jdh@hou5g.UUCP (09/20/84)
speaking of rape: How many people think that a woman has given up her right to say no to a man after leading him on? To be more specific: Can she rightly refuse intercourse if she has been: 1) flirting, moving sexily, leaning close, making lewd, sexual comments. 2) wearing excessively provacative clothing -- whore like clothes, with most of the breasts and/or legs showing (or whatever), or with somewhat transparent material. 3) participating in kissing, heavy petting, fondling with the man. Responses to the net ONLY please. Here's another question: How many people think that if a woman's a slut that means anyone can sleep with her? How many people think that if a woman's a slut that means she sleeps with anyone she wants (anyone being too many by her society's definition). Responses to the net ONLY please.
lmf@drutx.UUCP (FullerL) (09/20/84)
A woman always has a right to say no. Period. Slut sounds like something out of high school. A very judgemental sexist term. What is the corresponding word for a man? The double standard strikes again. Lori Fuller
js2j@mhuxt.UUCP (sonntag) (09/20/84)
******************************************************* How many people think that a woman has given up her right to say no to a man after leading him on? To be more specific: Can she rightly refuse intercourse if she has been: 1) flirting, moving sexily, leaning close, making lewd, sexual comments. 2) wearing excessively provacative clothing -- whore like clothes, with most of the breasts and/or legs showing (or whatever), or with somewhat transparent material. 3) participating in kissing, heavy petting, fondling with the man. ******************************************************** ANYONE can rightly refuse intercourse ANYTIME, no matter what they've been doing, saying, or wearing. If sex is not mutually voluntary, it IS rape. BTW, just what does the term 'aggravated rape' mean? I thought that 'aggra- vated assault' meant that the assaulter had first been assaulted by the assaultee. (If it doesn't, it should.) There doesn't seem to be any way that a similar definition of 'aggravated rape' could be applied, though, except maybe in prison. ;-( Does 'aggravated rape' refer to rapes in which the victim exhibited some of the above behavior prior to the rape? Why should the rapist get a lesser sentence in these cases? I'll second someone's proposal for castration as a punishment for rape. Jeff Sonntag ihnp4!mhuxl!mhuxt!js2j "Think of it as evolution in action."
wetcw@pyuxa.UUCP (T C Wheeler) (09/21/84)
The corresponding word for slut is I believe roue'.
rlr@pyuxn.UUCP (Rich Rosen) (09/21/84)
> How many people think that a woman has given up her right > to say no to a man after leading him on? To be more > specific: > Can she rightly refuse intercourse if she has been: > 1) flirting, moving sexily, leaning close, making > lewd, sexual comments. > 2) wearing excessively provacative clothing -- whore > like clothes, with most of the breasts and/or > legs showing (or whatever), or with somewhat > transparent material. > 3) participating in kissing, heavy petting, fondling with > the man. [hou5g!jdh] Just because I let you sit in the driver's seat of my Porsche, doesn't mean I'm obliged to let you drive it. Just because someone may "interpret" another's actions to imply consent to do something else, that other person offers consent (or not) at their discretion, not based on the first person's interpretation. > How many people think that if a woman's a slut that means > anyone can sleep with her? > How many people think that if a woman's a slut that means > she sleeps with anyone she wants (anyone being too many > by her society's definition). Is this written by the same guy who asked a few months ago whether or not it was O.K. to rape certain types of women (e.g., prostitutes)? The tone sounds remarkably similar. Any person who sleeps with anyone they want to (provided the other person wants to as well) is simply engaging in free personal choice that is none of anyone's business to classify or name or label. -- If it doesn't change your life, it's not worth doing. Rich Rosen pyuxn!rlr
sunny@sun.uucp (Sunny Kirsten) (09/21/84)
[]
Yes, the double standard exists, particularly in connotations
associated with descriptive terms. Can anyone seriously suggest that
"bachelor" has any of the negative connotations of the equivalent feminine
"slut"? These two equivalent terms carry the implied connotations that
promiscuity is ok for men, but not for women. What did you expect?
