Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site rtech.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!bellcore!decvax!tektronix!hplabs!amdahl!rtech!jeff
From: jeff@rtech.UUCP (Jeff Lichtman)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: "Rape is violence, not sex"
Message-ID: <466@rtech.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 5-Jun-85 02:42:24 EDT
Article-I.D.: rtech.466
Posted: Wed Jun  5 02:42:24 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 9-Jun-85 02:44:51 EDT
References: <601@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP> <2788@nsc.UUCP>
Organization: Relational Technology, Alameda CA
Lines: 34

> >Sarah stated the she thinks "we need to focus on the
> >fact that rape is violence and *NOT* sex".  I must confess I'm curious as
> >to *why* we need to *focus* on that here. 
> 
> Because that realization allows us to cut through rationalizations like:
> 
  ...
>   3. I'm sick...I need treatment, not punishment.
  ...
> Richard Mateosian

I don't quite see why, if a man blamed the fact that he raped a woman on
mental illness, it would mean that he was equating rape with sex.  He could
just as easily be saying that he couldn't avoid violent behavior because of
his mental illness.

Maybe claims of mental illness should be called "irrationalizations". :-)

Many people these days are intolerant of the insanity defense, largely
because of some famous abuses (e.g. the Dan White Twinkie defense).  Actually,
the insanity defense is rarely used.  In many cases where it is used, the
defendant actually was driven to commit the crime because of mental illness.
I feel that if someone committed even as severe a crime as rape due to mental
illness, then that person should get psychiatric or psychological treatment,
not prison.

This is getting a little far afield.  One thing I don't know is: how often
do rapists use the insanity defense?
-- 
Jeff Lichtman at rtech (Relational Technology, Inc.)
aka Swazoo Koolak

{amdahl, sun}!rtech!jeff
{ucbvax, decvax}!mtxinu!rtech!jeff