The Fish
for 16 March 1998. Updated every WEEKDAY.
Suck Staff

Joey Anuff
Joey Anuff
Editor in Chief


Terry Colon
Terry Colon
Art Director


[the fixin' pixie... ]
Emily Hobson
Production Manager
and Drink Taster


Heather Havrilesky
Heather Havrilesky
Senior Editor


[Ian Connelly]
Ian Connelly
Marketing Manager


[Copy Edit]
Copy Edit

Suck Alumni
Suck Alumni Text

Carl Steadman
Carl Steadman


Ana Marie Cox
Ana Marie Cox
Executive Editor


Sean (Duuuuude) Welch
Sean Welch


Owen Thomas
Owen Thomas
Copy Editor


T. Jay Fowler

Production Manager

& Ass Kicker


[yes, it's a plunger. i'll l
eave the rest up to your imagination ... ]
Erin Coull
Production Manager


Matt Beer
Matt Beer
Development Manager

Hanging Judge

I read with interest your piece
on the portrayal of children,
but your views appeared
confused on the issue of the
sexuality of young children.

The issue of the portrayal of
children must be considered
separately from the issue of
sexual activity with

While I quite agree
that the portrayal of
children in the American
media is often based on false
ideas of "innocence," and is
often horrifically gloopy, I
do not draw a parallel
between such portrayals and
sexual activity with

Sexual activity between
adults and children
is not wrong because of some
unchanging physical law - but
in Western societies, as they
are currently constituted,
there can be no justification
for it. In the time of
Socrates, there was a general
acceptance that homosexual
relationships between men and
boys (and more rarely, women
and girls) was a perfectly
normal stage of sexual
development. That this is not
the case now does not mean
that the modern era is more
hypocritical or less relaxed
than the Hellenes were. It
merely reflects a differing morality.

Children in the
modern era are not taught
that sex between them and an
older adult is normal, or
that it is right. Indeed, in
many countries, they are not
taught about sex at all until
a relatively advanced age.
Also, the physical process of
sexual maturity rules out the
possibility of procreative
sex until a certain age.

The lack of societal approval of
adult-child sexuality, and
the assumption drilled into
children that adults are
generally to be obeyed, means
that the reaction of children
to adult-child sexual
activity is utter devastation
- the loss of all behavioral
reference points. The large
numbers of alleged victims
bandied around by groups with
axes to grind do not make
less the suffering caused to
the relatively small number
of people who are the victims
of abuse. Similarly, the
younging-down of sexuality
in advertising, etc., whether
one agrees or not, will not
mean that adult-child sexual
relations are OK - there are
still too many taboos against
it for it not to have a
harmful effect on the child.
Abusus non tollit usum, as
they say.

I hasten to add
that I am not accusing you of
supporting child sex abuse,
or even of drawing invalid
parallels between younging-
down and abuse - but I did
think that your article did
not make the distinction very clear.

Anthony Zachary, Department of Health,
HM Government, London.

I don't even support sex between
consenting adults, A. Z., let
alone sex between adults and
children. But as you seem to
agree, a large portion of
advertising is a child
molester's wet dream. That
doesn't mean we should be
copying the Greeks (look what
happened to them), but it
does make you wonder.

yr pal,

Fish With Letter Icon

Many thanks for your 3
March Suck article, "Hanging
Judge." Mostly, I was glad to
see that there is someone
else who recognizes that
those evil pedophiles lurking
in our midst are not simply
mental misfits with too many
screws loose, but are truly
products of our deranged
culture that continually
presents the sexless,
childlike body as the
titillating sexual ideal.
Working at a university chock
full of supposed intellectual
elites, one assumes this fact
would at least be more
apparent to those lucky
enough to be educated in our
society, but I have certainly
not found this to be the
case. In fact, I was worried
I was just becoming old,
crotchety, and unyielding in
my views.

(Well, I may still
be old, crotchety, and
unyielding, but at least
someone agrees with me on at
least one point.)

Cheryl Klimaszewski

Thanks, Cheryl.
It turns out that those evil
pedophiles really are mental
misfits with too many screws
loose, and that our culture
is, in fact, deranged. You
may be old, crotchety, and
unyielding, but I know for a
fact that I have a sexless,
childlike body.

