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!houxm!hogpc!pegasus!hocsj!ecl
From: ecl@hocsj.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: violence
Message-ID: <222@hocsj.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 5-Nov-84 08:51:14 EST
Article-I.D.: hocsj.222
Posted: Mon Nov  5 08:51:14 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 6-Nov-84 06:37:33 EST
Organization: AT&T Information Systems Labs, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 26

Ed Hall asks:
> Why insist on viewing things from the criminal's point of view?  When
> you claim that rape is an act of sex, you aren't giving any more
> insight than if you say robbery is an act of greed.  It is the violence
> experienced by the victim that defines the crime, *not* the motivation
> of the criminal.

Now pay attention, because I don't want to have to repeat this:
BECAUSE IF YOU CAN'T FIGURE OUT THE MOTIVATION, YOU HAVEN'T A SNOWBALL'S CHANCE IN HELL OF STOPPING IT!
(The ASCII equivalent of screaming at the top of my lungs.)

If you have a broken leg, what you perceive is *pain*, but merely treating the
pain won't make it go away.  If my home is robbed and I perceive it as
anti-semitism (because I have a mezzuzah on the door), but in fact the burgler
was just looking for money, my perception of what has happened is just so much
dingos' kidneys.  The victim's perception may be valid to point out, but it has
*nothing*, repeat *nothing*, to do with the causes.

Lest someone out there accuse me of insensitivity, I will say that nothing I
say denies any of the pain, violence, or humiliation that the victim feels.
But talking about that won't end the problem; looking at the causes will.
That's what we should be working on.

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