Equality?
--
{ucbvax,decvax,ihnp4}!sun!sunny (Sunny :-> Kirsten of Sun Microsystems Inc.)sunny@sun.uucp (Sunny Kirsten) (09/23/84)
I sit corrected:
>The corresponding word for slut is I believe roue'.
Yes indeedy, my off the cuff bachelor vs slut reply was thoroughly wrong, wrong,
wrong. Indeed, roue or rake or libertine would be lexicographically more
correct opposites of slut.
On the other hand, I believe the double standard for *acceptability* of
lasciviousness in males vs females still stands. That part has not yet been
refuted by anyone on the net (should I have waited longer for a reply?)
And while we're at it, since the subject line is about rape:
A woman's "looseness of character" (ref: slut) in no way affects her
right to "say no" at any time, regardless of what activites preceeded her
decision that she wants not what seems pending. Only consensual activites
(whether sexual *or* violent) do *not* constitute "rape". Further, I believe
"rape" could be entirely non-physical...i.e. psychological rape.
--
{ucbvax,decvax,ihnp4}!sun!sunny (Sunny :-> Kirsten of Sun Microsystems Inc.)rch@brunix.UUCP (Rich Yampell) (09/23/84)
A woman always has a right to say no. Period. But to lead someone on and then come out with a 'no' is still a shitty thing to do. But people have the right to do shitty things. Slut does indeed sound like something out of high school, but the concept behind it appears to be based more in puritanism. The basic concept behind 'slut' is a woman who by some arbitrary definition has too much sex. I personally cannot fathom the concept of too much sex, and therefore, whatever the corresponding word is for a man, I proudly count myself as one! Rich Yampell
tron@fluke.UUCP (Peter Barbee) (09/26/84)
First of all a woman never gives up her right to say no, no matter what the situation (including marriage). But, a woman should remember that the more she "leads" someone on the more difficult it may be to say no. I don't think this is the best situation, but it is reality. I can remember saying to my date "If we continue this we will end up in bed, if you're not comfortable with that we should stop now." (or words to that affect). I think this puts part 3 (below) in perspective. In other words I don't think a woman has the right to please herself with no regard for the man, but then no one has that right over someone else and I wasn't suggesting that woman might (or think they should). below is the original posting: 1) flirting, moving sexily, leaning close, making lewd, sexual comments. 2) wearing excessively provacative clothing -- whore like clothes, with most of the breasts and/or legs showing (or whatever), or with somewhat transparent material. 3) participating in kissing, heavy petting, fondling with the man. --------_________-----------__________-------____--------_____------- How many people think that if a woman's a slut that means anyone can sleep with her? How many people think that if a woman's a slut that means she sleeps with anyone she wants (anyone being too many by her society's definition). What's a slut???? In answer to my question; it seems that this is a label that is put on someone by someone else. I have trouble with the concept of too many sexual partners except where it may apply to the concerned persons health (enough partners raises chance of VD) or pleasure (generally, making love is better than getting laid, and I think there is a finite numbe of "making love" partners at any time). After rereading this I guess I do think a person can be *too* promiscuous (notice use of asexual 'person'). I would probably know this type of info only when the person in question is someone I care about (or is extremely indiscrete) so I'm not likely to use the word slut (is stud the male equivalent,or is there one?). This is probably long enough, Peter Barbee decvax-+-uw-beaver-+ ihnp4--+ allegra-+ ucbvax----lbl-csam-+--fluke!tron sun-+ ssc-vax-+
dubois@uwmacc.UUCP (Paul DuBois) (09/28/84)
> Yes, the double standard exists, particularly in connotations > associated with descriptive terms. Can anyone seriously suggest that > "bachelor" has any of the negative connotations of the equivalent feminine > "slut"? These two equivalent terms carry the implied connotations that > promiscuity is ok for men, but not for women. They do not. And they're hardly equivalent. -- Paul DuBois {allegra,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!dubois "Make me to go in the path of thy commandments; for therein do I delight." Psalm 119:35