london@oddjob.UUCP (David London) (05/18/85)
<> This discussion about whether women who wear "provocative" clothing are at fault (in part) for being raped is becoming increasingly offensive. It is truly distressing to see the number of (apparently sensitive, enlightened well-meaning) men who do not see what rape is all about. For instance, Ross Greenberg (not to singly out Ross, but his is the letter that I remember) suggests an analogy between a person walking around in a bad neighbourhood with $100 bills hanging out of his pockets, and a women wearing "suggestive" clothing. Ross, you just don't get it, do you? For the sake of argument, suppose I concede that I am partly at fault for getting robbed. In this case, the purpose of the robbery was to get my money. Rape is nothing like this. A woman is not raped because the man was so horny he couldn't stand it; a woman is raped BECAUSE SHE IS A WOMAN. This business about "provocative" clothing is a red herring, invented by men in order not to take responsibility for their actions and their attitudes toward women. (We) men have to start realizing that we are responsible for the way society (and other men) treat women. Perhaps the phrase "rape is not a crime of sex - it is a crime of violence" is overused. It certainly hasn't gotten through to many men on the net. Perhaps a new phrase is in order. David London ..!ihnp4!oddjob!london P.S. Sophie: your reply to Mark was right on target!
greenber@timeinc.UUCP (Ross M. Greenberg) (05/20/85)
David London comments on how I "just don't get it".
I think he's wrong.
Women, solely based on their sex, have the horror of potential
rape to live with, and I am saddened. And the sickies out there that
will manifest their sickness upon women, based only on their sex, do
not have my sympathies. They deserve the most painful place in Hell
for their deeds.
And if a women wants to reduce her chances of being raped, then
she should not call attention to her sex by dressing provocatively.
Just like if I want to reduce my chance of being mugged, I don't
flash hundred dollar bills.
It seems obvious. That still doesn't make it right. Just obvious.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Ross M. Greenberg @ Time Inc, New York
--------->{ihnp4 | vax135}!timeinc!greenber<---------
Timeinc probably wouldn't acknowledge my existence, and has opinions of its
own. I highly doubt that they would make me their spokesperson.
------
"There's something wrong in the world. There's always been. Something no one
has ever named or explained" --- Francisco d'Anconiaellen@reed.UUCP (Ellen Eades) (05/20/85)
> Ross Greenberg > David London comments on how I "just don't get it". > I think he's wrong. > > Women, solely based on their sex, have the horror of potential > rape to live with.... > > And if a women wants to reduce her chances of being raped, then > she should not call attention to her sex by dressing provocatively. > Just like if I want to reduce my chance of being mugged, I don't > flash hundred dollar bills. > I agree with David, you just don't get it, Ross. Women are not victims of rape SOLELY BASED ON THEIR SEX. Men are also victims of rape. Children both male and female are victims of rape. Rape is an expression of one person's ability to physically FORCE another person. The only thing it has to do with sex is that it is a sexual expression of that power relationship. Rape is NOT a sexual crime!!!!! If a person wants to reduce his/her chances of being raped, he/she should try to be as formidable a target, as unlikely a victim, as possible. This may or may not relate to provocative dressing. It does relate to things like how you walk and carry yourself, your posture, your verbal aggressiveness, your mental forcefulness. Rapists are known to spend up to 10 minutes sizing up potential victims before they attack. If the victim does not ACT like a victim, the rapist will probably try another person. Now, if the guy was just afflicted with blue balls, I doubt that he would behave in that manner! Men who blame rape on hormones do themselves an injustice. It used to be said that women could not work or think intellectually because of their hormones; now men cannot think rationally because of theirs? Come off it, guys! Ellen Eades
jeffw@tekecs.UUCP (Jeff Winslow) (05/21/85)
> Men who blame rape on hormones do themselves an injustice. It > used to be said that women could not work or think > intellectually because of their hormones; now men cannot think > rationally because of theirs? Come off it, guys! > Both statements are certainly ridiculous extremes, however, don't imagine that hormone levels have nothing to do with violent behavior. People who insistently scream that rape is a crime of violence and not of sex often seem to imagine that the two must be mutually exclusive. While I agree with that particular psychological assessment (of the reason for rape), when I consider the murky recesses of brain chemistry I wouldn't count on any such exclusivity. Jeff Winslow
