welsch@houxu.UUCP (Larry Welsch) (01/18/84)
{To the eater of first lines}
What the doctors on 60 minutes were suggesting is that a some
male rapists are readily identifiable by the amount of testerone
in their blood and can be treated. They also suggested that men
with an abnormally high amount of testerone cannot be held
responsible for their rape since the desire to rape is due to
this condition. Men with this condition can be treated with a
drug and when treated are no longer harmful to society. Note
this is merely a hypothesis for which they were gathering
clinical evidence.
What is interesting about this is that women, {I recall hearing
of 1 case in England, but I don't have references at my finger
tips} have successfully used cramps as a defense for crimes and
more recently Hinckly used insanity as a defense for attempted
murder. I grant that rape is a terrible (more so for men raped
by other men) crime. However, if the condition is a identifiable
medical condition, then rapist does not deserve to be castrated
or sent to prison, but rather treated.
Larry Welsch
houxu!welschwalsh@ihuxi.UUCP (B. Walsh) (01/18/84)
Did I understand Larry Welsch's comments? Did he actually say that rape is worse for men if raped by another man? Please give us your reasons for thinking that that is worse than a woman being raped by a man. One reason (perhaps minor to some) that I would not think that is that a man is (I assume) usually raped in the anus. The anus is not normally used by most men (I said MOST) in lovemaking. A woman is raped in the vagina. The vagina is used in lovemaking. Every time a woman makes love after being a rape victim, it is a reminder of the crime. I think for a man a rape would be humiliating and a violation, but for a woman it is that and much more. And please don't tell me it's the woman's problem if she thinks of the crime every time she makes love. I'd just like to know Larry's reasons for his assumption. I've given one reason for the opposite view. B. Walsh
fitch@inmet.UUCP (01/26/84)
#R:houxu:-28800:inmet:10900032:000:704
inmet!fitch Jan 24 12:37:00 1984
Regarding the case of the man convicted of rape and sentenced only
to a regular dosage of a hormone-reducing drug, the defense attorney said
something like this:
> Normal people don't do this. Therefore he [the defendant] has some-
> thing wrong with him. Therefore society should treat his illness.
Am I to infer from this that we should only give criminals the
appropriate drug to eliminate their violent behavior, then set them free?
There has be a personal price to pay for this and other criminal acts.
People who rape should pay for it. Giving them drugs for their crime is
a reward, not a punishment.
Geoff Fitch
Intermetrics, Inc.
...{harpo|ima|esquire}!inmet!fitchmazur@inmet.UUCP (01/26/84)
#R:houxu:-28800:inmet:10900034:000:768 inmet!mazur Jan 24 18:31:00 1984 Let's get this one straight right away. The woman in England did not use "cramps" as a defense for her trial. The real word for cramps is dysmenorrhea, and includes cramps, back pain and nausea. What this woman claimed to experience was premenstrual syndrome (PMS). PMS includes emotional changes like irritability and depression. A recent episode of St. Elsewhere contained a storyline about PMS, where the woman had been experiencing these moods of irritability. Her husband left her because he was afraid of what she would do to the kids. In the wonderful world of TV, the doctors diagnosed PMS, gave her some drugs, and let her go back to her family. In the real world, we women still have difficulty convincing some people that "cramps" aren't imagined.
