HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: seiffe@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Erica Seiffert)
Subject: Re: Kristen's Question (off the track a bit)
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 16:58:14 GMT

In article <SCG.92Jul21103736@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> scg@mentor.cc.purdue.edu writes:
>seiffe@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Erica Seiffert) writes:
>
>>Excuse me, but I think you have missed the point of my post. I am NOT
>>saying that women who fantasize about being raped want to be raped. I
>>certainly don't.
>
>I was commenting on the concept, not attempting to imply that you
>were espousing it.  I am quite capable of reading your article,
>thankyouverymuch.
>
>>I'm saying that there are people out there that do believe that's
>>what a woman wants.
>
>I know.  IMHO, it stems from the same sort of Freudian nonsense that
>leads people to believe that most reports of childhood sexual abuse
>are actually fantasies about having sex with daddy.
>
>>Of course there is no justification for rape (perhaps that was a poor
>>choice of wording on my part). Perhaps I should phase my sentiment
>>this way, "I hate to see these findings used to validate a rape
>>myth."
>
>Statistics are well known to be usable to justify whatever you want.
>That's why statistics, by themselves, are both meaningless and
>useless.
>--
>"No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should
>they be considered patriots.  This is one nation under God."
>	-- President George Bush, Chicago, August 27, 1988

		Then are we agreeing? (Sorry I am a bit slow, I've had
	some very bad news from the home front and am a little spacey 
	right now.)

	ems
	*****
	I don't speak for my employers.
From: scg@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Scott Goehring)
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: Re: DanZ on what planet he's from ...
Date: 25 Jul 92 00:48:52 GMT
Reply-To: scg@mentor.cc.purdue.edu
Organization: Society for the Prevention of National Mudding Associations

kimmyd@bnr.ca (Kimmy Posey P920) writes:

>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.

It won't.  The problem with our society is not that the punishments
for rape are too lenient (we'll put aside the common practice of
plea-bargaining rapes down to lesser offenses), but rather that it is
far too difficult to secure a rape conviction.  The reasons behind all
this are rather complex.  A lot stems (IMHO) from a pair of
deep-seated traditions in our society: one, women are to be treated as
property, and two, women are less reliable than men.  Top it off with
a general reticence in our society to talk about sexuality, and you
get the real problem: people are afraid, for whatever reason, to come
forward when they are raped and report it; and, when they do, other
people are unwilling to believe them.

--
"My TA wasn't the sharpest knife in the drawer--overall, I'd say she's a few
 fries short of a Happy Meal."
	-- Comment on a course evaluation form, Brown University
From: snyeva01@uctvax.uct.ac.za
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: rape - lust
Date: 27 Jul 92 11:30:05 GMT
Organization: University of Cape Town

fuck off and die

if rape is inevitable lie back und enjoy it!!!

Armer & co.
Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: lazlo@triton.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble)
Subject: Re: To Lazlo: What your problem ...
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 04:49:29 GMT
Organization: Sporadic and incomplete

kimmyd@bnr.ca (Kimmy Posey P920) writes:

> Why is it you think that I'm tryin' to impress anybody with the size of
> my organ? 

Because that's what your testosterone-laden "pertekt the wimminfolk" chest-
beating sounds like.

> I didn't address that post to you so why are you inclined to comment? 

Hey, if you don't want people to respond to your posts, don't post them.

> I am attempting to tone down the level of hostility in my post so as not
> to intimidate people like yourself.  That way maybe I can contribute
> something to the discussion here.  What do you say? 

"By all means, please let us know when you get started."

--
Lazlo (lazlo@triton.unm.edu)
Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: tenney@med.unc.edu (Charles R. Tenney)
Subject: Re: suppressing victim's name
Organization: UNC-CH School of Medicine
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 03:03:26 GMT

In article <1992Jul16.110558.8682@uoft02.utoledo.edu> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:


>> [Story about woman who made false accusation of rape, sending a man to
>> prison for six years]
>> 
>
>Futhermore, am I the only person who sees how this woman's actions hurt all
>real rape victims? 

