HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin)
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: Re: More on fantasies and discussing one or two (was) Re: Rape in any form ...
Date: 31 Jul 92 01:07:30 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon

In article <1992Jul27.172713.19373@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> rpetsche@mrg.CWRU.EDU (Rolfe G. Petschek) writes:
#In article <1992Jul27.045208.219642@cs.cmu.edu> garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:

I deleted a great deal here.  

Thank you very much.  I think that I finally understand your
motivation, and I can thus generalize to other people.  I
am indeed grateful that you were willing to discuss such
private things in order to help me see this.  The "playing
lion" story was most helpful, too.  I think that I needed
something totally removed from a rape scenario to really see.

##I get
##the impression from the "It's perfectly normal!" crowd that
##they are not at all alarmed by their fantasies.
#
#Well remember I have had rape fantasies (both ways) all my adult life.
#I have never (even come close to) rape.  Remember also that it was clear
#to me at one point in my life that I could have acted out a rape
#fantasy consensually (and this would probably even have been a good
#thing for me to have done and would have been welcomed, possibly greatly 
#enjoyed, by my partner - but well I can not be sure of that).  My
#response - controled revulsion.  I wanted nothing to do with that.
#
#Why should I be alarmed by a fantasy which I could not even imagine actually
#acting out?

Exactly.  You shouldn't have needed to say this, but I didn't
quite see this before.  See below.

#I remark that it is also possible to have rape fantasies e.g. because
#you are upset with someone and wish to do them harm, just as Susan had
#torture fantasies with a particular person because she was 'upset' with
#him and wished to do him harm.  I agree that such fantasies are less
#healthy/normal and a matter for concern.  (Yes, I had such during a very
#stressful period of my life now thankfully past).  If a person has them
#persistantly - or even if they persistantly have rape fantasies with the
#notion of acting on them somehow realistic - why, help is a good idea.

The reason that my fantasy bothered me so was that I could easily
imagine carrying it out.  I *wanted* to carry it out.  

To answer Synth's question, the therapist I saw told me that it
was normal to want to hurt the man who raped me, and that I
shouldn't be overly concerned unless I found myself actually
planning to carry through with my fantasy, or if I became
obsessed by it.  (I'm still not sure if I would have become
obsessed or not - he died very soon afterward.  I do know, though,
that I never made any serious plans to go to the prison
and torture him)

Again, thank you for patiently explainig this.  It did
help.

Susan
Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: dan@cubmol.bio.columbia.edu (Daniel Zabetakis)
Subject: Re: Daniel: Spelling, targets, etc.
Organization: Columbia University, Dept. of Biological Sciences.
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 18:05:02 GMT

In article <1992Jul31.145827.29320@brtph560.bnr.ca> kimmyd@bnr.ca (Kimmy Posey P920) writes:
>
>Yes blindly attacking a problem sometimes results in hitting the wrong target.
>In the case of rape however, the target which I am attacking blindly or other-
>wise is the rapist.  IMO this is the correct target.
>

      Actually, I think the main people you are hitting is the victims. The
majority of your articles had as thier main point an attack on rape
fantasy. I doubt (as do many others) that fantasy has any real connection
with potential to be a rapist. Therefore, I think the main effect of your
blind attacks is to increase the shame and guilt felt by rape victims who
may have had rape fantasies before or after the attack.

DanZ

-- 
This article is for entertainment purposes only. Any facts, opinions,
narratives or ideas contained herein are not necessarily true, and do
not necessarily represent the views of any particular person.  

Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: kimmyd@bnr.ca (Kimmy Posey P920)
Subject: DanZ on what planet he's from ...
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, BNR-RTP 
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 20:53:58 GMT

What on God's green earth are you talkin' about?  Who said I don't believe
we should "try to move towards justice" ?  I certainly didn't and if you so
infer from my post then I must have really fouled up.  My position is that if
public execution would deter a large number of rapes (which I think it would),
then it is a practice we should adopt.  Even if a vanishingly small number of
the persons so punished are actually innocent.  Innocent lives have been
sacrificed to save others innocent or otherwise since time immemorial.  And
why do you think that I believe we shouldn't do everything possible to ensure
that only the guilty are punished ?  Furthermore I did not say or even imply
that I just wanted to put "_someone_ in jail" for every rape.  That would be
insane.  I believe that anyone found guilty of rape by a jury of his/her peers
should be executed.  You know like after due process and all that.  If you
arrived at these conclusions after thoroughly reading my post then you should
either come back from Dimension X where everything is bass-ackwards or see the
folks at Columbia about enrolling in Reading Comprehension .101.

KimmyD
Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf)
Subject: Re: The reason for Rage
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 20:46:00 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.122410.8874@uoft02.utoledo.edu> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
>
>PS. It should be anti-lesbigay, not anti-queer. Amke sure you keep your
>speech politically correct.

"We're here, we're queer, get used to it."  That ring any bells for
you?
From: alyoung@kiwi.ucs.indiana.edu (Amy Young Leith)
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: Re: To All: Apology to Amy ...
Date: 29 Jul 92 02:04:01 GMT
Organization: Indiana University, Bloomington

In article <1992Jul27.134930.25676@brtph560.bnr.ca> kimmyd@bnr.ca (Kimmy Posey P920) writes:
>Dear Amy Young,
>
>  I apologize for the ignorant, sappy , stupid comment I made in the
>"Lucky star" post.  Sometimes I get carried away.  That's not an excuse, just
>an explanation.  I hope I didn't hurt your feelings.  Sometimes I forget that
>words can be as hurtful and intimidating as physical assault.  More so maybe.
>I hope you can forgive such a juvenile outburst, even though it was really
>unforgivable.  You certainly don't owe me forgiveness, I just hope you will
>be able to.

"I'm a stupid, flighty, emotional, sexist prick.  Sorry, someone's
called me on it, and it seems that I'm in the minority, so I'm going
to say I'm sorry, although I'll probably just keep spewing the same
shit over and over and over... " 

Sorry, "Kimmy," it just doesn't fly with me. 

>P.S.: Really though, it's good advice to be carefull about who's on the other
>      end of the wire.  There are over 1 million assaults against women each
>      year (statistic supplied on MACE commercial ??!!).  Frightening number.

And you think that I am going to let this hinder or change my behavior
in any way?  Hell no.  I still walk home at night.  I still talk to
strangers.  I still go to places I'm unfamiliar with alone.  You try
and mess with me and you'll end up with a gunshot wound or a knife
wound if it comes down to my safety, however.  But *never* will I let
a few assholes hinder my life.  But really, your concern touches me.
*snort*

amy
From: pepke@ds1.scri.fsu.edu (Eric Pepke)
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: Re: Clarifications on Rape in any form ...
Date: 24 Jul 92 20:59:45 GMT
Reply-To: pepke@ds1.scri.fsu.edu (Eric Pepke)
Organization: Florida State University, but I don't speak for them

In article <1992Jul24.161815.26091@brtph560.bnr.ca> kimmyd@bnr.ca (Kimmy Posey P920) writes:
>I concede that most people have rape fantasies.  I have had them, although it
>makes me ashamed of myself to admit it.  This shame however doesn't make me
>feel that I am a bad person nor does it make me more likely to commit a rape.
>On the contrary it makes me less likely to do so as it is the realization of  
>the horrible nature of rape that invoke this shame.  On the other hand if I
>enjoyed the fantasy, drawing pleasure from it, feeling no shame then I would
>react like all animals, i.e. I would seek to re-experience that thing which
>gave me pleasure.  Eventually I would reach the conclusion that the real thing
>would be even more satisfying and seek to turn fantasy into reality.

OK.  This is a statement about you, and I accept it as accurate and honest.

