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 (Sunny Kirsten)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Only a few nuts rape?
Message-ID: <1830@sun.uucp>
Date: Sun, 2-Dec-84 05:26:55 EST
Article-I.D.: sun.1830
Posted: Sun Dec  2 05:26:55 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 4-Dec-84 06:56:31 EST
References: <10011@watmath.UUCP> <136@ihu1m.UUCP>
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Lines: 54

*** REPLACE THIS species WITH YOUR petri-dish ***

> -- Ken Perlow says:
> >> The figure was in this month's Harper's Index, and was the
> >> following: Percentage of college men who say they might commit
> >> rape if there were no chance of being caught: 35
> 
> I've wondered for a while about this.  
> There's a big difference between thinking and acting, and
> it may be that a lot of these college guys hadn't worked that through yet.  
> Male sexual fantasies often involve domination and control, ...
> ...which poor horny guys may think means they'd like to rape someone.  
> But that's not the same.

And so it is that women's sexual fantasies often involved being
ravished, but that's a lot different than being raped.  Both involve
"being taken", but one is by force of ecstatic enjoyment of what one is
being distracted with, and the other is by force of violence without
consent.  Would you prefer I manicure your nails with this file, or
shall I just rip them out with this pair of pliers?

The fact that the question involved "getting caught" implies we're
talking about the use of force of violence, rather than "friendly
persuasion" of true enjoyment.  Thus we can say that 1/3 of the male
population of a certain age category ( a snapshot of the better
(college) crosssection of "society") has no moral compunction (only
fear of retribution) about forcibly dominating a woman and using her
sexually.  If that isn't a sad statement about the state of human
rights in the country who's main claim to fame "above" other countries
is it's support of human rights, then I can only conclude that women
are not considered human, but merely chattel, by "society".

We freed the slaves and gave equality to every racial and religious
interest and variation, yet society refuses to ratify the same for
women (ERA).  Why?

Why does anyone feel they have the right to control another?  Slavery
is out!  And that means rape, too.  Rape is "merely" violent sexual
slavery!  It's not constitutional, not moral, not sane, yet is condoned
by "society".  Would anyone care to produce a poll of the percentage of
women who condone rape?  Is society composed only of men?  Are women
only chattel?  Why?  Why?  Why?  What gives you the right?  This is
WAR!  Women Against Rape.  Have you done your part to discourage men
you know who evidence attitudes which do not indicate disapproval of
rape?  Women are people, human, have rights.  Don't they?  Oh...
Hmmm....
....we have met the enemy, and he is social attitudes
....which are no more than the collection of individual attitudes
....which are modeled on the social attitudes, which...

-- 
mail ucbvax\!sun\!sunny decvax\!sun\!sunny ihnp4\!sun\!sunny<