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: ..explicit text.. ; rape worse than murder?
Message-ID: <468@rtech.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 5-Jun-85 15:46:30 EDT
Article-I.D.: rtech.468
Posted: Wed Jun  5 15:46:30 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 9-Jun-85 02:47:42 EDT
References: <560@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP> <522@usl.UUCP> <530@utai.UUCP>
Organization: Relational Technology, Alameda CA
Lines: 80

> >> . . .   I disagree with you - I think rape is worse than murder. . .
> >
> >Agreed that there are people who never "recover" from rape, but then there
> >are some who do survive it without serious damage (several women I know,
> >e.g.).  On the other hand, *nobody* survives murder.  
> >-- 
> >				    Joe Arceneaux
> 
> Admittedly being murdered is not very nice and can really ruin things,
> but at least it is over and done with.  With rape, victims have to
> live with the fact of it and the memory of it for the rest of their 
> lives.
  ...
> For the lucky ones who are able to return to "normal" (can they ever?),
> there is still a period of time (weeks, months, years?) during which they 
> have too come to grips with the fact that another human being(*) could have
> violated them so.  During this time of readjustment, can you imagine
> the feelings that are going on inside them?
  ...
> With murder victims, they do suffer, but once the crime is over that's
> it -- their suffering is done (but not that of their families [that's
> another can of worms, though]).
> 
> I think that this definitely shows that rape is a worse crime than
> murder.
> 
> Geoff Loker

Geoff Loker's reasoning really, really bothers me.  Right now, there are people
all over the world who are struggling against almost impossible odds to stay
alive, struggling against starvation, war, disease, and persecution, at the
cost of their own intense suffering.  These people could simply kill themselves
to end their suffering.  Why don't they?

Maybe some of these people feel that suicide is a mortal sin, which would cause
them to go to Hell and receive more suffering than they are currently
undergoing, but I don't think that's the real answer.  Survival is one of the
strongest instincts.  It is so strong that most people would endure just about
anything in order to stay alive.

I believe that Mr Loker's argument carries the following message to women who
have been raped and who now feel that their lives may not be worth living:

	"The worst thing that can ever happen to you has happened.  It is worse
	 than being killed.  You may never recover.  It is likely that you will
	 live the rest of your life with extreme self-loathing and fear at
	 every moment."

The underlying message is that, if you have been raped, then the rest of your
life will be useless to you.  I realize that this is not what Mr. Loker
intended, but I feel very strongly that this is the effect of his philosophy.
I think this comes from an overzealous attempt to make some men realize the
seriousness of rape.

Homocide is the only crime from which it is impossible to recover.  It may be
extremely difficult to recover from rape, but it is not impossible.  I think
that any woman who has been raped and is feeling suicidal, deathly afraid, or
worthless, should be encouraged in every way possible to overcome the problems
that have been imposed on her.  I feel that attitudes like Geoff Loker's are
counter-productive.

What bothers me most about Mr. Loker's argument is that it seems derived from
political expediency.  The attitude seems to be that, to counteract arguments
that belittle the seriousness of rape, one must claim that rape is absolutely
the worst thing that can happen to a woman, even worse than murder.  The
implications of such a belief are ignored, because the important thing is to
win the argument.

P.S. To the women who have said that you would fight to the death rather than
submit to rape: I am not arguing against you.  I have said before in this
newsgroup that I feel women should defend themselves in every way possible
against violent attack.  I feel that defending yourself in this way is the
opposite of folding up and dying, because it follows the instinct to keep
yourself alive and intact.
-- 
Jeff Lichtman at rtech (Relational Technology, Inc.)
aka Swazoo Koolak

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