Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 SMI; site sun.uucp
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!mcnc!decvax!decwrl!sun!sunny
From: sunny@sun.uucp (Ms. Sunny Kirsten)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Rape?
Message-ID: <2243@sun.uucp>
Date: Wed, 29-May-85 23:19:40 EDT
Article-I.D.: sun.2243
Posted: Wed May 29 23:19:40 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 1-Jun-85 01:33:40 EDT
References: <2220@decwrl.UUCP> <429@ttidcc.UUCP>, <842@mnetor.UUCP> <564@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP>
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Lines: 21

> 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*.
>
> 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.

Just because she's wearing clothes which "clearly" demonstrate her desire
to have sex does NOT mean she clearly desires to have sex with anyone.
In the stereotypical case of the woman dressing to invite approaches by
men in general, she still has the right to choose which one(s) and when.
(the lack of) clothes do not under any circumstances excuse rape.

			Sunny
-- 
{ucbvax,decvax,ihnp4}!sun!sunny (Ms. Sunny Kirsten)