nap@druxo.UUCP (ParsonsNA) (06/28/85)
> More seriously, the phrasing of the question is *REAL* important. > If the word "rape" was used, I find the statistic hard to believe. > If the phrase "make the woman have sex with you"... > ...this is quite different. I know this is several weeks old, but would someone explain to me the difference between "making someone have sex" and "rape"...I thought that rape is "making" someone have sex... Nancy Parsons AT&T ISL
zubbie@ihlpl.UUCP (Jeanette Zobjeck) (06/28/85)
> > I know this is several weeks old, but would someone explain to me the > difference between "making someone have sex" and "rape"...I thought that > rape is "making" someone have sex... > > Nancy Parsons > AT&T ISL The difference is obvious: Making someone have sex with you implies that they still consent to the sexual **congress** even though they might much rather be in Pittsburgh at the time. (;-) (unless they are already in Pittsburgh that is) RAPE is violently FORCING a sexual act on a persons body regardless of age, sex objecttion, resistance or any other concern of the person being raped. While rape usually involves some kind of sexually related action there is no sex involved (Where sex is defined as the act of sexual coupling). Maybe the difference seems very fine and perhaps even arbitrary the semantics involved only help to confuse the issue. It is very difficult to define an act or concept or anything at all when the key words used in the thing to be described appear in the definition as well. ie pastel red is a color which is less red than the normally thought of color red. Poor choice of example perhaps but mabe it gets the point accross if you think of is as: Rape is a violently sexual act which involves sex as the means which one person uses to exhibit dominance over another. Although sex is used on both sides each use has a totally different meaning which is not inherantly obvious at first reading. This seems to have been the source of many misunderstood postings dealing with the concept that rape is violence not sex. jeanette l. zobjeck ihnp4!ihlpl!zubbie ================================================================================ These are my opinions! I worked for them and I intend to enjoy them. Handle carefully or else someone might think they are yours also. ================================================================================ ~~~ (o o) ************************* |WMWMWMWMWMWMWMWMWM /MWMW| * TO HELL WITH THE DOG * |MWMWMWMWMWMWMWMWMW | WMWM| * -*-*-*-*-*-*- * _________I_I________|/_____ * WATCH OUT FOR THE * * OWNER * *************************
cramer@kontron.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) (07/05/85)
> > > More seriously, the phrasing of the question is *REAL* important. > > If the word "rape" was used, I find the statistic hard to believe. > > If the phrase "make the woman have sex with you"... > > ...this is quite different. > > I know this is several weeks old, but would someone explain to me the > difference between "making someone have sex" and "rape"...I thought that > rape is "making" someone have sex... > > Nancy Parsons > AT&T ISL Being the original poster, let me clarify what I meant. "Rape" means to use force or the threat of force (plus a few other special cases for unconsciousness); "make the woman have sex with you" *can* include annoying ("have sex with me, or I'll say nasty things about you", whining ("please, please"), attempting to provoke guilt ("if you don't have sex with me, all the money I spent on dinner is wasted"). These are all real tacky and disgusting things to do, but they aren't rape, and they are probably not criminal matters.
brianc@tekla.UUCP (Brian Conley) (07/12/85)
> > > More seriously, the phrasing of the question is *REAL* important. > > If the word "rape" was used, I find the statistic hard to believe. > > If the phrase "make the woman have sex with you"... > > ...this is quite different. > > I know this is several weeks old, but would someone explain to me the > difference between "making someone have sex" and "rape"...I thought that > rape is "making" someone have sex... > > Nancy Parsons > AT&T ISL Apparently Nancy the writer believes that rape is a "Violent" crime, thus rape requires violence or the threat of violence. Psychological or emotional trauma is not preceived by the writer as being violent or injurous. (As an asside, perhaps the writer would like to be the subject of some experiments is psychological warfare and torture, just to see how it compares to physical pain.) Either that or the turkey thinks that women LIKE S & M or B & D.
