Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site sphinx.UChicago.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!bellcore!allegra!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!beth
From: beth@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (Beth Christy)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Rape?
Message-ID: <564@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 25-May-85 03:00:40 EDT
Article-I.D.: sphinx.564
Posted: Sat May 25 03:00:40 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 26-May-85 21:45:02 EDT
References: <2220@decwrl.UUCP> <429@ttidcc.UUCP>, <842@mnetor.UUCP>
Organization: U. Chicago - Computation Center
Lines: 49

From: sophie@mnetor.UUCP (Sophie Quigley), Message-ID: <842@mnetor.UUCP>:
>> I think the problem here lies in proving rape.  More than almost any  other
>> crime, the proof of rape depends on a person's state of mind.  Furthermore,
>> unlike any other crime I can think of, it  depends  on  the  state  of  the
>> _victim's_ mind.
>> 
>> If you point a gun at someone and demand they give you money, that's  armed
>> robbery.  Period.  States  of  mind  don't  enter  into  the case, only the
>> actions matter.
>> 
>If you point a gun at someone and demand that they "submit", that's armed
>rape.  If you force someone some other way, it is unarmed rape, but still
>rape, just like unarmed theft is still theft.
>
>If you want to make a valid comparison, you should compare armed rape
>with armed robbery, and unarmed rape with unarmed robbery.
>If there are no weapons involved, theft could also depend in the state
>of the victim's mind.
>
>"Why Officer, when I asked him to, he just handed over his whole paycheck
>to me.   I had no idea he didn't really want to!"
>-- 
>Sophie Quigley

Oh come on now.  The fellow made a valid point.  If I'm particularly
into S&M, and it's *clear* to both myself and my lover that I *want*
him to tie me up and do dastardly things to me with a fork, he has not
raped me by doing so.  If, on the other hand, he does *exactly the same
things* to me against my will, I'm gonna want his ass *busted*.  His
actions are the same in both cases, but one is rape and one is not.
That's why rape is such a tough problem legally.  The actions of the
accused are, in most cases, not enough to prove rape.  The wishes of
the victim at the time is often all that can distinguish between rape
and...well, you know.  And that's why judges have tried saying that
because she was wearing clothes that "clearly" demonstrated her desire
to have sex, she must have wanted it and therefore it wasn't rape.
They need some way of determining whether or not it was against her
will.  Clothes are a particularly lousy factor to consider, but they do
need *something*.  It is likely that if a weapon was used then it was
against her will.  But if I remember correctly, weapons are not
involved in most rapes.  So the fellow (sorry, I forget who) was
correct in pointing out that it's a tough charge to prove.

-- 

--JB                                             "The giant is awake."

Disclaimer?  Who wud claim dis?