greenber@timeinc.UUCP (Ross M. Greenberg) (05/22/85)
In article <1549@reed.UUCP> ellen@reed.UUCP (Ellen Eades) writes: > >Men who blame rape on hormones do themselves an injustice. It >used to be said that women could not work or think >intellectually because of their hormones; now men cannot think >rationally because of theirs? Come off it, guys! > >Ellen Eades Ellen, if you read my postings carefully, I think you'll see that I have not commented on what rape is (sex or violence) or any such thing. I am not blaming rape on "raging hormones" or other such baloney. I don't hold that such commentary is true. The only comment that I made is that, for whatever reason, "provocative" clothing *may* trigger the rapist into action. And IF THIS IS TRUE, for any reason, than a women who dresses modestly reduces her chances of rape. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Ross M. Greenberg @ Time Inc, New York --------->{ihnp4 | vax135}!timeinc!greenber<--------- Timeinc probably wouldn't acknowledge my existence, and has opinions of its own. I highly doubt that they would make me their spokesperson. ------ "There's something wrong in the world. There's always been. Something no one has ever named or explained" --- Francisco d'Anconia
dmcanzi@watdcsu.UUCP (David Canzi) (05/22/85)
In article <1549@reed.UUCP> ellen@reed.UUCP (Ellen Eades) writes: >> And if a women wants to reduce her chances of being raped, then >> she should not call attention to her sex by dressing provocatively. >> Just like if I want to reduce my chance of being mugged, I don't >> flash hundred dollar bills. >> >I agree with David, you just don't get it, Ross. Women are not >victims of rape SOLELY BASED ON THEIR SEX. Men are also victims >of rape. Children both male and female are victims of rape. >Rape is an expression of one person's ability to physically >FORCE another person. The only thing it has to do with sex is >that it is a sexual expression of that power relationship. Rape >is NOT a sexual crime!!!!! Pfui! Armed robbery is an expression of one person's ability to physically THREATEN another person. The only thing it has to do with money is that it's a monetary expression of that coercive relationship. Robbery is not a monetary crime!!!!! So there. See. I can argue like a feminist, too. -- David Canzi "The Indians got revenge on the white man. They gave him tobacco."
jeff@rtech.UUCP (Jeff Lichtman) (05/22/85)
> Perhaps the phrase "rape is not a crime of sex - it is a crime of > violence" is overused. It certainly hasn't gotten through to many men on > the net. Perhaps a new phrase is in order. > > David London This has always seemed to me to be an oversimplification. I think rape is a crime of both violence and sex. After all, it's not the same as getting hit on the head, is it? If it were not for the sexual aspect, rape would be just another form of assault. -- Jeff Lichtman at rtech (Relational Technology, Inc.) aka Swazoo Koolak {amdahl, sun}!rtech!jeff {ucbvax, decvax}!mtxinu!rtech!jeff
sophie@mnetor.UUCP (Sophie Quigley) (05/23/85)
> > If a person wants to reduce his/her chances of being raped, > he/she should try to be as formidable a target, as unlikely a > victim, as possible. This may or may not relate to provocative > dressing. It does relate to things like how you walk and carry > yourself, your posture, your verbal aggressiveness, your mental > forcefulness. Rapists are known to spend up to 10 minutes > sizing up potential victims before they attack. If the victim > does not ACT like a victim, the rapist will probably try another > person. Now, if the guy was just afflicted with blue balls, I > doubt that he would behave in that manner! > > Ellen Eades While I agree with that and think that it makes perfect sense for people not to try to act like victims, I am worried that such analysis of he situation again throws the blame on the victim. One should never forget that the RAPIST and nobody else is responsible for the rape. If grown women all learn to act tough, then rapists will attack people who cannot act tough, like children or older people (I am not implying that older people are not grown in this sentence). There will always be people weak enough to be attacked, so even though it is a nice idea to teach strong people to defend themselves, this should not be an excuse not to defend weaker people. -- Sophie Quigley {allegra|decvax|ihnp4|linus|watmath}!utzoo!mnetor!sophie
zubbie@ihlpa.UUCP (Jeanette Zobjeck) (05/23/85)