chrisa@azure.UUCP (Chris Andersen) (07/14/85)
In article <288@tekla.UUCP> brianc@tekla.UUCP (Brian Conley) writes: >> >> I know this is several weeks old, but would someone explain to me the >> difference between "making someone have sex" and "rape"...I thought that >> rape is "making" someone have sex... >> >> Nancy Parsons >> AT&T ISL > >Apparently Nancy the writer believes that rape is a "Violent" crime, >thus rape requires violence or the threat of violence. Psychological or >emotional trauma is not preceived by the writer as being violent or injurous. [Just an asside: I think it is always dangerous to put words in another persons mouth. It makes them look bad, it makes you look bad, and makes them want to strike back at you.] > >(As an asside, perhaps the writer would like to be the subject of some >experiments is psychological warfare and torture, just to see how it compares >to physical pain.) Really, do you think saying this is nescessary? Do you really think that Nancy doesn't understand that psychological pain *is* pain. I have found that when people make postings they make subcounscious assumptions about what they are saying (ie "this point need not be stated since it will get across anyway"). Also, no one can keep up a constant guard against saying things that one second thought they would consider absurb (I'm talking generally here, not specifically about Nancy). If you read a posting where someone says something that sounds, to you, absurb, don't lash back at them, just tell them that you think it is absurb *AND* *WHY* you think it is absurb. I think this will go a long way tworads alleviating bad feelings on the net. > >that or the turkey thinks that women LIKE S & M or B & D. I would like to point out that there are some women who do like S&M and B&D. I don't know any personally, but I have listened enough to the media (no not mens magazines!) to know that there are both men *AND* women who like S&M and B&D. Also note that I said *some*, not all. So don't flame me for saying that women want to be raped. Because I have never said that, and I never will. Life, Love, Laughter, and Hope, Chris Andersen -- "Roads? Where we're going we don't need any roads!"
csdf@mit-vax.UUCP (Charles Forsythe) (07/15/85)
<381@mit-vax.UUCP> cancelled from rn.
rdz@ccice5.UUCP (Robert D. Zarcone) (07/16/85)
> > Either that or the turkey thinks that women LIKE S & M or B & D. Some women do. So do some men. So what? There is NOT a fine line between sex of a consenting nature and rape. And there are people who will consent to the above. If the "turkey" thinks that way, SHE is not the one with the faulty thought process. :-) *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***
nap@druxo.UUCP (ParsonsNA) (08/03/85)
>>> Me: >>> I know this is several weeks old, but would someone explain to me the >>> difference between "making someone have sex" and "rape"...I thought that >>> rape is "making" someone have sex... >> Brian: >> Apparently Nancy the writer believes that rape is a "Violent" crime, >> thus rape requires violence or the threat of violence. Psychological or >> emotional trauma is not preceived by the writer as being violent or injurous. Me: That was the whole point of my posting...Any force (physical, psychological, emotional, economic, etc.) used to *make* someone have (so-called) sex *IS*, in my opinion, *RAPE*. Chris: > I have found that when people make postings they make subcounscious > assumptions about what they are saying (ie "this point need not be > stated since it will get across anyway"). Also, no one can keep up a > constant guard against saying things that one second thought they would > consider absurb... Me: Okay, I'm dense. Will *SOMEBODY* please explain what it is that I'm missing in this discussion? Why is my contention that "any force used to coerce someone to 'have sex' constitutes rape" being interpreted as the opposite? P.S. Sorry to drag this up weeks after the original posting, but I was on vacation, it has taken me weeks to get caught up on everything, and I really do want to understand what my blunder was. Nancy Parsons AT&T ISL ihnp4!drutx!druxo!nap
brianc@tekla.UUCP (Brian Conley) (08/08/85)
> Me: > ... Will *SOMEBODY* please explain what it is that I'm > missing in this discussion? Why is my contention that "any force used to > coerce someone to 'have sex' constitutes rape" being interpreted as the > opposite? > > Nancy Parsons > AT&T ISL > ihnp4!drutx!druxo!nap *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE *** Before I begin let me try to clarify past responses: 1) I agree with you that coercing someone to have sex is rape. 2) Reading the original writer's response to your (Nancy's) question (which I read after I wrote my response) has caused me to take another look at this question. 3) Chris' commentary (which I assume was directed at me in particular and future respondents in general) to "think before writing", caused me to think even more on the question. so here goes... Although Webster defines rape as "unlawful sexual intercourse by force or threat . . . " it does not say whether this force or threat must be physical or can be any other form of trauma. Obviously this discussion is getting away form the subject of violent rape, which I'll call obvious rape, and into another form of rape, latent rape or "DATE RAPE". The substance of the original writer's answer to Nancy's question was that "making someone have sex with you" is not coercion but "persuasion" (whether he included pleading, begging, whimpering, etc. I do not remember.). Thus it is RAPE ONLY if you use a "sales technique" which YOU find "morally objectionable". Of course there ARE people who believe that using force as a method of persuasion is NOT morally objectionable. As a non sexual example of this idea, consider home computers. How many people do you know who were "persuaded" to buy a home computer to help educate their child and prevent the child from being "illiterate of technology"? The premis here is that if you don't buy this thing, YOU will be hurting YOUR child! Is this a threat? Is it coercion? Or is it persuasion? Personally, I don't think this is a threat or coercion, just absurd logic and an immoral sales tactic. However, many people see nothing wrong with this technique. I hope this has cleared up some of the confusion on this, although I think that I've probably just reopened a can of worms and offended many people. Please also remember that this is MY ANALYSIS of SOMEONE ELSES REPLY, and I may have misinterpreted the reply.