However, there are many, many people to whom this description does not apply.
I am one of them.  I certainly feel shame at various things, although not at
any kind of fantasy, but shame for me is not a significant inhibition against
doing evil.  Shame occasionally does inhibits me from doing things which are 
benign or even good, and I wish I were entirely rid of it.  

For me, most fantasies derive their value from the very fact that they are not 
real.  For most fantasies, there is no chain of logical steps by which I could 
even conceivably come to the conclusion that it would be even better if made 
into reality.  Even if there were such a fantasy that involved a significant 
amount of harm to another which had such a logical chain, what would 
effectively inhibit me would be *empathy*, not shame.  I have met a large
number of people who think the same way.  I have also met a large number of
people who cannot even comprehend thinking this way.

For me, and perhaps for many people, the less shame the better.  The feeling
of shame has a tendency to feed on itself, making people hide the thing they
are ashamed of.  The alcoholic drinks at home alone, too ashamed to admit it
even to himself.  Jimmy Swaggart hides out with prostitutes in cheesy motels,
his self-flagellating "I'm a sinner" spiel merely driving him on.  Shame is
the handmaiden of denial, because the easiest way of avoiding the shame is to
prevent oneself from admitting or even becoming fully conscious of the thing
that causes the shame. 

-EMP
Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf)
Subject: Re: The reason for Rage
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 22:57:39 GMT

In article <1992Jul22.120733.8852@uoft02.utoledo.edu> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:

>Yes, but I remember a post about being upset that the police viewed
>the mal/male rape as being 'icky'. Let's face it, homosexuals are
>discriminated against in employment, promotions, friendship, social
>activities, and, in TRYING TO GET WOMEN TO GO OUT WITH THEM!!!

This is one of the stupider things I've seen on the net.  Look, the
discrimination and harassment lesbigay people face are real.  They
include discrimination in jobs, in housing, in serving in the
military, not being allowed to marry, being physically attacked,
kicked out of churches, etc.  They range from stupid annoyances to
life threatening problems.  But in getting women to go out with them?
Some homosexuals are women, remember?  And why should gay men be
interested in sexual relationships with women?

>If nothing else, the LAST thing I need is to have women avoid going
>out with me for fear I may have caught AIDS the night before. It really
>ruins the chances for an intimate interlude.

Oh, I see, the bad thing about men raping men is that it may ruin your
chances of getting laid.

First of all, gay does not mean HIV infection.  Second, men who rape
other men are not necessarily gay.  Third, the current rate of HIV
infection in hetero women is the highest of all groups.  I seriously
doubt that it comes from women sleeping with hetero men who have been
raped by men.

>However, let me ask YOU a question. Would you care if I braodcast to your
>employers, co-workers, and friends you'd been bu-fu by another man???
>Or, do the opinions of those who can hire and fire you matter on this.

Well, hmmmm, if you think your rape by another man would result in
people assuming you're gay and firing you, then it looks as if you do
have some reason for being concerned about lesbigay rights, no?

>Further, I do not care what people think about me as long as it is accurate.
>I am arrogent, self-centered, rude, sexually uninhibited, somewhat
>chauvanistic, somewhat prejudiced, and lots of other things. I not only
>admit to all of that, but I don't care who knows any of that. If
>they have a problem with it, it's their problem.
>
>As for having labels placed on me that are untrue, like homo or rapist, I can
>live without.

But why does the label of homosexual hit so hard that you wouldn't
report a rape?

Could it be, no, no way!  Your homophobia or society's?  If it's the
former, that's your problem.  If it's the latter, maybe you should be
concerned about lesbigay rights.

(This probably doesn't belong in talk.rape, but I'll be darned if I
know where it does belong.  Talk.flame perhaps?)
From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: Re: Question for Scott
Date: 24 Jul 92 15:37:24 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

In article <1992Jul24.144105.14005@leland.Stanford.EDU>, farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:
> In article <1992Jul24.013603.8887@uoft02.utoledo.edu> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
>>In article <1992Jul23.204414.25451@leland.Stanford.EDU>, farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:
>>> But people you know would call you gay if you reported a rape by a
>>> man?
>>> 
>>
>>Probably not to my face. However, they would probably all wonder if I contracted
>>AIDS during the assault.
>>
>>That is reason enough to keep it quiet.
> 
> So, it's not homophobia that would keep you from reporting it, but
> HIV-phobia?  If you were that worried about what people think, you
> could have an HIV antibody test in six months and publish the results.