No.  That was the first thing I thought when I saw the story.

-- 
--
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: kimmyd@bnr.ca (Kimmy Posey P920)
Subject: To Synth: Sexism not intended ...
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, BNR-RTP 
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 22:50:30 GMT

Synth,

  I certainly didn't mean to sound sexist with words about protecting women.
Didn't I add a postscript?  Might not have.  Anyway, I didn't mean to imply
that women need men to run around protecting them all the time.  Indeed I have
some female friends that are *VERY* formidable.  I guess that what I'm saying
is that having been raised in a very, very old southern family my belief sys-
tem tells me this:  You see a man assaulting a women.  Kill him.  DO NOT PASS
GO, DO NOT COLLECT $200.  Foreign aggressor threatens The State (including
home, hearth, wife, children) destroy aggressor in-situ.  The point is that
I believe that a true man is willing to put his body / life between a lady
and Harms Way whenever it is called for.  Not at other times.  Women are
indeed capable of taking care of themselves.  Without a doubt.  But most women
could not defend themselves against a big collard-green eatin' maniac bent on
hurting 'em.  In that case it is my duty as a man to step in and deliver a
lethal set-o-lumps to said maniac before the lady gets hurt.  This attitude
may be sexist but I don't think I could change the way I feel about it.

KimmyD
From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: <None>
Date: 27 Jul 92 07:05:37 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

In article <1992Jul27.045208.219642@cs.cmu.edu>, garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:
> 
> I did fantasize about some rather obnoxious things at one
> point in my life.  When I learned that the thing that raped
> me had cancer, I imagined going to the prison and torturing
> him now that he was helpless.  These fantasies alarmed me
> in that they were so violent.  I got some help.  I get
> the impression from the "It's perfectly normal!" crowd that
> they are not at all alarmed by their fantasies.
> 
> Susan
> 

Susan,

What is the difference between fantasizing about raping another person, and
fantasziing about committing heroic acts in times of war or on a spy mission
where you kill people?

DC

(Please do not say you are killing bad guys in those fantasies, as in both
cases you are killing human beings just like yourself who are doing their jobs,
and have families and friends.)


Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: lazlo@triton.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble)
Subject: Re: DC: Stick to law, sap ...!
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 17:00:52 GMT
Organization: Sporadic and incomplete
Followup-To: alt.flame

kimmyd@bnr.ca (Kimmy Posey P920) writes:

> I have a whole team of folks with more degrees than a thermometer
> lookin' after my mental health and they don't seem to think I'm beyond
> help thank you! 

Get a few more.  The ones you have now don't seem to be doing any good.

--
Lazlo (lazlo@triton.unm.edu)
From: hcbarth@afterlife.ncsc.mil (Bart Bartholomew)
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: Re: <None>
Date: 22 Jul 92 05:14:27 GMT
Organization: The Great Beyond


	Personally, I would like to see a little responsibility
imposed on the people who are in charge of releasing violent
criminals, whether the parole board for prisons, or the 
shrinks who let 'patients' out of psych hospitals.

	How about requiring the person to be released to 
live with a member of the board that lets him/her loose for
a while?  I bet that would make them a tad more cautious about
declaring someone safe for society.
	It would make it kinda hard to find members of 
parole boards, though.
	Bart
-- 
"It's not the thing you fling, the fling's the thing." - Chris Stevens
 If there's one thing I just can't stand, it's intolerance.
*No One* is responsible for my views, I'm a committee. Please do not
infer that which I do not imply.  hcbarth@afterlife.ncsc.mil
From: mncmic02@uctvax.uct.ac.za
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: post
Date: 28 Jul 92 10:32:18 +0200
Organization: University of Cape Town

post
-- 
-----
  Gus (not while I'm eating vomit) the Gorilla

"Get it while it's hot" 
              -Gus

"Or even if it's cold"
              - Gus again
----
From: scg@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Scott Goehring)
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: Re: The reason for Rage
Date: 22 Jul 92 14:19:27 GMT
	<1992Jul21.134948.8810@uoft02.utoledo.edu>
	<1992Jul22.035836.29793@leland.Stanford.EDU>
	<1992Jul22.044410.20702@a.cs.okstate.edu>
	<1992Jul22.085048.8836@uoft02.utoledo.edu>
Reply-To: scg@mentor.cc.purdue.edu
Organization: Society for the Prevention of National Mudding Associations

dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:

>It is an easy way for them to dismiss what you are saying without
>dealing with the issues you raise.