kmw@iheds.UUCP (01/30/84)
While I agree with the point of Larry Welsch's article, which was that if hormonal imbalance can be pin-pointed as the cause for an act of violence the man or woman should be treated, not imprisoned, I must question his casual aside that rape is worse for a man than for a woman. The specific case was rape of a man by a man. If you meant that rape of a man by a man is worse because the physical act itself is "unnatural" (or at least less accustomed) you miss the point. Rape is in no way natural to the woman. Its physical similarity to love-making is more a nightmare than a mitigating factor. The potential, and actual, violence in the two cases is the same. The potential for physical damage is the same. The psychological stresses resulting from being physically dominated and violated are the same. If you were thinking of anal or oral rape, that happens to women as well. I suggest the following exercise to men: Imagine (REALLY imagine) yourself in a situation where you are raped. The rapist has a weapon, or there are more than one of them -- whatever it takes: put yourself in a situation where you can't get out of it. If you honestly run through what your reaction would be, and not just skirt the idea intellectually, you will begin to have a pretty good idea how women view it. A basic difference in men's and women's perceptions of being raped is that women know they are more likely than men to be rape victims, and are more likely to have thought it through. It is not an abstract concept for us. If rape of a man by another man seems worse (to a man) than rape of a women by a man, may I suggest it is because it hits closer to home; THAT kind of rape not an abstract concept to him. -- K. M. Wilber iheds!kmw or mvuxt!kw
jamcmullan@watmath.UUCP (Judy McMullan) (01/31/84)
>Regarding the case of the man convicted of rape and sentenced only >to a regular dosage of a hormone-reducing drug, the defense attorney said >something like this: > >Normal people don't do this. Therefore he [the defendant] has some- > >thing wrong with him. Therefore society should treat his illness. >Am I to infer from this that we should only give criminals the >appropriate drug to eliminate their violent behavior, then set them free? >There has be a personal price to pay for this and other criminal acts. >People who rape should pay for it. Giving them drugs for their crime is >a reward, not a punishment. I agree. I would go further and state that there has to be a distinction made between emotions (eg. anger, frustration) and the socially appropriate way to deal with those emotions. A man who feels aggressive towards women (because of an excess of testosterone) is better off playing hockey to get some of the physical feelings out of his system, then going home and masturbating to get the sexual feelings settled down. Raping someone he doesn't (or more often does!) know is not the way to deal with his emotions, whether they are caused by normal OR excess hormones. Convicted criminals should still have to undergo the punishment for their crimes. --from the sssstickkky keyboard of J.A.M. ...!{allegra|decvax}!watmath!jamcmullan
aeq@pucc-h (Jeff Sargent) (02/01/84)
Geoff Fitch (inmet!fitch) writes: > Regarding the case of the man convicted of rape and sentenced only > to a regular dosage of a hormone-reducing drug, the defense attorney said > something like this: > > > Normal people don't do this. Therefore he [the defendant] has some- > > thing wrong with him. Therefore society should treat his illness. > > Am I to infer from this that we should only give criminals the > appropriate drug to eliminate their violent behavior, then set them free? > > There has be a personal price to pay for this and other criminal acts. > People who rape should pay for it. Giving them drugs for their crime is > a reward, not a punishment. My reaction to this is ambivalent. On the one hand, there is certainly something wrong with the rapist, and he does need treatment of some sort-- if only an opportunity to go away by himself and rage a while to get the anger and hatred out of his system. On the other hand, sometimes the only thing which will deter someone desiring to rape is the thought that he will likely end up in jail; the prospect of treatment, even sympathy, might actually increase the odds of someone's committing rape, just to get the attention he craves. I speak from experience. Since I've probably already got a reputation as one of the less stable network personalities (especially among net.singles readers), I can afford to mention that I once experienced a brief spell (< 2 days) of criminal insanity, or the next thing to it. My emotions were so mangled that I was seriously considering not only raping but murdering a certain young woman of my acquaintance. The fact that this would have been a horrible and unjustified thing to do never entered my head; the only thing that stopped me was the realization that I would probably go to prison, which I most emphatically did not want. I eventually managed to dissipate the rage harmlessly; as far as I know, the young woman is happily alive & well today. I hope this inside information is of some value to someone; it's sure to start a) more discussion, b) the men in white coats converging on the Mathematical Sciences building here at Purdue.... -- Jeff Sargent/...pur-ee!pucc-h:aeq
marla@ssc-vax.UUCP (Marla S Baer) (02/01/84)
[] A friend of mine is a sufferer of PMS. In addition to other symptoms mentioned, she is prone to fainting spells, disorientation, and severe depression if she is even a little bit late in taking her medication. And this medication is very expensive and NOT commonly available! A few weeks ago, the medication she had with her was ruined by exposure to water (accidentally). A round trip drive of over 50 miles had to be made to get more from her home. The local hospitals were not able to supply it! Just a few things to think about! Marla S. Baer ssc-vax!marla
preece@uicsl.UUCP (02/04/84)
#R:houxu:-28800:uicsl:16400038:000:3649
uicsl!preece Feb 3 14:05:00 1984
There has be a personal price to pay for this and other criminal acts.