> In article <1549@reed.UUCP> ellen@reed.UUCP (Ellen Eades) writes: > >> And if a women wants to reduce her chances of being raped, then > >> she should not call attention to her sex by dressing provocatively. > >> Just like if I want to reduce my chance of being mugged, I don't > >> flash hundred dollar bills. > >> > >I agree with David, you just don't get it, Ross. Women are not > >victims of rape SOLELY BASED ON THEIR SEX. Men are also victims > >of rape. Children both male and female are victims of rape. > >Rape is an expression of one person's ability to physically > >FORCE another person. The only thing it has to do with sex is > >that it is a sexual expression of that power relationship. Rape > >is NOT a sexual crime!!!!! > > Pfui! Armed robbery is an expression of one person's ability to > physically THREATEN another person. The only thing it has to do > with money is that it's a monetary expression of that coercive > relationship. Robbery is not a monetary crime!!!!! > > So there. See. I can argue like a feminist, too. > -- > David Canzi > OK That's great but I bet that if you are robbed you will recoup your loss either through insurance or by working a bit of overtime to get **caught up** How,pray tell, do you expect a rape victim to accomplish the anolog of either? Your ability to argue as a feminist is as effective as your ability to choose valid arguments. Jeanette Zobjeck ihnp4!ihlpa!zubbie ================================================================================ All opinions are my own (I think?) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
chris@pyuxc.UUCP (R. Hollenbeck) (05/24/85)
>Rape is nothing like this. A woman is not raped because the man >was so horny he couldn't stand it; a woman is raped BECAUSE SHE IS A WOMAN. Agreed. I never bought the notion that anyone could get so horny they couldn't stand it. Rapists are working from a different perspective (I don't claim to know what it is, but I wouldn't buy the "so horny they couldn't stand it" line either.) > This business about "provocative" clothing is a red herring, invented >by men in order not to take responsibility for their actions and their >attitudes toward women. Here, however, I'd like to take partial exception. Since your posting is about rape, the above should say "invented by rapists (and their lawyers) in order not to take responsibility ..." . I've been flamed for saying this before (mostly by amateur Freudians), but I'm going to say it again anyway. Conversations about rape tend to label all men as potential rapists. Men don't commit rape; rapists (most of whom are male) commit rape. Until people can start making this distinction, discussions on this topic will never achieve their purpose. >(We) men have to start realizing that we are >responsible for the way society (and other men) treat women. True.
sigma@usl.UUCP (Spiros Triantafyllopoulos) (05/25/85)
In article <1549@reed.UUCP> ellen@reed.UUCP (Ellen Eades) writes: >If a person wants to reduce his/her chances of being raped, >he/she should try to be as formidable a target, as unlikely a >victim, as possible.... >............. Rapists are known to spend up to 10 minutes >sizing up potential victims before they attack. If the victim >does not ACT like a victim, the rapist will probably try another >person. Which reminds me of a VERY amusing scene a couple of years ago. I was in the main terminal room and a thunderstrike zapped out the entire power supply system of the computer center. Instant blackout. The only lights that came on (apart from a quite furious operator!) were the ones of the countless Oriental (Malaysian & Taiwanese) girls who were carrying miniature torches/alarm combos for the walk back to the dorm!!! Spiros: ut-sally!usl!sigma
dmcanzi@watdcsu.UUCP (David Canzi) (05/25/85)
In article <253@ihlpa.UUCP> zubbie@ihlpa.UUCP (Jeanette Zobjeck) writes: >> >Rape is an expression of one person's ability to physically >> >FORCE another person. The only thing it has to do with sex is >> >that it is a sexual expression of that power relationship. Rape >> >is NOT a sexual crime!!!!! >> >> Pfui! Armed robbery is an expression of one person's ability to >> physically THREATEN another person. The only thing it has to do >> with money is that it's a monetary expression of that coercive >> relationship. Robbery is not a monetary crime!!!!! >> >> So there. See. I can argue like a feminist, too. >> -- >> David Canzi >> >OK >That's great but I bet that if you are robbed you will recoup your loss >either through insurance or by working a bit of overtime to get >**caught up** >How,pray tell, do you expect a rape victim to accomplish the anolog >of either? I'd take the loss. (I don't get paid extra for overtime, and I have no insurance.) It may be that this is all a rape victim can do. >Your ability to argue as a feminist is as effective as your ability >to choose valid arguments. My argument was ridiculous. It was identical with her argument. That's the point of it. A lot of people are casually assuming that sex is not part of what motivates a rapist. How do you know? Do you have studies to back this belief up, or do you merely go along and believe because it's the politically correct thing to believe? >All opinions are my own (I think?) That hint of doubt is a healthy sign. -- David Canzi "The Indians got revenge on the white man. They gave him tobacco."
