Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.PCS 1/10/84; site hocsj.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!drutx!houxe!hogpc!pegasus!hocsj!ecl
From: ecl@hocsj.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Re: Re: violence
Message-ID: <192@hocsj.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 27-Oct-84 14:26:24 EST
Article-I.D.: hocsj.192
Posted: Sat Oct 27 14:26:24 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 29-Oct-84 02:45:06 EST
Organization: AT&T Information Systems Labs, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 69


Reference: <328@mako.UUCP> <597@gloria.UUCP>, <2484@rochester.UUCP>

hocsj!dls says:
>>> For those of you who believe that the sole motive for all rape is violence:
>>> 
>>> Do you honestly believe that there are no men in the world that are so
>>> desperate for sex that they would, and do, force a woman into unwilling
>>> sexual intercourse?

gloria!colonel replies:
>> This is an extreme position.  You will find many who believe that the
>> _dominant_ motivation for _most_ rapes is violence.  What does it mean
>> to be "desperate for sex," except that one wants to resort to violence
>> to correct what one believes to be a denial of a right?

rochester!ciaraldi then says:
> If there are men "desperate enough for sex" that they will
> 1) pay a prostitute for it
> 2) marry someone they don't really love
> 3) pick up random women in singles bars
> or any of the other ways of having sexual contact without 
> forming a long-term loving relationship  (the way most men
> seem to prefer it, although if tyehey find someone through
> 1), 2), or 3), that's their business)
> then I would assueme that there are men desperate
> enough to have sex with a woman by force.
> Some might do it because they feel they have a "right" to
> it, some might just claim to feel that way, and
> some might know it's wrong but do it anyway.

And some might not have the money for #1, or want to bother with #2, or
can't manage #3 (the people dls earlier referred to as:
>>>           the ugly, the fat, the stupid, the emotionally disturbed,
>>> the insane, the poor, etc. They become desperate men, injured
>>> by women on many levels, terribly insecure, and they turn to
>>> desperate means. They may indeed lust after  women, but
>>> mainly they lust after revenge.

Also, since rape was an "accepted" way of getting sexual partners throughout
most of man's existence (going back to pre-historic times, but even up until
recent times)--attack an opposing tribe, kill the men, take the women--it
is understandable that some men  may consider that it is still their right.
Note that I said 'understandable', *not* 'excusable'.  Those who claim that
rape is something new, caused by the mass media's emphasis on pornography,
haven't read their history.

ciaraldi again:
> As a further continuation, there are occasional drives
> to castrate rapists.  If rape is a crime motivated by
> violence rather than sexual desire, what good will this
> do?  A man can still get an erection without testicles,
> so it wouldn't prevent him from raping again.  Since
> he did it supposedly not because of his sexual desire,
> the castration won't reduce his motivation.
> If castration reduces his tendency toward violence, then we
> might as well advocate castrating all violent criminals.
> Now that's a thought, just not one I care to dwell on
> for long!

I suspect that at least some of the people who are saying 'castration"
actually mean 'amputation'--in either case it's an ineffective punishment.
But certainly many people want it both ways--rape is a crime of violence,
not of sex, they say, but we should castrate the rapists.  To which my reply
is, "Make up your f***ing mind!"  ('***' = 'lip')

					Evelyn C. Leeper
					...ihnp4!hocsj!ecl