Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site druxo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!drutx!druxo!nap
From: nap@druxo.UUCP (ParsonsNA)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Make vs. Rape
Message-ID: <933@druxo.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 3-Aug-85 16:56:42 EDT
Article-I.D.: druxo.933
Posted: Sat Aug  3 16:56:42 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 6-Aug-85 08:23:49 EDT
Organization: AT&T Information Systems Laboratories, Denver
Lines: 36


>>> Me:
>>> I know this is several weeks old, but would someone explain to me the
>>> difference between "making someone have sex" and "rape"...I thought that
>>> rape is "making" someone have sex...

>> Brian:
>> Apparently Nancy the writer believes that rape is a "Violent" crime,
>> thus rape requires violence or the threat of violence.  Psychological or 
>> emotional trauma is not preceived by the writer as being violent or injurous.

Me:
That was the whole point of my posting...Any force (physical,
psychological, emotional, economic, etc.) used to *make* someone have
(so-called) sex *IS*, in my opinion, *RAPE*.

Chris:
> I have found that when people make postings they make subcounscious
> assumptions about what they are saying  (ie "this point need not be
> stated since it will get across anyway").  Also, no one can keep up a
> constant guard against saying things that one second thought they would
> consider absurb...

Me:
Okay, I'm dense.  Will *SOMEBODY* please explain what it is that I'm
missing in this discussion?  Why is my contention that "any force used to
coerce someone to 'have sex' constitutes rape" being interpreted as the
opposite?

P.S. Sorry to drag this up weeks after the original posting, but I was on
vacation, it has taken me weeks to get caught up on everything, and I
really do want to understand what my blunder was.

Nancy Parsons
AT&T ISL
ihnp4!drutx!druxo!nap