Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ccieng5.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!rochester!ritcv!ccieng5!jbf From: jbf@ccieng5.UUCP Newsgroups: net.women Subject: prisons Message-ID: <240@ccieng5.UUCP> Date: Fri, 20-Jan-84 17:30:48 EST Article-I.D.: ccieng5.240 Posted: Fri Jan 20 17:30:48 1984 Date-Received: Sat, 21-Jan-84 08:47:09 EST Organization: Computer Consoles Inc., Rochester, NY Lines: 138 First of all, please leave such gems as "I don't know where you come from, but", "your attitude was so sick", and "words, that I think you may be able to comprehend" for net.flame. I will try to refrain from insulting you throughout this article, treating only your arguments. If you persist, I will nevertheless refrain from insulting you here, but insert a reference to a separate net.flame article dedicated to denigrating you (so far, no such article has been written). You respond to 1. You seem to feel that the physical damage suffered in "minimal rape" is trivial: with First let me say most rapes are not "minimal". Very often the victim is also beaten, stabbed, mutilated or just flat outright killed. I don't consider that trivial. But even in the "minimal" case there is still the extreme discomfort of lesions on the skin in a very sensitive area. That is a big deal! This initially ignores my attempt to isolate the "minimal rape", the least offensive act that would qualify as an instance of rape by dragging in other rapes whose possibility I HAVE NEVER DENIED. But you see, I think that even if you are NOT raping someone, it is wrong to beat, stab, mutilate, or just flat outright kill them. Beating, stabbing, mutilating, or flat outright killing are separate crimes, and should be treated separately. The "minimal" case does not even involve lesions of the skin: if the woman is insufficiently lubricated, the rapist (to remain minimal) would provide artificial lubrication. My point is that even if the rapist is as gentle as a criminal could be, the defining characteristic of rape is the forcible detention of a woman for sexual use. Any laws dealing with rape, any statements made about it, should consider this essential characteristic rather than frequently concomitant crimes. 2. You seem to categorize rape as a very insignificant act, and indicate that how the individual reacts to this act is solely the responsibility of that individual: How an individual reacts to ANY act is the responsibility of that individual. The act is the responsibility of the actor. Thus, the rapist is responsible for the rape, while the victim is responsible for her reactions. If it seems that I am categorizing rape as "very insignificant", this is by comparison to the usual categorization, not in any absolute sense. If ANY rapist, even the most 'considerate', were killed during the commission of the crime, it would be little loss -- it was a risk the rapist took when he made his decision to rape. But the same, as far as I am concerned, holds true for any form of illegal detention. If someone sends "de-programmers" to capture their Mooney kid, and the kid kills them in an attempt to escape -- that's life! That's death! "Rubbing skin", to me conotates a rather gentle motion. Being forceablely fucked is in no way gentle. As already stated, the force of the fucking (such language!) does not a rapist make. Remember that the penis is a very sensitive organ, and even a rapist might not want to give himself blisters. While the ACT is not "gentle", the motion may well be. I'm not even going to get into the issue of why men have this desire to "rub" certain parts of their skin on certain parts of womens skin. Good. ALL of this risk and physical discomfort is incurred to satisy the urge of some crazed male to "rub" his skin against hers. I doubt it. While I am no expert on statistics, it seems to be the general line that most rapes are motivated by hostility rather than excessive lust. I will concede that in many specific cases this might be true, but more often than not there is no rape and the woman is as urgent, careless, and unprepared as the male. While I agree that accidental pregnancy is a serious consideration, it applies only to vaginal rape(and, if such a rape is committed, the additional risk the woman undergoes makes it 'non-minimal'). I believe that even if you could convince all rapists to make only oral and anal assaults, the situation would not be improved much. 3. The feeling of violation, and is it justified in the victim of a rape. Your discussion regarding this is the most worthwhile and interesting part of your article. In most details, I agree with you. There are exceptions: 1. Rape is the only violent crime that is sexist - how many times do you hear of a rape trial where a man is accusing the woman of raping him?? For one thing, homosexual rape exists without question. For another, a man would be laughed out of court making any such accusation, EVEN IF IT WERE TRUE. I also think that there is a legitimate place in society for pornography (it aids masturbation), but that is not germane to the discussion at hand. 2. In how many cultures has the vagina been the womans most important attribute? Woman who were raped in some cultures were considered spoiled, the rapist had to pay the father damages for spoiling property, the woman could not marry and was considered an outcast. I'm going to try to cut this short - but basically, even in our enlightened/modern culture today - women are still viewed as "unclean" by many males after a rape. I am aware that such attitudes still exist. I don't like them. Much of my desire to see rape treated differently is due to a need to disavow such outdated prejudices. A WOMAN HAS NOT BEEN 'DEVALUED' BECAUSE SHE HAS BEEN RAPED. She has been forced to undergo an unpleasant experience. Regarding her 'right to feel violated', I should have been more specific. Of course she has a right to feel violated -- she has been. However, the well balanced woman should feel violated for a while and go on with her life. If she ruins her whole life with worries and recriminations, the sad part as I see it is more in how society has warped her attitudes than how the rapist has abused her. There are many women who have never been raped in their entire lives and still let the fear of the crime warp their lives to an extent that seems unacceptable to me. The measures many women take to protect themselves against rape seem far harsher to me than the actual occurence of the crime. In your conclusion, you go back to your ad hominems about how insensitive I am. Spare me. Personally, I will try and kill the next man who tries to rape me, I have no objections to that, as long as you get him in the act. If you try to avenge yourself afterwards, and are caught in the act, you should undergo whatever penalties normally exist for murder (although in my heart I might sympathize with you). Azhrarn -- Reachable as ....allegra![rayssd,rlgvax]!ccieng5!jbf