No, YOU could.

> 
> Doesn't any rape victim, though, have to worry about the possibility
> of infection by STDs?  That has been my understanding for the
> rationale of having people charged (but not convicted) with rape
> tested for HIV infection.
> 

I am glad that you agree with me that there are a plethora of reasons to not
report a rape.

DC

Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: kaarts@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Kenneth John Aarts)
Subject: Re: Rape in any form ...
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 15:19:12 GMT

In <SYNTH.92Jul28193941@deepthought.unm.edu> synth@deepthought.unm.edu (Synth F. Oberheim) writes:

>dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:


>> Nor am I trying to.  But by the same token, it's unscientific and
>> irresponsible for you to contend that they are.  You can draw your own
>> personal conclusions, but I object to you stating them as fact.

>dc> I am specifically asking you WHAT makes you think the studies are
>dc> invalid?

>I have *never* said the studies were INVALID.  Jesus H. Christ!  How
>long are you going to run us in circles here??

>dc> You are taking scientific evidence and dismissing it with a wave
>dc> of your hand ...

>BZZZT.  Quite the contrary, I find the evidence plausible and
>enlightening.  Just what *is* the evidence?  That rape fantasies and
>other fantasies are common in both genders.  That fantasies can heighten
                  ^^^^^^^^^^
>intimacy.  That too much fantasy can distance you from your partner.
>That separating fantasy from reality is important.  And that the
>scientific community does not know enough about fantasy to say whether
>any certain kind is normal and another abnormal:
                     ^^^^^^^

You guys seem to be argueing semantics.  How are you defining normal vs
common?

Ken
From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: <None>
Date: 28 Jul 92 13:49:37 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

In article <1992Jul28.145113.4251@ccu.umanitoba.ca>, kaarts@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Kenneth John Aarts) writes:
> synth@deepthought.unm.edu (Synth F. Oberheim) writes:
> 
>> Based on personal experience and observation -- namely, growing up
>> around and being socialized with other males -- I've seen that most men
>> visualize a scenario of simply "getting sex" at the expense of whoever
>> is on the receiving end -- a purely selfish goal. 
> 
> There seems to be a hidden assumption that 'simply getting sex' would have
> to be at the expense of a woman.  Why is this?  How are women's sexual
> fantasies different form mens?  Note: sexual fantasies, not romantic.
> 
> Ken

The biggest difference I can think of is a woman can fulfill her sexual
fantasies any time she wants. Men must wait for the woman to want to fulfill 
hers before they can fulfill theirs. (Not fair in the least!) The end result is
a woman fantasizes about exercising this option of sex on demand, while the 
man fantasizes about having the option of sex on demand. 

DC

Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: tenney@med.unc.edu (Charles R. Tenney)
Subject: Re: Rage (story)
Organization: UNC-CH School of Medicine
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 00:15:35 GMT

In article <1992Jul25.124654.8925@uoft02.utoledo.edu> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
>In article <19326@plains.NoDak.edu>, hennebry@plains.NoDak.edu (Michael J. Hennebry) writes:
>Selected quotes from Michael J.
>> 
>> 
>
>> 
>> Can you say non sequitor? Can you spell it?
>> 
I can.  It's spelled "non sequitur."
>
>> 
>> 
>> If he does it'll probably be cause he didn't do it. Executions end appeals.
>> Drugs and drug money haven't done much for the integrety of "law"
>> enforcement.
>> 
>
[DC's counter-rants deleted]
[including calls for documentation]
>
>Now, as this has nothing to do even with rape related issues, there are
>forums for your views to be better expressed. 
>
>DC