seb@mtgzz.UUCP (s.e.badian) (05/27/85)
REFERENCES: <734@oddjob.UUCP>, <193@timeinc.UUCP> It still seems that men(and probably lots of women) confuse the act of rape with something resembling sex. You have to get away from this mental block. It just isn't so. When you consider the number of just plain women who are raped(women who are minding their own business, women who are dressed in unassuming clothes, older women who are being far from provocative) you suddenly realize that rapes are not commited because the woman was "asking for it." The only thing the women did to ask for it in most cases of rape is be born a women. That is all. Throwing in all this stuff about provocative clothes only confuses the issue. It throws the responsibility of rape back at the woman. "Well, look at the way she was dressed. Anyone would want to jump her bones!" Unfortunately, the fact that you may want to jump her bones has absolutely nothing to do with rape. It is an act of domination and that is all. Sharon Badian ihnp4!mtgzz!seb
sophie@mnetor.UUCP (Sophie Quigley) (05/28/85)
HMMMMMMMMMMM HMMMMMMMMMMMMMM (clearing my throat)
This "provocative clothing" discussion is starting to make me EXTREMELY
angry!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I know that some of you men out there are trying to be "helpful" by explaining
to us poor women that "provocative" clothing might increase our chances of
getting raped. Well, you are NOT being helpful; as a matter of fact, you are
being absolute nuisances and insulting our intelligence.
WE are very aware that any rapist will use whatsoever excuse he can get
to be "provoqued" into raping. We are not bumbling idiots. We know
very well, that if we wear sexy clothes we will be usually at least
accosted once. We know very well that we stand a greater chance of
being raped. So, we are very aware of the dangers, much more than any
of you are.
HOWEVER, we have to live too, you know, and we do occasionally like to
dress up and look nice because that's part of the pleasure of being
alive. We also like to be attractive, and don't even mind it if
strangers find us attractive. Why, after all, we even enjoy looking at
attractive strangers ourselves. So, if we are doing all these things,
it is because we derive some emotional satisfaction out of it, and
(damn it!) life wouldn't be worth living if we could not even enjoy
such simple pleasures as looking good.
WE HAVE A RIGHT TO WEAR NICE CLOTHES!
WE HAVE A RIGHT TO WALK ALONE LATE AT NIGHT!
(Add a few "Damn it!" to all of the above and repeat five times)
furthermore,
NOBODY HAS A RIGHT TO RAPE ANYBODY ELSE!!
So, could we please concentrate our attentions on the *real* problem:
How to stop rapists from raping.
