To the editors:

I picked up a copy of the 3 January, 1992, Reader last Friday, for the first time in about three months. Now I remember why I don’t pick up a Reader very often.

On page seven of the 3 January issue is a little item titled “Search for Nightlife: a study of male arousal response.” I have tried to imagine a valid reason why this item was run.

Humor? Do the editors of the Reader find fun in promoting the objectification of women? The piece did not move me to mirth.

Satire? It qualifies as satire, but at whose expense, really? Certainly the supposed object of ridicule is men’s response to women paid to dance naked in front of them.

But here’s the real message, as I read it: Women (smart white women–“Dr. Sarah”) support and encourage the sexual exploitation of women (women of color–“Carmelita,” “Vanity”); educated women are really only interested in what turns men on; “enlightened” women will wear high heels and flaunt their breasts (preferably big breasts, that cannot tolerate being without the constraints of a bra) if they want to enrich their personal lives.

That’s not satire. That’s sexism.

Who is Toni Schlesinger and what was he or she thinking when writing this? Where is the Reader editorial staff, and what were they thinking when they decided this was fit to print?

I am sick to death of this shit and so is every woman I know. I will never pick up the Reader again.

Please, oh please, I beg of you, print a response that tells me to lighten up.

Diana Slickman

W. Winona