Just as it is an easy way for you to dismiss what I am saying without
dealing with the issues *I* raise.

--
A man walks into a crowded theater and shouts, "ANYBODY WANT TO BUY A
CAR?"  The crowd stands up and shouts back, "WRONG THEATER!"
	-- Edward Vielmetti (env@msen.com), news.admin
Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: scg@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Scott Goehring)
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: Re: Homosepciesexist fantasies.
Date: 31 Jul 92 13:46:07 GMT
	<SYNTH.92Jul30141726@deepthought.unm.edu>
	<1992Jul30.225839.9073@uoft02.utoledo.edu>
Reply-To: scg@mentor.cc.purdue.edu
Organization: Society for the Prevention of National Mudding Associations

dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:

>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.

By that definition, probably just about everybody is bi, then.

DC, ever hear of the Kinsey scale?
--
"in public debate our own citizens must tolerate insulting, and even
 outrageous speech in order to provice adequeate breathing space to the
 freedoms protected by the First Amendment."
	-- Justice William Rehnquist, in _Hustler Magazine v. Falwell_
Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: kimmyd@bnr.ca (Kimmy Posey P920)
Subject: I apologize Ami ...
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, BNR-RTP 
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 22:04:44 GMT

You're right Ami, personal attacks are totally uncalled for.  Please consider
forgiving me.  I tend to be (as I've stated before) somewhat confrontational
and literal-minded.  I have been accused of being part Klingon.  Like I inter-
pret "Rape Fantasy" to mean a fantasy about rape.  Not fantasy about hot sex.
Again I beg your forgiveness for the bus comment.  It was unbecoming of a
gentleman.

KimmyD 
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 03:58:36 GMT

In article <1992Jul21.134948.8810@uoft02.utoledo.edu> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
>In article <SCG.92Jul21085828@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>, scg@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Scott Goehring) writes:
>> So, you're right.  Homophobic cops make it unwise to report same-sex
>> rape.  It's a fucking shame our police aren't interested in protecting
>> the rights of all our citizens; only the ones they find morally
>> upstanding.
>> 
>> Or were you talking about your own inability to deal with
>> homosexuality?
>
>Inability? No, I deal with them just fine. I ignore their rantings
>and move on to issues that concern me. (Sorry, but life is too short
>to get involved with everyone's plight.)

Goehring wrote homosexuality, not homosexuals.  He was referring (I
believe) to the idea that your own homophobia may prevent you from
reporting your rape by a man.

His post also dealt with homophobia, something I think you show by
referring to homosexuals' "rantings."  Think of it this way: If this
discussion were about white police officers not talking the rape
reports of black women seriously and Goehring blamed it on racism,
then he made a similar comment to you about the problems of black
women.  Would you then write: "No, I deal with them just fine.  I
ignore their rantings..."?

Life may be too short to get involved with everyone's plight, but you
can at least respect when lesbigay people point out discrimination and
mistreatment and not call it "ranting."
From: scg@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Scott Goehring)
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: Re: Homosepciesexist fantasies.
Date: 29 Jul 92 23:00:42 GMT
	<1992Jul28.134937.9015@uoft02.utoledo.edu>
	<SCG.92Jul29084550@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>
	<1992Jul29.151700.5678@leland.Stanford.EDU>
	<1992Jul29.133512.9032@uoft02.utoledo.edu>
Reply-To: scg@mentor.cc.purdue.edu
Organization: Society for the Prevention of National Mudding Associations

dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:

>No, we just wonder why every one of our statements which do not
>include all sub-categories of possible alternative lifestyle
>variances get slammed by gays.  Jesus Christ, I left out the people
>who fantasize about porking dogs and horses. Why aren't you also
>standing up for THEIR rights to be included in each and every
>conversation???

