Re: RC: 2 cents worth

[BMcCrary27@aol.com]

In a message dated 05/10/2000 9:49:27 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
Ag47xAu49@aol.com writes:

<< I do need to add to my last post that the letter article, which I did not 
 see,  could have been edited to make it safer for kids to read,  it they 
 indeed read stuff before the parent does.  >>

I'm not critiquing Howard's article, either pro or con, but if all of us 
think HIS article was tasteless or risque, what do we all say about 
Cosmopolitan, People, or a jillion other magazines that kids can lay their 
hands on?  I don't admire this obsession with sex at all.  If I thought the 
USA was the only country that is so obsessed, I would think we had a few 
loose screws somewhere.  But much of the world seems to share this obsession. 
 Wouldn't it be nice if it weren't so public?  We all know sex has been 
around for milleniums, but what is the big thrill of slathering it all around 
as if it were butter on toast?  Personally, I had a bigger thrill when it was 
all very subtle, as in the movies of the 40s and 50s when the tension could 
build with only a look, rather than the way they are today.  Now how did I 
get started on this?  Oh, yes, Howard's article.  Aren't we being a bit 
two-faced here?  We criticize the article for mentioning sex, but it's all 
over the stores, movies, everywhere.  SHEESH!  My only concern about the 
article is the possibility of PETA making political hay over it.  Any 
comments to MY comments?

Barbara