rdz@ccice5.UUCP (Robert D. Zarcone) (08/08/85)
> > Me: > That was the whole point of my posting...Any force (physical, > psychological, emotional, economic, etc.) used to *make* someone have > (so-called) sex *IS*, in my opinion, *RAPE*. > > Nancy Parsons Well, if this is a working definition of rape, I will hazard to guess that most men, and many women, are rapists. Sorry, I don't consider myself one. BTW, before I get flamed, let me point out that none of the females I may, or may not (since it's really none of your business), have had sex with have never indicated that they consider me a rapist either. *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***
oaf@mit-vax.UUCP (Oded Feingold) (08/09/85)
I think there's a difference, though they shade into each other at
some undefined point. The examples below are tentative and
idiosyncratic. They're intended to make plausible the case for
claiming such a difference exists, not nail it down.
"Make:" Wheedling, begging, threats of withholding future
attention/affection/support/whatever. "I'll be so hurt and my balls
will ache and I won't get any sleep tonight and be miserable all day
tomorrow if you say no." "If you can't even share your body with me
you're not worth my time, let alone the price of dinner." Implies a
continuing relationship, however exploitive. In fact, the aggressor
may like (or think he likes) the victim, but dominance and sexual
satisfaction come first. [Is it okay to use "he" blithely in the
preceding sentence?]
"Rape:" Threat or actuality of violence, humiliation, physical
force, etc. The only continuing relationship implied in such actions
consists of future depredations, with the victim unable to break the
cycle. This works especially well on children, who might not
comprehend there exists a justice system which considers such things
actionable.
Where they shade into each other: Power relationships - "We fuck
or you lose your job." "We fuck or your husband doesn't get the
job/funding/whatever." "If you won't sleep with me you can forget
about getting a degree from this place." [Variants: "I'll give you a
better grade." "I'll give your concert a better review."] "If you
fuck me willingly we're still friends, but if not then I'm going to
take what I want anyway. So which is it gonna be?" Naah, most of
those are too crude. Maybe someone else can find a less clear-cut
example.
Comments? Here's one: I find this class of discussion ugly and
depressing, but that's what net.women is for, presumably. If not, I'm
sure I'll hear about it.
--
Oded Feingold {decvax, harvard, mit-eddie}!mitvax!oaf oaf%oz@mit-mc.ARPA
MIT AI Laboratory 545 Tech Square Cambridge, Mass. 02139 617-253-8598linda@amdcad.UUCP (Linda Seltzer) (08/14/85)
> > "Rape:" Threat or actuality of violence, humiliation, physical > force, etc. The only continuing relationship implied in such actions > consists of future depredations, with the victim unable to break the > cycle. This works especially well on children, who might not > comprehend there exists a justice system which considers such things > actionable. > > Where they shade into each other: Power relationships - "We fuck > or you lose your job." "We fuck or your husband doesn't get the > job/funding/whatever." "If you won't sleep with me you can forget > about getting a degree from this place." [Variants: "I'll give you a This is the difference between sexual harrassment and rape. Legally, one can sue for harrassment and press charges for rape - a person more knowledgeable about legal matters could comment on this.