For anyone who's really interested, this was discussed (and probably still
is, though I dunno, I unsubscribed months ago) on talk.politics.drugs.
They were discussing how if you flew into Dallas airport and looked like
you fit a DEA profile, and you had 10's of thousands of dollars cash, they
would take your money away and allow you to sue to get it back.  IF you
could prove that it wasn't intended to buy drugs.  Really pissed off an
antique-car dealer who was headed for an auction, as well as some
Jamaicans who said they didn't believe in banks.  (Of course if you did
sue, your law firm would only keep a measly 1/3 of the money that you
shouldn't have lost in the first place.)  Anyway, t.p.d would have the
info, anyone who wants to know could look it up there.  Now back to the
regularly scheduled discussion.

-- 
--
Charles R. Tenney	tenney@med.unc.edu   | What would the UNC school of
					     | Medicine want with my opinions?
	"My karma ran over my dogma."	     | What would I want with theirs?
Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf)
Subject: Re: Question for Scott
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 07:21:36 GMT

In article <1992Jul22.235648.8867@uoft02.utoledo.edu> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
>In article <SCG.92Jul22164540@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>, scg@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Scott Goehring) writes:
>
>Listen, you reported your incident. Great. Here's a cookie. It will go good
>with the additional degrading the police gave you.

This is really low, DC.  It shows appalling insensitivity to what
happened to Goehring.

If a woman had posted about the mistreatment she received after
reporting a rape, would you respond like this?

(Why do I even ask a question like that?  You probably would, you're
probably proud of being insensitive.)

>The only reason I can think of is you want more homosexual rapes reported so it
>becomes more commonly known about, so that you feel less stigma attached with
>your own attack. Would correlate with how much you seem determined to tell the
>whole world--trying to somehow prove you are not ashamed of it.

Bullshit.  Goehring has posted about being raped.  That's his right.
I think it's great that he has.  I wish more rape survivors would
speak out, so that people would know they're not strange, they didn't
"ask for it," etc.  Perhaps if more survivors did speak out, there
would be fewer stigmas, fewer people assuming that nice people don't
get raped.  Goehring was a victim, DC.  There's not one reason that he
should be any more ashamed of it than I am of having my bicycle
stolen.

>Unless, you can come up with an alternative explination as to why men are
>obligated to report it, when a woman is expected to make her decision based
>solely on her own needs and beliefs, and no one would ever try to push her one
>way or the other.
>
>Well, why the difference?

I can't speak for Goehring, but here's my objection.  You said that
you would probably report a rape by a woman, but not by a man.  It
didn't seem to occur to you that you'd probably be laughed out of the
police station.  It didn't seem to occur to you that a lot of people
would assume you hadn't been raped or that you were such a wimp that a
woman could rape you.  But you jumped to all sorts of conclusions
about being raped by a male.  That to me implies a double standard.
From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: Re: Homosepciesexist fantasies.
Date: 31 Jul 92 03:58:39 GMT
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

In article <SYNTH.92Jul30141726@deepthought.unm.edu>, synth@deepthought.unm.edu (Synth F. Oberheim) writes:
> 	<SCG.92Jul29180042@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>
> 	<1992Jul30.083253.9058@uoft02.utoledo.edu>
> 	<1992Jul30.172704.3673@ncar.ucar.edu>
> Lines: 12
> 
> 
> Cancelling your article, huh, DC?  A wise move.  In case you need the
> report you posted on how fantasies cannot determine one's sexual
> orientation, I can email it to you.

No, why don't you go back and re-read it. One's fantasies do not determine 
WHO or what gender one will pick for partners. One's fantasies do determine
the labelling of one's sexual preferences.

Do not make the mistake of thinking psychological preferences equal physical
preferences--the two do not have to correlate. 

If you only fantasize and experience sex with members of the opposite sex, you
are heterosexual. If you only experience and fantasize about members of the
same sex, you are homosexual.

Everything else is just a bi.

DC