People who rape should pay for it. Giving them drugs for their crime
is a reward, not a punishment.
----------
I can't agree. In an ideal world there would be no punishment, only
adjustment. The problem is making the adjustment without otherwise
changing the person. If it were possible to magically adjust the rapist's
mind so that he or she recognized the horror of the act and acquired
society's view of it, then there would be no point to punishment. If the
anti-social person could be made pro-social, punishment would be simple
revenge and unworthy of society. Unfortunately, we cannot make such
adjustments without drastic alteration of other aspects of the
individual criminal's personality. Our respect for the individual
prohibits such changes (at least on an involuntary basis) as cruel and
inhuman punishment.
If someone raped my daughter, I would probably want to kill him,
whether or not he could be socialized. On the other hand, if an
elephant stepped on her, I would probably want to kill the elephant.
If it were possible to cure the anti-social parts of the criminal's
personality, then my response in either case is irrational and
unjustified. The rape is an accident and not the 'fault' of anyone.
[Yes, Laura, I know we should make people more responsible; what I'm
saying is that if someone is NOT responsible, and could be made to
be so, that would be better for society than punishing him for
his prior actions. I don't pretend we have the ability to do this today,
and I don't think the testosterone business is proven. I don't think
it unreasonable to say that someone's anti-social behavior represents
society's failure rather than his own; in the current world that may
not mean anything -- we may need to isolate such persons from society
for the safety of the rest -- but if it were possible to provably and
accurately eliminate the anti-social aspects of the person, the view
that society is responsible for the irresponsible would mandate a
significant change in treatment.]
I don't claim I could be rational in the event, but I do believe
strongly that society should be rational beyond the ability of
its individual members. Society doesn't let me shoot someone as
revenge and it shouldn't seek vengeance itself.
{Please, people, don't write and tell me that I'm urging 1984 or
Brave New World on us. I'm speaking of ideals and underlying assumptions,
not of anything remotely possible today. I realize the danger of changing
individuals to avoid the anti-social; sometimes we need the anti-social.
On the other hand, prison seems barbaric and counter-productive.
I just don't believe in vengeance, whether on the individual or
societal level.]
Consider, in closing, an analogy. Suppose it became possible to
fix near-sightedness. You would not expect the cured patient to go
on wearing glasses. Yet those who support the verdict "guilty but
mentally ill" say that we should first cure the subject and then
punish him or her for what was done before. That's dumb and
spiteful, ASSUMING that we can accurately say that the suspect (1)
was not responsible for the act and (2) is cured. I don't think we can
say the latter with any assurance in most cases, and the former
makes me nervous. That's the framework I want to be interpreted in:
the assumption that we can really and truly fix the criminal's
behavior. I'm not sure that will ever be generally possible, it's
just the basis for my response to the notion that the criminal
should be punished even if a cure is possible.
scott preece
ihnp4!uiucdcs!uicsl!preecetims@shark.UUCP (Tim Stoehr) (02/06/84)
I agree 100% that a man's testosterone level is no excuse or defense in a rape case. But... reading several articles in this group lead me to believe that alot of women out there in netland believe that cramps or other menstrual symptoms are an excuse for similar violence. Any comments?
ariels@orca.UUCP (Ariel Shattan) (02/06/84)
Tim, I have never seen anybody on the net say that Pre-Menstrual Syndrome (PMS) was a valid excuse for violent behaviour, just that it has been succesfully used as a defense in court when the woman concerned was charged (in England, by the way). Just the way elevated testosterone levels were used as a defense by the men concerned. Cramps has never been used as a defense. All cramps is an excuse for is taking pain killers and a hot bath. In fact, for women severly afflicted with PMS, the onset of the cramps and lower back pain that accompany the menstrual flow is a blessing, because it meanr that they are no longer pre-menstrual, but menstrual, and therfore no longer subject to PMS. Ariel Shattan ..!tektronix!orca!ariels