I am writing to express my extreme disappointment and frustration at the dehumanizing, objectifying, and degrading content that was on the cover and in the pages of the June edition of FACE magazine. Specifically, I am referring to the image on the cover in which a woman's legs are being bitten and grabbed by a group of preying men as well as the ridiculous commentary written by Shane Kinney.

Whoo-hoo! I got some fan mail! It was a heavy metal band after all…what do you expect them to do on the cover, hand her some daisies?

In my opinion, the front cover photograph (as well as in the article) promotes objectification, dehumanization, (Dear reader…I promise you'll be seeing these words again) and therefore violence against women. According to Jean Kilborne, yet another chick I could care less about “Turning a human being into a thing is almost always the first step toward justifying violence against them.” For the record, my thoughts portrayed were sexual, not violent. Those are two different things. There's quite a difference between a mind-blowing orgasm and a broken nose. For me this image is as offensive as seeing an image depicting the lynching of a person of color, I wonder if the NAACP would back you up on this. a swastika or other nazi propaganda, (Or better yet, ask eight million Jews) and/or any other symbol of hatred towards a particular group. Particular group? What, did you run out of oppressed societies? C'mon, how' bout the Polish and the jokes about them? The French, NASA? Please be more specific. You're wasting my time here. Unfortunately we live in a world where we so often are bombarded with these kinds of depictions of women that an overwhelming amount of people do not see how these images contribute to a cultural tolerance for abuse, mistreatment, and oppression of women by men. That's because the people who don't see it are stupid, plain and simple. It amazes me that in the year 2003, women are still not free or safe to be full human beings. What is a full human being? Somebody who just ate a hearty meal? 1 in 3 women will be raped in her lifetime. 1 in 3 women will be beaten by the man that says he loves her. Factual, however, it renders no bearing on the artwork. The model depicted did that on her own accord, in her attempt to be a full human being. And she was not raped during the shoot, I asked the photographer myself.

As for Shane Kinney's absolutely unintelligent commentary, Of course it's unintelligent. It's FACE! Not the New Yorker. Those are two different papers working on very different budgets. I'm the best they could get. Would you like fries with that? "I pray that low cut jeans and high rise tank tops never go out of style because then I'd probably have to get to know women for who they are, God forbid" Hey, that's a pretty good line. Who wrote that? is just one example of the many in his piece that also promotes objectification and dehumanization of women. Here we go with even more redundancies. Grab a thesaurus sweetheart. Have you ever heard of humor? That was my way of saying these particular girls are showing off their best assets, as opposed to their brain. He spouts that if women had any self-esteem that they would not wear these outfits and infers that wearing these outfits makes one promiscuous. I was referring to a woman who had the cheeks of her ass exposed after all. What image does that project to you? First of all, many women wear these outfits because it is hot outside and less clothing feels better, and some women wear these outfits because they feel sexy. Would feeling sexy not be objectifying ones self? God forbid, a woman is self-expressed and fully human enough In paragraph two, you stated that they weren't fully human enough express her sensuality. And I'm fully human enough to comment on it, thank you very much. I do not know any women who want to be objectified and leered at. I do. Join me at the OPT sometime for a drink and I'll show you.

As for the self-esteem issue, women are socialized in a culture that promotes violence against them through constant objectification, women who view any mainstream media are told that their number one priority should be what they look like, that they are too fat, their skin is too rough, their clothes are not good enough, and they are only as good as their body parts. Read: TRENDY It is written about in many places. Which is why they should pay no attention to what society tells them, and have the wherewithal to carve out a niche of their own, like anybody who chooses to do something with their lives. If anybody lives by the guidelines that society and media creates, they are doles like you.

It is written in many places that when a girl is in her early adolescence her self-esteem drastically drops, it sometimes takes a full lifetime to regain her full self, some never do. Took me a few grand in therapy, which I'd suggest to you as well. So yeah, some women may be looking for positive reinforcement from men, But, like you said before in paragraph three, you don't know any women like that, so let me guess, if you don't know them, they don't exist, right? You're really contradicting yourself here. Back it up, sister. I mean we have only been told since the fairytales of Sleeping Beauty, Snow White, and Cinderella that in order to be happy we need a man and to get a man we need to be sexy, oh but not too sexy, because then we are “promiscuous” or the more contemporary term “sluts”. Those are my favorite. They'll do anything for cab fare. So, Mr. Kinney, next time you want to write commentary on the psyche of women I recommend that you do a little reading and get yourself some free education to back up the banter that takes up a full page in the newspaper. For the record, I am educated on the psyche of women. I spent years being a slut myself. I perfected my craft of telling stupid chicks like you what you wanted to hear until I got what I wanted, and then I dumped them. Is this what you're so upset about? Not to toot my own horn here, but I am emotionally intelligent enough, worldly enough, and experienced enough to create commentary like this. I spent enough time studying the female psyche to figure it out. You're the one jumping to a conclusion that I know nothing about women. I'll jump to the conclusion that you should stop worrying about what's happening with Boomslang, Model Michelle, Franklin McMahon, and my good self, and start working on liberating your own sexuality. There are ways to be sexual, and there's ways of being a slut. I was commenting on sluts. Don't try to tell me they don't exist, I could have saved thousands on condoms. At the risk of sounding redundant like you, I was commenting on AN EXPOSED ASS. IF SHE HAD TO TIE HER SHOE, HER LABIA WOULD HAVE BEEN EXPOSED. HOW IS THAT EXPRESSING ONES SELF? If I marched into your organization with shorts so short that one of my testicles was exposed, would the room break into a chorus of “Sisters are doing it for themselves?” I don't think so honey. You'd call the cops, and I'd ask for some talcum powder. Oh yeah, I know you are a comedian; I just don't think misogyny is funny! Then don't read it. It's a humor column after all.

Sincerely, name witheld by webmaster (Shane),