. Furthermore, two out of three :adults who fall into the federal definition of poverty are women. Ac- companying this financial subordinan- ce is a political one. Out of 536 federal representatives only a handful are women. An even lower percentage of members of the Senate are women. And out of the 200-plus history of the Supreme Court, only one judge has been a woman. DESPITE THIS LACK of political and financial power, or perhaps. because of it, women remain the primary caretakers of children. In fact, increasing numbers of women now face child raising alone. The percentage of single mothers has increased par- ticularly rapidly among college educated women, a fact that should be of special interest to the University community. Even when married, however, it is the woman who bears the main burden of household chores and caretaking. This means that in addition to financial and political hardship, women suffer from extra demands on their time, as well as the stress that arises from being constantly needed. When women look wistful, it is probably not because they are trying to look more endearing, but because they have so little control over the forces around them. Glamorous? Why should we be, and, more to the point, why do we have to be? Many women prefer intelligence, competence, and power to good looks. They know glamour will get them into Hollywood only if they're very, very lucky, and even then it could end up crushing them like it did Marilyn or any one of a number of women who couldn't withdraw from silly sex-pot roles. Yet we continue to be judged on the basis of physical attractiveness. For instance, more than one woman has been described as "an attractive young woman" in job recommendations. Many women can't resist the pressure to aspire to those images - billions are spent each year on cosmetics, hair sprays, bleaches, dyes, hair removers, and a whole host of look-alike contest sponsored by the Michigan Theatre and the Classic Film Theatre fed right into these narrowly defined expectations. Although they cannot be held responsible for creating these images, they have done nothing to confront the bleached blond, white skinned, and helpless image of women. If the theatre and the film group were really interested in making the point that "those days are over" why didn't they encourage a serious discussion af- ter the movie about the sex role 'Actually, many women wish there was some way to avoid being constantly per- ceived as a sex object by men. Most women can't get through a day without some form of verbal if not physical sexual assault.' One employee of the theatre told us that "A lot of women fantasize about looking like Marilyn Monroe. This is their chance to fulfill those fantasies." And that contestants remarked on Monroe as a symbol of women's oppression in no way indicates that the Michigan Theatre intended the contest to be a satire. Some of those who entered were part of the protest groups, and chose that as their way to get their message across to the audience. Sultry? Actually, many women wish there was some way to avoid being con- stantly perceived as a sex object by men. Most women can't get through a day without some form of verbal if not physical sexual assault. "Hey, babe, whatcha doin' tonight?" a man calls from across the street. Or, "Who'd you screw to get that good grade?" This isn't stuff from construction workers either. A study conducted at Harvard University found that 34 percent of female undergraduates, 41 percent of female graduate students, and 49 per- cent of female faculty reported ex- periencing some type of sexual harassment. LOOK-ALIKE contests, in general, emphasize looks as primary. They par- ticipate in the cultural process of objec- tification. Furthermore, by offering prize money on the. basis of looks they commercialize sexuality. Why direct- our protests at the Michigan Theatre? Because they are a major part of the image mainstream culture in this communityl Innocence? This is the last thing women need. More women need to know of the poverty that faces a manless woman, of blatant sex discrimination, and that a woman is raped every two and a half minutes in this country. As long as we remain unknowing of the political and economic realities that face women, we wll remain powerless to respond. Wistful, glamourous, sultry, and irn- nocent. These are not the image$ women need to gain power, influence, economic security, and fulfillment. Yet Michigan Theatre's "good clean fun,' promotes just those stereotypes. By axj- ticulating the degrading nature of the Marilyn Monroe imagery - imagery that caused Marilyn herself anguis and possibly death. We believe ouk protest has stimulated the publi' dialogue we intended. We acted not from a "spontaneous reaction" bytt from an analysis of the realities of sex roles and gender stratification. In conclusion we ask, what if an "Amos and Andy" contest were held Would anyone be surprised if blacks and other concerned citizens becam# outraged? Would we say, what's th4 matter, can't they take a joke? Where'4 their sense of humor? Why should the, object to a shuffling "yes, massah" at= titude presented on the stage of the Michigan Theatre? After all, whites could enter too, so it wouldn't be racist . other commodities which contribute to huge beauty industry