Stamp collecting: is a bad image better than none?

"I don't like pornography. It's indecent, it's immoral and the lighting's
always terrible" -- Woody Allen



| For the record I don't view pornography - Ispens a fair amount of time
| trying to get rid of the stuff other people insist on putting on my
| computer from outside!!

Bob

Tore myself away from soaking another load of stamps for a snack and a
quick look at the paper when a paragraph caught my eye:

"She* suggests that the bulk of today's excessive viewers of Internet
pornography are likely overweight young men who avoid sports and who,
10 or 15 years back, would have been obsessive stamp collectors."

* The "She" is Marian Valverde, a University of Toronto criminologist
specializing in pornography and compulsive behaviour. The quote is
from the Canadian "Globe & Mail", 31 Jan, page F7.

Hey folks, this is serious stuff. I am now only allowed to use the
Internet under close supervision and I am under notice to prove I am
not an "obsessive collector" - which could be just a little bit
tricky.

My only hope now is for someone somewhere to link coin collectors with
terrorists and, maybe, sports fans with scam artists or something.
That should take the heat off stamp collecting computer users so that
I can get on with sorting jumbles of coloured slips of paper into
neatly ordered rows and columns.

And particularly avoid any connection with stamps less than sixteen
years old!

Michael
Michael Meadowcroft
Waterloo Lodge
72 Waterloo Lane
Leeds LS13 2JF
GB
Tel: +44 (0)113 257 6232

That's her FACE?!?!?!!?

--
Cheers - John Mycroft
coryton_at_cobbsmill_dot_com

Mariana & Marian are the same person from everything I've gone
through. Not unusual for persons to hold professorships at more than one
university.
Dave
(and her so-called theory doesn't hold water, even if in the frozen state of
a Canadian Winter)
"TC" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 14:00:52 GMT, "Dave"
wrote:

The "esteemed" Mariana Valverde is unlikely to ever to looked at by any
excessive viewers of Internet pornography. No wonder she is s girl who
likes girls. View her esteemed visage at:

http://www.umanitoba.ca/faculties/la...ative_law/arti
cle2.html

Her theory is as unattractive as she is.

Dave (can't look at her anymore! AAAAAARRRRGGGHHHH!)
"Bob Watson" wrote in message
...
Tore myself away from soaking another load of stamps for a snack and a
quick look at the paper when a paragraph caught my eye:

"She* suggests that the bulk of today's excessive viewers of Internet
pornography are likely overweight young men who avoid sports and who,
10
or 15 years back, would have been obsessive stamp collectors."

* The "She" is Marian Valverde, a University of Toronto criminologist
specializing in pornography and compulsive behaviour.
The quote is from the Canadian "Globe & Mail", 31 Jan, page F7.

Hey folks, this is serious stuff. I am now only allowed to use the
Internet under close supervision and I am under notice to prove I am
not
an "obsessive collector" - which could be just a little bit tricky.

My only hope now is for someone somewhere to link coin collectors with
terrorists and, maybe, sports fans with scam artists or something. That
should take the heat off stamp collecting computer users so that I can
get on with sorting jumbles of coloured slips of paper into neatly
ordered rows and columns.


All the best,
Bob Watson



================================================== ===

Dave :

You are confusing TWO persons.
Mariana Valverde is NOT Marian Valverde.

Mariana Valverde is at Univ, of Manitoba.

Marian Valverde is at Univ. of Toronto and
was also editor of "The Healthsharing Book:
Resources for Canadian Women." Women's Press, l985.

Blair



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

If the lady in the link is who wrote the original article. does anyone have
any actual proof? I mean, here's a local woman who is being castigated and
having her looks criticized and she may not even be the proper object of
such foul displeaure.

FWIW, the article in the link is excellent. She makes a compelling case for
government not to use broad brush strokes to deal with what some find
unpleasant regarding the moral choices of others. You know, the idea that in
a democracy the State is equire dto act with restraint.

None of you had a clue who she is, do you? Sad. Really sad.

"Grandpa" jsdebooATcomcast.net wrote in message
...
Dave wrote:

The "esteemed" Mariana Valverde is unlikely to ever to looked at by any
excessive viewers of Internet pornography. No wonder she is s girl who
likes girls. View her esteemed visage at:

http://www.umanitoba.ca/faculties/la.../article2.html

Her theory is as unattractive as she is.

Ohhhhmuhgod! Thats a face only a mother could love. An ugly woman
who's never had a date and blames men for itVBG.

A cheer for her!

U!
G!
L!
Y!
You ain't got no alibi!
Yo UGLY!

If the lady in the link is who wrote the original article. does anyone have
any actual proof? I mean, here's a local woman who is being castigated and
having her looks criticized and she may not even be the proper object of
such foul displeaure.

Foul indeed! Thanks, Peter, for saying what I was thinking. I was beginning
to think that freedom of speech had become the sole province of the
beautiful people. How embarrassing to think that some of the words that have
been written in this thread are now enshrined "forever" in the Google Groups
archive!

Perhaps someone in this group can explain to me what a person's appearance
has to do with their worth as a human being. If each us was required to meet
some arbitrary standard of personal appearance before we were allowed to
express an opinion, I doubt anyone would hear what we have to say!