So it all works out in the end.

yr pal,

Fish With Letter Icon

I'm wasted.... Is
there any paperwork for me to
receive? Why won't anyone
contact me? I am looking for

$1.84 aliens kick ass

Derek Dangelo

Derek, I'm naked....
Has anyone seen my
lactose pads? Why isn't
anyone looking at my
physique? I need a friend.

fr 11 teletubbies rock BarTel

Fish With Letter Icon


I'm just a pseudo-linguist,
but wouldn't number four be
funnier if bachelor number
one spoke of bachelors dos and tres instead of
uno and dos? Or is it part of
the joke that he's no cunning
linguist either? Or is this
one of those
in-the-third-person things?

P. S.: Miss Wiffleworth says
that the lower-left-hand icon
should be "Previous Page,"
not "Last Page." She also
says not to start a sentence
with "and" or "or," but Ned
don't pay her no nevermind on
that subject.

Ned Kittlitz

Re: the bachelors - The panel
was designed to have a number
of possible interpretations,
Ned. Your failure to choose
one decisively indicates a
fundamental flaw in your
psyche, which your subsequent
reference to the phantom Miss
Wiffleworth only accentuates.

Our assessment: seek help.

St. Huck

Fish With Letter Icon

I'm viewing your cartoon
balloons from a 19-inch TV
screen, and they are too
small to read. I don't wear
glasses and my opthomologist
tells me I have normal
vision. With no cartoons, the
colomn if great. Though, at
times, The verbal garbage
becames a bit overwelming.

VTU, Richard

Maybe you should get a bigger


Fish With Letter Icon

Gas Mask

Subject: Teenage wasteland

Other than my instinctive
reaction to disagree with
everything you write just for
the sake of a good argument,
I honestly think there are
two legitimate criticisms one
can make of your fine

1. It really is dangerous in
the Gulf. Even if nobody
shoots back (and somebody
will shoot back), taking off
and landing and just flying
around carriers is inherently
risky. In 'Nam, medical tests
showed that pilots were
actually more scared when
landing on their carriers
than when making bomb runs.
And don't forget John Glenn's
crack about what it was like
being in the space program:
"Sitting on 10 million parts,
all of which were sold by the
lowest bidder." These guys
are flying with several tons
of Bang, all of which was
made by the lowest bidder.
It's scary. Let them crow a

2. Our policy toward Iraq in
particular, and the Middle
East in general, is lousy,
full of contradictions,
morally inept, and very
confused. The technical term
for this situation is "life."
We are not responsible for
all of it; most of the
problems result from the
behavior of somebody else. We
are doing the best we can
(OK, we're doing a lot less
than the best we can), with
what we have. Perhaps it's
time to come to the
realization that not
everything that goes wrong is
our fault. Not everything
that breaks can be fixed. Not
all problems have neat

These are the lessons
children must learn to become
adults; not all learn them.
Maybe it's time we learned
them as a nation.

This isn't a criticism of
your analysis, which is
accurate and effective. And,
most certainly, it isn't a
plea for us to "trust our
leaders." It's just a
suggestion that maybe the
world can't be fixed by even
the best zine column.

Alan Kornheiser

But there's no disagreement,

In re: "Even if nobody shoots
back (and somebody will shoot
back), taking off and landing
and just flying around
carriers is inherently
risky," note that I wrote,
and emphasis added, here:
"One suspects that the
sailors, being highly
disciplined professionals and
well accustomed to getting
their work done in an
atmosphere of real and
persistent danger,
this." The point was simply
that the added danger that
would come from shooting at
Iraq didn't rise to the level
of drama that the newspapers
took it to.

In re: "Not everything that
goes wrong is our fault. Not
everything that breaks can be
fixed. Not all problems have
neat solutions," I would have
to say that 1) I agree, and
2) it's our effort to "fix"
the world - arming Iraq to
fix Iran, for example - that
makes things worse,
sometimes. I think the very
problem here (recently, in
addition to the arming Iraq
thing) is that the Clinton
administration has been
trying to sell a picture of
"neat solutions," of firm
posturing being a real
solution to something more

I must go fix the world, now.

Ambrose Beers

Fish With Letter Icon

The Stuff -- it's a list of stuff we like

Little link to Suck
Arrow Image
Contacting Us
Contributors Index
Little Barrel Link
Little Gun Link
A machine producing Suck
Link To Tech Notes