profits. These products often cause health problems for the womem who use them. The fact is, however, none of us ever feels we achieve this image, including Marilyn Monroe who spent hours and hours in front of the mirror agonizing that she wasn't beautiful enough. THE RECENT MARILYN Monroe stereotypes that are portrayed? Why did they ask the contestants to "say something like Marilyn Monroe would say"? The Michigan Theatre gave $100 to the winner and other prizes to the run- ner up. Nothing in their advertising, nor in their comments to us before the con- test, hinted that the contest was merely "satire" as the emcee tried to claim. T1 .: Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan Sinclair Vol. XCIV-No. 112 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Editorials represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board Questionable conduct T HE PROPOSED student code for non-academic conduct is an attempt by the University to take the law into its own hands. But the law doesn't belong in the hands of the University, it belongs, and already exists, under the authority of the government. The code comes as a result of the University's frustration concerning its inability to discipline students who may have committed criminal or otherwise unsavory behavior. But while frustration with established channels of enforcement may be legitimate, the University should not take on the task of enforcing laws already under local, state, or federal jurisdiction. The University should be concerned only with the academic credibility of, the student and should leave existing governmental mechanisms to define, enforce, and judge the law. Should enforcement in a particular instance be blatantly inadequate, it is already within the power of the University president to issue a directive aimed at punishing the offender. The desire for speed and efficiency in punishment is understandable but dangerous. Sidestepping lengthy court proceedings to avoid "troublesome technicalities" could infringe upon an individual's fundamental rights. The proposed University judicial system is an inconsistent and inadeauate mechanism for nunishing code violators. The internal court would deny the right to a trial by a jury of peers because it would be run by professors and administrators. Another difficulty would lie in the flexibility with which a punishment could be applied to an offense. It would be the University's prerogative to provide an academic punishment, such as suspension, for a non-academic violation. The system could also place a student in double jeopardy. It would be possible for a student to be tried and punished by two courts - both Univer- sity and civil or criminal - at the same time. Especially inappropriate are provisions within the code that would stifle dissent, such as diag demon- strations or sit-ins. Proponents argue that these provisions are peripheral, but peripheral or not they are a part of the code. Why does the rule exist if it isn't going to be enforced? And if it is going to be enforced, it could be used to discourage legitimate protest. The University is supposed to educate and serve the students. If the students areunable to protectthem- selves, then it is the role of the gover- nment to protect them; it is not the role of the University. At the very least the code would create a bureaucracy that would not even be used since the University doesn't have the time to run its own court system. At its worst, it would be an inefficient and un- necessary means of enforcing laws already established by society that would infringe upon the rights of the student to a just trial and punishment, and to register legitimate dissent. Either way it won't do the job. f LETTERS TO THE DAILY: Apple To the Daily: From most perspectives the University deserves congratulations for the cooperative arrangement with Apple Computer enabling faculty, staff and students to pur- chase equipment at reduced prices. As the purchase details of the arrangement surface, however, one cannot help but begin to feel that the arrangement is really targeted to push Apple's new MacIntosh. There are several indications that heighten one's suspicions. Most of the information released by the University has indeed focused on the MacIntosh; the Ile (Apple's tried and true standby) has received "also ran" status. If you want to purchase a Ile you need to go off campus to do so as only the MacIntosh and Lisa are being handled on campus. The dieknunt nn the MacTntnh issub- s motives technological advancement and appears to be an excellent com- puter. The marketing question however is, will it sell or fall flat, leaving the owner with limited BLOOM COUNTY are unearthed available software? What better investment for Apple than to at- tempt to flood the market of "University types" with their new technology product. - Gary Rentschler Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences February 13 4 by Berke Breathed I~tS6S D t A1SlNESA"O. i2z AND4 MAILEDcoN&'ESS WD CUIP O6F C' 5TRAI&W' (UP! Z-13 COFFEE LZT5 YOU CALM YOUR5ELF POWN WkUL ITrPCK5 YOU UP! A1NP I'MI ONE OF IHE NEwWEOFEE G&ER1NCKIlN.. ONEP OF 1VPAY'5 MOVER5 ANP' 5HAKER5 ! Y65511?... I'VE JLI(NCP 77/ COrree ACHINVCR~5 A37 T >, i OR (5 IT ALL JUST A ANCH Of HOOEY? 4 1- -Gjjjb 17-A ~ 4- - -""""""" 1-- J