Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site oddjob.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!oddjob!london
From: london@oddjob.UUCP (David London)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: "provocative" clothing
Message-ID: <734@oddjob.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 18-May-85 13:48:23 EDT
Article-I.D.: oddjob.734
Posted: Sat May 18 13:48:23 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 19-May-85 00:49:51 EDT
Distribution: net
Organization: U. Chicago, Astronomy & Astrophysics
Lines: 25

<>
	This discussion about whether women who wear "provocative" clothing
are at fault (in part) for being raped is becoming increasingly offensive.
It is truly distressing to see the number of (apparently sensitive, enlightened
well-meaning) men who do not see what rape is all about.
	For instance, Ross Greenberg (not to singly out Ross, but his is 
the letter that I remember) suggests an analogy between a person walking
around in a bad neighbourhood with $100 bills hanging out of his pockets,
and a women wearing "suggestive" clothing. Ross, you just don't get it, do
you? For the sake of argument, suppose I concede that I am partly at fault
for getting robbed. In this case, the purpose of the robbery was to get
my money. Rape is nothing like this. A woman is not raped because the man
was so horny he couldn't stand it; a woman is raped BECAUSE SHE IS A WOMAN.
	This business about "provocative" clothing is a red herring, invented
by men in order not to take responsibility for their actions and their 
attitudes toward women. (We) men have to start realizing that we are
responsible for the way society (and other men) treat women.
	Perhaps the phrase "rape is not a crime of sex - it is a crime of
violence" is overused. It certainly hasn't gotten through to many men on
the net. Perhaps a new phrase is in order.

					David London
					..!ihnp4!oddjob!london

P.S. Sophie: your reply to Mark was right on target!