Please note, dear, that I am straight.  I have *never* had consenting
sex with another man.  I have fantasies about doing so, but that
doesn't make me gay.  I suspect that a lot of straights have such
fantasies (although many probably won't admit it, out of homophobia).

So don't trot out that old tired line about how the gays are jumping
on you.  I'm jumping on you, and I'm not gay.
--
The real question for 1988 is whether we're going to go forward to tomorrow or
past to the -- to the back!
		-- Vice President Dan Quayle
Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: boggs@a.cs.okstate.edu (BOGGS RICHARD GRAN)
Subject: Re: To Prof. P. on degrees of rape ...
Organization: Oklahoma State University, Computer Science, Stillwater
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 17:34:01 GMT

In article <1992Jul24.213214.669@brtph560.bnr.ca> kimmyd@bnr.ca (Kimmy Posey P920) writes:
>saddened that their corpses are not fertilizing some unfortunate pig farm in
>Oklahoma or some place like that.  With regard to the plea bargain thing making

Hey now!  Careful of your choice for states to slame there, bub.

Read the .sig or Organization lines (grin).

-- 
Grant Boggs
boggs@a.cs.okstate.edu
Oklahoma State University
Stillwater, Oklahoma
From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: Re: Rape in any form ...
Date: 24 Jul 92 08:06:00 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

In article <1992Jul24.075551.12191@a.cs.okstate.edu>, boggs@a.cs.okstate.edu (BOGGS RICHARD GRAN) writes:
> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
>>Quite true, as rape fantasies are the second most common fantasies ejoyed by
>>both men AND women. (If you want, I will e-mail you the studies. They
> 
> If rape is the second most common fantasy, what's the first?
> 
> -- 
> Grant Boggs

Didn't read the posts, 'eh? 

The most common for heterosexuals is to have sex with someone other than who
they are having sex with now. (Either a different partner, or someone they 
want but can't get.) If memory serves correctly, this was true for homosexual 
males as well. 

The only variant to the trend was lesbian women. Their MOST common fantasy 
was forced sex. With them being the forcer.

Homosexual males fantaized about rape in the number two position as well, with
them being the one having sex forced upon them as the trend.


DC


Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: cs611a10@umbc5.umbc.edu (cs611a10)
Subject: Re: Kathi's lies continue...
Organization: University of Maryland Baltimore Campus, Academic Computing Services
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 23:06:04 GMT

>I am still calling you a liar. And I am disgusted at such a feeble attempt to
>try and exonorate yourself. You have had a month to dig up the post. I first
>demanded it when it would have been on your system (if it had existed). Had
>I ever made such a post, you would have produced it then.
>
>DC
>
  I agree with DC, that at no point did he or any other person talk about 
violating  any other person on the net.  I wouldn't go as far as to call her 
a liar though, since each of us only remembers what WE want to remember. 
Maybe there was a post, maybe there wasn't.  DC  SHOULD remember writing that 
post considering he would have  WROTE it, we  would just have read it.  Why 
do you keep saying DC wrote it, when he says he didn't? Is he lying because 
if he did write it, ALL the research he posted on the net is completly 
invalid?? Of course not.  Even IF he did write it, it WOULD only imply that he
was rude and unthoughtfull, but it has no usefull connection to the debate 
going on.
  I don't blame Kathi, since there was a LOT of posting (and reposting and 
reposting) until it got very hard to tell who said what and when.  The ONLY 
time I saw anything about "Violating" was when a female complained about 
people having rape fantasies, and didn't like the idea of men (in general) 
dreaming about violating her body (that is, she thought the fantasies were
about her, when this was not stated at all). If people have cut and pasted 
that paragraph about 10 or 20 times, its damn hard to tell who said it.
I think this is just a major miss-communication that went on, and is nothing 
else. Calling Kathi twisted (oops, TWISTED :-> ) and a liar, is something 
that would be better off if sent by email.
  Does anyone out there still have any posts with "violate" in it, and can they
post who was the "REAL" author of the letter.  I'll place my bets its not 
D.C. or any one else defending his side of the issue.
  
