regard@ttidcc.UUCP (Adrienne Regard) (08/02/85)
>>So, please guys-- show some respect!!! It makes me ill to see so many >>men try to defend those who deliberately harm others. I cannot for the >>life of me understand putting down obviously hurt women by defending, >>excusing, or even "understanding" the actions of assailants. It is a >>collosal insult. >Previous posters, including myself, have offered suggestions on the >motivations and politics of rape, among other things. Among these suggestions >have been statements about the likely behavior of rapists, sometimes >expressed in the point of view of the rapist, for greater clarity. >These comments are meant to show likely behavior, and the reasoning that >leads to this behavior, and does not pass judgement on the behavior itself. >The previous poster did not say that the crime of rape was excused by the >dress of the victim, nor was this implied. This thought was added by the >reader, who followed with an attack on all postings attempting a description >of the motivations of a rapist. Eric, do you really think that ALL the postings are simply EXPLAINING the behaviour of rapist, like, for our own edification? I'm not quite sure that this was the real chain of events, or at least not the chain that I think the upset posters are responding to. There were definite remarks that STATED women should alter their behaviour (i.e., dress, walking to cars alone, etc.) because of rapist's behaviour. Which came from the curfew discussion. And there were definite remarks that sounded like some odd defense of rapists to me, too. There have, of course, been rational discussions as well, some of which have even included some suggestions for changes to societal perceptions, suggested treatments/punishments/methods to avoid, etc., and I don't think those people should be flamed. But no where near all of the postings that perportedly just "explained" the behaviour were innocent of implications that "blamed" the victims. I suggest the rational avoid over-reacting, and post the proper disclaimers when discussing such an incendiary topic, to avoid being blasted unnecessarily. >To coin a word: "rapism", the disorder that both allows and compels certain >men to rape. Very little is known about it. This is also true, to a point. The flames start spouting when unsubstantiated claims are made -- from either side -- which carry implications of the "wrongful" or "shameful" behaviour of their adversary, and when substantiated claims are flat ignored. These, too, have been a part of this discussion for some time. (-: This, of course, Eric is an explanation of some of the behaviour of the posters whose work you objected to, which may help explain their motivations in order to "show likely behaviour" for future reference. What action you take about "provokative clothing" re this likely behaviour is, of course, your privilege. If the shoe DOESN'T fit. . . :-) >Eric McColm Adrienne Regard