--
Sophie Quigley
{allegra|decvax|ihnp4|linus|watmath}!utzoo!mnetor!sophiecramer@kontron.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) (05/28/85)
> REFERENCES: <734@oddjob.UUCP>, <193@timeinc.UUCP> > > It still seems that men(and probably lots of women) confuse > the act of rape with something resembling sex. You have to get away > from this mental block. It just isn't so. When you consider the > number of just plain women who are raped(women who are minding their > own business, women who are dressed in unassuming clothes, older > women who are being far from provocative) you suddenly realize > that rapes are not commited because the woman was "asking for it." > The only thing the women did to ask for it in most cases of rape > is be born a women. That is all. > Throwing in all this stuff about provocative clothes only > confuses the issue. It throws the responsibility of rape back at > the woman. "Well, look at the way she was dressed. Anyone would > want to jump her bones!" Unfortunately, the fact that you may want > to jump her bones has absolutely nothing to do with rape. It is > an act of domination and that is all. > > Sharon Badian ihnp4!mtgzz!seb If you read what people have been writing, rather than what you *think* they are writing, you would realize that no one here is claiming that provocative dress is "asking for it", and no one here is claiming that *most* rape is the result of provocative dress. The only assertion is that provocative dress may push *a few* rapists over the edge; it would be safest to avoid trouble, just like I avoid trouble by not walking through Watts at night.
sed408@ihlpg.UUCP (s. dugan) (05/29/85)
> The only comment that I made is that, for whatever reason, "provocative" > clothing *may* trigger the rapist into action. And IF THIS IS TRUE, > for any reason, than a women who dresses modestly reduces her chances > of rape. > If it is true that women wearing "provocative" clothing *may* trigger the rapist, why do little, old ladies in wrinkly clothes get raped? For that matter, what about little children (male and female) being raped by adults (again, both male and female)? Men in prison get raped, too. I think we need to focus on the fact that rape is violence and *NOT* sex. Sarah E. Dugan (no clever lines) -- Sarah E. Dugan (no clever lines)
zubbie@ihlpa.UUCP (Jeanette Zobjeck) (05/29/85)
> > A lot of people are casually assuming that sex is not part of what > motivates a rapist. How do you know? Do you have studies to back > this belief up, or do you merely go along and believe because it's > the politically correct thing to believe? > > >All opinions are my own (I think?) > > David Canzi I have no studies to believe. I have no political sense of correctness to support my beliefs. I am not a lot of people. How do I know? Have you ever been assaulted, physically or psychologically? Do you know the feeling of having been USED? Any woman who has been raped or assaulted will tell you that for quite a while after the fact one of the things they feel is that they are **soiled**. You dont know what it feels like to take a good hot shower step out, towel dry , get dressed only to start all over with another shower because you still feel dirty. It really does not matter to a woman what the motives of the rapist are until long after the fact because she has to deal with the trauma, mental and emotional, of believing in herself and building up her own self-respect to a point where she can again feel human. Rape is not a pretty topic for discussion, only an important one, but rape to a rape victim becomes a central element in her life, sometimes, many times, for the rest of her life. We can sit here at our keyboards and calmly or not discourse on the why's and how's of rape till hell freezes over but a rape victim or an assault victim will know from experience just how terrible the experience really is, they may even be able to hide the self-loathing they feel from their friends and family but it still eats away at them from inside. My own solution to the question of rape, rapists and appropriate punishments and deterents has never been voiced on this net, by myself, although others have said it for me. Given the choices as presented here I know beyond any shadow of a doubt that I could easily vote for rapists to be sentenced to the elctric chair and an assailant or would-be rapist is entitled only to be completely blown away preferably by his current victim or by one of his previous victims. Jeanette L. Zobjeck ihnp4!ihlpa!zubbie ================================================================================ These opinions are my own. I earned them and the right to express them and by gum I'm going to. ================================================================================
gail@calmasd.UUCP (Gail B. Hanrahan) (05/30/85)
In article <180@kontron.UUCP> cramer@kontron.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes: >The only assertion >is that provocative dress may push *a few* rapists over the edge; >it would be safest to avoid trouble, just like I avoid trouble by not >walking through Watts at night. The only problem with this is that women have no way of knowing what will be considered provocative. Jeans and t-shirts have been considered provocative. Do you mean that I should not wear my normal, everyday clothing on the street? Should we, just to avoid trouble, wear voluminous robes and veils a la Middle Eastern cultures? But someone, somewhere, may be provoked by a voluminous robe. Maybe we should, just to avoid trouble, stay at home all the time? Sharon Badian was perfectly correct when she said (I paraphrase here) that discussion of provocative clothing only confuses the issue.