Some of you know what I look like from very limited "exposure" on the web,
and I know what some of you look like, and so far I haven't seen anyone who
would win a Mr. or Miss or Mrs. Universe contest, me included for god's
sake! And I suspect that those of you I haven't laid eyes on are not about
to establish new criteria for good looks either! And so what?

Time to grow up, guys. This isn't a high school locker room! Intelligence,
knowledge, wit, wisdom, prejudice, stupidity, are independent of a person's
physical appearance. If you don't believe that, take a look in the mirror!

Bob Ingraham



2/3/2004 7:12 PM



FWIW, the article in the link is excellent. She makes a compelling case for
government not to use broad brush strokes to deal with what some find
unpleasant regarding the moral choices of others. You know, the idea that in
a democracy the State is equire dto act with restraint.

None of you had a clue who she is, do you? Sad. Really sad.

"Grandpa" jsdebooATcomcast.net wrote in message
...
Dave wrote:

The "esteemed" Mariana Valverde is unlikely to ever to looked at by any
excessive viewers of Internet pornography. No wonder she is s girl who
likes girls. View her esteemed visage at:

http://www.umanitoba.ca/faculties/la...ve_law/article
2.html

Her theory is as unattractive as she is.

Ohhhhmuhgod! Thats a face only a mother could love. An ugly woman
who's never had a date and blames men for itVBG.

A cheer for her!

U!
G!
L!
Y!
You ain't got no alibi!
Yo UGLY!

Bob Ingraham wrote:

snipped

Foul indeed! Thanks, Peter, for saying what I was thinking. I was beginning
to think that freedom of speech had become the sole province of the
beautiful people. How embarrassing to think that some of the words that have
been written in this thread are now enshrined "forever" in the Google Groups
archive!

Bob Ingraham

Whoa there Bob, she's entitled to her opinion about stamp collectors and
I'm entitled to mine about her. A freedom of speech issue as you allude
to above. 'Nuff said.

2/3/2004 9:10 PM

Bob Ingraham wrote:

snipped

Foul indeed! Thanks, Peter, for saying what I was thinking. I was beginning
to think that freedom of speech had become the sole province of the
beautiful people. How embarrassing to think that some of the words that have
been written in this thread are now enshrined "forever" in the Google Groups
archive!

Bob Ingraham

Whoa there Bob, she's entitled to her opinion about stamp collectors and
I'm entitled to mine about her. A freedom of speech issue as you allude
to above. 'Nuff said.

Obviously I did not make myself clear. This is not a matter of freedom of
speech.

A person's appearance has nothing at all to do with the validity of his or
her opinions. I don't understand why some members of the group were
compelled to comment on the woman's looks. If she had been attractive, I
doubt the comments would have been made, nor should they have been. If she
were male, or obviously handicapped, I doubt the comments would have been
made. I would hope that r.c.s.d. is inclusive rather than sexist and
exclusionary.

Bob

"Bob Ingraham" wrote:

Obviously I did not make myself clear. This is not a matter of
freedom of speech.

A person's appearance has nothing at all to do with the validity
of his or her opinions. I don't understand why some members of
the group were compelled to comment on the woman's looks. If
she had been attractive, I doubt the comments would have been
made, nor should they have been. If she were male, or obviously
handicapped, I doubt the comments would have been made. I
would hope that r.c.s.d. is inclusive rather than sexist and
exclusionary.

Bob

Greetings Mr. Ingraham.
..
What if she is pictured on a postage stamp? Could we then discuss the
merits of her beauty? Could a joint issue by Canada and Spanish North
Africa be appropriate?
..
Respectfully,

Gordon Lee
Great Fritain Royal Memorabilia & Broken Mirrors Emporium
True beauty is on the inside, where no one will ever see it.

On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:34:03 GMT, Bob Ingraham
wrote:

2/3/2004 9:10 PM

Bob Ingraham wrote:

snipped

Foul indeed! Thanks, Peter, for saying what I was thinking. I was beginning
to think that freedom of speech had become the sole province of the
beautiful people. How embarrassing to think that some of the words that have
been written in this thread are now enshrined "forever" in the Google Groups
archive!

Bob Ingraham

Whoa there Bob, she's entitled to her opinion about stamp collectors and
I'm entitled to mine about her. A freedom of speech issue as you allude
to above. 'Nuff said.

Obviously I did not make myself clear. This is not a matter of freedom of
speech.

A person's appearance has nothing at all to do with the validity of his or
her opinions. I don't understand why some members of the group were
compelled to comment on the woman's looks. If she had been attractive, I
doubt the comments would have been made, nor should they have been. If she
were male, or obviously handicapped, I doubt the comments would have been
made. I would hope that r.c.s.d. is inclusive rather than sexist and
exclusionary.

A nice wish, Bob. There are too many stereotypes out there and some
of the "leftists" of the hobby keep pushing hatred and malcontent.

At first, I thought for sure she was a stereotyped ___ ___ ___. Now,
it doesn't matter. I don't believe her anyway.

Tracy Barber