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!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!bellcore!allegra!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!crsp!gargoyle!sphinx!beth
From: beth@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (Beth Christy)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Rape?
Message-ID: <614@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 3-Jun-85 18:59:04 EDT
Article-I.D.: sphinx.614
Posted: Mon Jun  3 18:59:04 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 9-Jun-85 21:47:51 EDT
Organization: U. Chicago - Computation Center
Lines: 24

From: sunny@sun.uucp (Ms. Sunny Kirsten), Message-ID: <2243@sun.uucp>:
>> 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

I would SINCERELY APPRECIATE IT if you quoted me in context.  The VERY
NEXT SENTENCE of the posting you quoted stated that clothing was a
"PARTICULARLY LOUSY" choice of things to use.  This kind of BULLSHIT
really pisses me off.

-- 

--JB                                          Life is just a bowl.