edhall@randvax.UUCP (Ed Hall) (06/03/85)
> A lot of people are casually assuming that sex is not part of what > motivates a rapist. How do you know? Do you have studies to back > this belief up, or do you merely go along and believe because it's > the politically correct thing to believe? > David Canzi This is USENET, not The NOW Times. The ``politically correct'' thing seems to be the status quo, or perhaps a bit to the right of it. Just spend some time in net.politics. I think you have a misunderstanding here. Rape is not sex. Rape is a violation of a person's body. It is violence, pure and simple. A rapist might be sexually aroused by violence. But this is not what makes rape a crime. The violence is. Almost anything could be sexually arousing to some person or another. There are criminals who are sexually aroused by murdering someone. But that does not make it ``sex'' to everyone else. Nor does it make murder a crime of sex. The question isn't whether rape is arousing to the rapist. The question is: what is rape to society? What is rape to me? To you? There is one thing sure: to the victim, it is NOT sex. To some, it is worse than death. Do you really want to call ``what motivates a rapist'' sex? Is this your idea of sex? Do you think it should be *anybody's* idea of sex? Then why do you persist in calling it ``sex''? What the hell is wrong with calling it violence? -Ed Hall decvax!randvax!edhall
cramer@kontron.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) (06/03/85)
> In article <180@kontron.UUCP> cramer@kontron.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes: > >The only assertion > >is that provocative dress may push *a few* rapists over the edge; > >it would be safest to avoid trouble, just like I avoid trouble by not > >walking through Watts at night. > > The only problem with this is that women have no way of knowing > what will be considered provocative. Jeans and t-shirts have > been considered provocative. Do you mean that I should not wear > my normal, everyday clothing on the street? Should we, just to > avoid trouble, wear voluminous robes and veils a la Middle > Eastern cultures? But someone, somewhere, may be provoked by a > voluminous robe. Maybe we should, just to avoid trouble, stay > at home all the time? > I completely agree with you that there is a problem in determining what constitutes provocative. (You may remember the judge a couple years ago back East who thought a 15 year old girl wearing jeans and a t-shirt was dressed "provocatively".) Nonetheless, there are some styles of dress that almost everyone could agree are provocative, and might be best to avoid in dangerous places like California. > Sharon Badian was perfectly correct when she said (I paraphrase > here) that discussion of provocative clothing only confuses the > issue. It only confuses the issue because a number of people seem to have interpreted my remarks as indicating that the rapist is less responsible because of what the victim was wearing. For the fifth or sixth time, "A rapist is responsible for his actions; the victim's style of clothing doesn't make her at responsible. This discussion is pure and simple, a discussion of *practical* ways to avoid problems." Finally, to add additional fuel to the fire, let me throw in another remark certain to get me flamed: A lot of what motivates rapists is hatred towards women. It seems to me from the reading that I have done on the subject, that a lot of rapists have a special hatred of any women they consider to be a "whore". (The rapist's definition of this tends to be *very* broad.) Certain clothing is associated in this culture with prostitutes. Wearing that clothing may provoke some rapists to rape simply because of the association that they make between the clothing and the rapist's concept of a "whore".
