Search

ARCHIVES
CONTACT US
WORLD NEWS

American Beauties

Arizona Daily Wildcat

Playboy magazine's "Women of the Pac-10" issue is hot off the press, with two current students and one UA alum gracing the pages. Now for UA students, a line must be drawn between art and degeneration. Granted, they may have beautiful bodies, but the argument hinges on whether the act was artistic or merely vulgar. In my opinion, these three ladies have stepped over the line of art. The production of nude material should return to its purer form rather than the grunge it has regressed into.

Formerly, the naked body was an artistic element that few could render onto canvas. Art is the natural expression of hand upon canvas, not hand on KY Jelly. It is the purpose for which such works hold, that defines them as art or slime. Where, ladies, is the purpose of your Playboy layouts?

Skin mags have spearheaded the death of the body as art, codified women as objects and caused a downfall in society. How, I demand, can women be a part of this collapse? How can they pass off the posing as simply a way to garner funds? To pose is to comment on your character; being one of low morals and a lack of self-respect. The moral fiber of this nation is waning under the guidance of perverts like Bill Clinton, with the women who fall into the trap of going buff for the camera feeding that perversion and the nation's waning, scruples.

For the great Venetian portrait painters, the body was a graceful design created by a heavenly being. For them, the Roman-Catholic church inspired them to commemorate His great creation forever with a brush. Antithetically, Hugh Heffner has found the sexual cord of the world's men, picturing women on glossy sheets to fuel the lust of males. Powering the ointment-driven shaft-pumping of males is not art, it's degeneration. In a period when the NEA is struggling for support, perhaps the funds directed at buying porn should be redirected to supporting the NEA and its struggling artists.

Women, as the "tools" of this trade, should be outraged that their sisters have deemed it appropriate to them to object status. It has been the struggle of women since the end of World War II, wherein females worked collectively to help win the war at home by taking on the tasks of men. Porn mags have redirected the roles of women as things for men to take advantage of. Shedding clothes to "get men off" serves no positive purpose. Especially not for the advancement of the standing of women in society. Women should be more aware of the repercussions of posing nude and how it not only affects their own position, but the position of their whole sex.

Moreover, all of society suffers under the weight of pornography. It has been reasoned that if the opportunity to go-astray is omitted, then a society will not do so. Although the erasure of the prospect to view females in a demeaning manner will not clean the world of all ills, it would be a great step forward. Undoubtedly, the right to post such material must be maintained because the First Amendment, despite its ability to poison, is necessary to maintain democracy and freedom. However, I must insist that it is also society's choice to decide the merit of such material. Vulgarity should not and cannot be deemed as art. The purpose for the work can clearly be identified as miscreant.

Thus, I challenge women to turn away from this demeaning activity, and for men to support women by not buying the recent, or any following pornographic magazine. What does this mean for women? Simply that they must take note of their greater worth and what their actions mean for every self-restraining woman. For men, the resistance to procuring such items necessitates more self control and the realization that women are far more than sexual instruments. The long-term effects are bound to be positive, as the place of women will rise and men will find more respect for them while bettering themselves at the same time. It is time to go beyond sexual pleasure for the good of society and self.