Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ttidcc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!ttidca!ttidcc!regard
From: regard@ttidcc.UUCP (Adrienne Regard)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: charges of rape, and good points
Message-ID: <446@ttidcc.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 28-May-85 13:56:04 EDT
Article-I.D.: ttidcc.446
Posted: Tue May 28 13:56:04 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 30-May-85 06:31:08 EDT
Organization: TTI, Santa Monica, CA.
Lines: 44



>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.

Maybe every right-thinking man should get a signed statement of consent
before "the act".  :-)  And if some guy tried to force her at gunpoint to
sign, she could always sign in a backhand scrawl, which she could use as
proof later that she signed under duress.

Actually, there aren't a whole lot of rape accusations that hinge on anything
so hard to prove as "state of mind".  That is often offered as a defense,
but the cases that go to court are usually pretty clear.  Attorneys don't
like to take cases in that are utterly ambiguous -- and hearings prior to
the trial sort the wheat from the chaff.

Therefore, it is important to consider that charges of "asking for it" are
levelled after the crime of rape has (allegedly) been committed.

And it is also important to consider that the man may have been as
provocatively dressed as the woman (or may have said as many provocative
things as the woman in the course of their time spent together {thinking
more of date-rape here}), but who was attacked?  "No" is "no", at any
stage of the game.  And if a woman claims she said "no", that's a pretty
good indication, even after the fact, that she meant "no".

(before you flame me for that one, I admit there are abuses to the charge
of rape.  I ask you if that's what we are really talking about.)