Madonna is not a bimbo ("What's Wrong With Bimbo Rock?," by Connie Johnson, March 10). Any moron (even Pia Zadora, for that matter) could tell you that Madonna's entire "boy-toy" image is just a put-on. The fact that Johnson takes this image so seriously and interprets it as a step backward for the feminist movement leads me to believe that she worries too much.
I suggest that she stop trying to analyze everything that she sees and just relax and enjoy the music.
I heartily applaud Johnson's long-overdue article, but don't get me wrong. If Madonna doesn't feel that writhing around on the floor degrades her, then who am I to say that it does?
I just wish artists with real conviction like Eurythmics' Annie Lennox and Chrissie (Hynde) Kerr of the Pretenders could get half the exposure no-talents like Madonna do.
Kerr and particularly Lennox are able to project erotic images on stage without ever having to flaunt their bodies. Also they write their own songs, proof that their music is a beautiful expression of personal feelings and emotions inside them. Not just something contrived to climb the pop charts.
Fortunately, Madonna and her ilk tend to burn out quickly. Usually as soon as another pretty face in a slick package comes along.
JAMES E. JECKEWICZ
Why not lobby for criticisms against Princess Diana and Christie Brinkley for their glamorized manikin existences as a negative influence on teens? At least Madonna, Sheila E., and Apollonia don't sugar-coat exploitation.
Is anybody able to explain why we aren't in an uproar about the social influence and statements of the likes of Ozzie Osbourne or Vince Neil (from Motley Crue, and up for a charge of manslaughter!), on the just-as-impressionable young boy's mind?!
In comparison, Sheila E. and Madonna are relatively harmless displays of the way our culture views femininity today.
Sheila E. isn't the only "bimbo" who can claim "legitimate musical attributes." Berlin's "The Metro," for example, is a lovely, touching, evocative song. The images it conjures up are anything but sleazy and cheap.
I admit it's hard to avoid the "bimbo" label when you've posed for Hustler and sing like Betty Boop, but that doesn't change the fact that Missing Persons has put out some tough, gritty rock songs, reminiscent of early Stones material.
Hurrah for Johnson. I find it interesting that while Prince considers himself the ultimate musical maverick, the women in his (what the rock critics like to call) "stable" are either clones of himself (i.e., Revolution members Wendy and Lisa) or clones of each other (Apollonia, Vanity, Sheila E.).
Prince's message is clear: one set of T&A; is as good as another.
We are still in the dark ages sexually. And it's women like disc jockey Deirdre O'Donoghue and Johnson that help keep us there.
If they'll remember, at the time, it was "every woman free to do what they want, be who they are"--a noble plight. But, now, these two have set themselves up as judges of what is and isn't dignified enough behavior for a woman.
What were these women fighting for in the movement, if not the opportunity for a woman to be as sexually free as a man without being termed a "slut"?
But, that is what O'Donoghue/Johnson are saying when using the more printable word, Bimbo. So, wh o' s not "liberated"? Who's stuck in stereotypical thinking?
The views expressed by so-called feminists in Johnson's article is yet another convincing piece of evidence of the startling idiocy and danger concomitant to their moronic ideology.
These puerile robots are nothing more nor less than just another breed of nauseous, self-serving moralists whose true aspiration and objective is to dictate the behavior of all other people. Their disguised, yet still highly discernible, motto is: Enjoy yourself and be your own person--just so long as you behave in a manner we find acceptable. This is the very same goal pursued by the Jerry Falwell ilk. The basic difference between the two groups of zealot crusaders is their labeling and marketing techniques.
The truth is, sexuality is a biological difference between members of the human race. Basically, there are only two distinctly different types of humans.
There are those who are tolerant of the taste and pursuits of pleasure and fun by others, and there are those who are not. And the latter group must never be permitted to inflict their odious narrow-mindedness upon the former group. That is what the fight for individual freedom and the pursuit of happiness is all about.
So, Madonna, Vanity, Apollonia, Sheila E., and everyone else who has the courage and boldness to defy all externally imposed intimidations, keep it up, for you are my type of people--period!
C. MYLES FOWLER
If this is the era of female rockers, I nominate The Times' female critics Kristine McKenna and Johnson as well.
McKenna's nomination (in her Teena Marie review) of "Betty Boop for female rock comeback of the year," has got to be the line of the year. Connie's "rock Bimbo" article should get more letters this side of Hunt, McDougal or Hilburn.
Keep up the good work, ladies.
SCOTT E. McCREARY
Watch that ladies stuff, please.
THE REAL BOWZER
In his article on VH-1, Terry Atkinson claims "if you didn't know Jon Bauman is a former member of Sha Na Na, you'll quickly be reminded" ("VH-1: Pop With Pictures for the Parents of the MTV Crowd," March 3).
The truth is, in 1540 segments I've done for VH-1, I've mentioned Sha Na Na fewer than 30 times. Proud as I am of having created Bowzer, it's most important to me to be allowed to function outside that character, as I am now doing.
Atkinson viewed a couple of segments where I happened to be on the subject and decided he was omniscient and knew what went on in the other 1538. However, to illustrate he was at least correct about my "real flair for humor," I'm writing this letter on leftover "Bouzer" stationery.