geoff@burl.UUCP (geoff) (06/07/85)
In article <413@calmasd.UUCP> gail@calmasd.UUCP (Gail B. Hanrahan) writes: >In article <180@kontron.UUCP> cramer@kontron.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes: >>The only assertion >>is that provocative dress may push *a few* rapists over the edge; >>it would be safest to avoid trouble, just like I avoid trouble by not >>walking through Watts at night. > >The only problem with this is that women have no way of knowing >what will be considered provocative. Jeans and t-shirts have >been considered provocative. Do you mean that I should not wear >my normal, everyday clothing on the street? Should we, just to >avoid trouble, wear voluminous robes and veils a la Middle >Eastern cultures? But someone, somewhere, may be provoked by a >voluminous robe. Maybe we should, just to avoid trouble, stay >at home all the time? > >Sharon Badian was perfectly correct when she said (I paraphrase >here) that discussion of provocative clothing only confuses the >issue. I don't think anyone who has posted on this issue (well, I can say for sure only myself) has been talking about things that 'might' be provocative. Sure, any given individual could find ANYTHING provocative (I am really into dirty burlap bags, myself :-)). The articles have been speaking about clothes that almost anyone would consider provocative. A really slinky dress slit up to the arm. That kind. (I really don't want to go through a bunch of examples; do you get my drift?). I am not trying to be picky, I just want to make sure we are describing the same things. The article posted (I think by Ross, but I am not sure) about interviews with rapists was interesting and seems to support the conclusion that many (repeat: *m*a*n*y*) rapists *are* influenced by the appearance of their victims. They want them 'sexy'. Now while everyone has their own ideas of 'sexy', I would hazard a guess that most people would find the type clothes described above 'extremely sexy'. Wearing them in questionable circumstances is like waving a red flag in front of a bull. Sure, most bulls probably wouldn't charge; but why take the chance?. I understand what the posters on the other side have been saying -- they want to be able to wear anything, and go anywhere without fear of harassment. I can understand wanting this. I also can understand wanting a million dollars. Um, welcome to the real world. As of yet, I have seen *zero* rational proposals for doing *anything* about rape except those promoting self-defense and choosing care where you walk alone (and, to a lessor extent, what you wear). Rapists have been around for a *long* time. I really don't think they are going to go away -- no matter how much vitriol is expended on the net. The rapist is wrong. Great. We ALL agree with that. YOU are still responsible for what you do, because you have to live with the results. If you do things that you know are risky, be prepared to take the consequences. You shouldn't have to? Well, life is mean, nasty, totally unfair, and absolutely indifferent to the desires of an individual (I saw a nature film where a pride of lions devoured a zebra they caught; the zebra was not happy). just stirrin' the pot geoff sherwood
dmcanzi@watdcsu.UUCP (David Canzi) (06/08/85)
In article <2516@randvax.UUCP> edhall@randvax.UUCP (Ed Hall) writes: >> A lot of people are casually assuming that sex is not part of what >> motivates a rapist. How do you know? Do you have studies to back >> this belief up,... > >I think you have a misunderstanding here. Rape is not sex. Rape is >a violation of a person's body. It is violence, pure and simple. Perhaps you and I mean different things by the word "sex". To you, perhaps, the word "sex" only includes acts in which all involved parties are involved voluntarily. I use the word to mean certain kinds of physical acts. By my meaning, rape is both sex and violence. >A rapist might be sexually aroused by violence. But this is not what >makes rape a crime. The violence is. As far as I know, nothing I've said implies that it's the sexual aspect of rape that makes it a crime. The question is: what aspect of rape is it that motivates the rapist? A lot of feminists seem to be absolutely certain that rapists are motivated solely by the violence, which is a pretty strong statement. I haven't seen any evidence strong enough to justify such certainty in such a strong statement. >Then why do you persist in calling it ``sex''? What the hell is wrong >with calling it violence? Sex (at least in my meaning of the word) and violence are not mutually exclusive. Even if the rapist's motivation is sexual, rape is still violent (or at least coercive). Nothing I've said implies otherwise. -- David Canzi "When more and more people are thrown out of work, unemployment results." -- Calvin Coolidge
bing@galbp.UUCP (Bing Bang) (06/10/85)
i don't know about provocative clothing causing rapes, but it can be deadly to a man's health. this was when i was still a young man (*sigh*) in college. i was walking on campus going towards a particularly mindful purpose (a lab i think) when i spotted this scantly dressed truly well endowed young lady walking in the opposite direction. i couldn't take my eyes off her... we passed... i kept walking forward with my head turned around as far as it would go... and then BAM!!! i was hugging a pole... very painful, i think the pole didn't like me... -- ---------- "Is anything really real?" ...akgua!galbp!bing