  DTB
From: synth@deepthought.unm.edu (Synth F. Oberheim)
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: Re: <None>
Date: 31 Jul 92 16:20:32 GMT
	<SYNTH.92Jul30135630@deepthought.unm.edu>
	<1992Jul30.224513.9071@uoft02.utoledo.edu>
Organization: SynthMedia Productions Ltd.: The Danes Call It Quality


dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:

dc> You are trying to
dc> defend your prior post by saying "Well, it means it to me, so my
dc> statement was valid."

No, what I'm contending here is that this argument becomes pointless
if we continue to shout about two different things.

> Laz> And by the way -- since when do dominance or force automatically
> Laz> imply rape?
> 
> Depends on the sample you have hung out with.  In my experience bondage
> and S/M attitudes were nil.  Your mileage may, and most likely does,
> vary.

dc> No, unless rape means anything Synth defines as rape, it does not
dc> mean force.  It means unwanted/unconsnted to sex.

"Unwanted and unconsented" automatically implies force or dominance of
some kind.  But you *cannot* say that force and dominance automatically
means rape if you have variables like S/M and bondage.  

> Laz> If these ... are really typical of the fantasies of the males you
> Laz> were socialized with, then the fact that you still associated with
> Laz> them says almost as much about you as it does about them.
> 
> "Still associated with them"?  From what hat did you pull *this* rabbit
> out of ...?

dc> 3. If you still associate with them, you are wilfully associating
dc>    with men who (you have claimed) want to rape women.

Yes?  And where did I ever say or even imply that I still associate
with them?

>> I agree that simply hearing of someone expressing a desire to have sex
>> with someone, without explicitly describing whether or not that person
>> consents, cannot be construed to be a rape fantasy. 
> 
> Laz> From where I sit, it obviously looks like you're construing
> Laz> exactly that.
> 
> You mean "looked", don't you, since I had now clarified that?  Or does
> that not matter to you?

dc> Then instead of defending you prior post, admit that you have no
dc> evidence to equate "I'd love to shove my dick in her mouth" with
dc> "I'd love to rape her."

Since I wasn't contradicting myself, but rather clarifying what was
meant, I have nothing to "admit".  Possibly you might look up
"clarified" in Webster's ...


===============================================================================
    :: :: :: :: ::     Synth F.    synth@deepthought.unm.edu    U S E N E T   
 :: :: :: :: :: :: ::  Oberheim    synth@yenta.alb.nm.us             in color!
===============================================================================
"Contestant number two?"
"I can kill Midi using only 30 calories, Bob!"
Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: kimmyd@bnr.ca (Kimmy Posey P920)
Subject: To Lazlo: What your problem ...
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, BNR-RTP 
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 14:44:39 GMT

... I mean didn't your mama teach you better than to talk like that in public?
Why is it you think that I'm tryin' to impress anybody with the size of my
organ?  I tried to ignore you before but now you're gettin' out o' hand.  I
didn't address that post to you so why are you inclined to comment?  I don't
remember having posted anything crude although maybe some stuff not totally
rational.

Personally I don't have any exibitionist (sp?) tendencies.  Don't need any.
Now with that settled I would like to offer you the olive branch.  I am
attempting to tone down the level of hostility in my post so as not to
intimidate people like yourself.  That way maybe I can contribute something
to the discussion here.  What do you say?  I will avoid yellin' & screamin'
and you avoid attacking, me especially with the use of graphic language.
That way nobody gets offended.

KimmyD
Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: rpetsche@mrg.tmc.edu (Rolfe G. Petschek)
Subject: Re: Sex fantasies--men, women, other.
Reply-To: rpetsche@mrg.CWRU.EDU (Rolfe G. Petschek)
Organization: CWRU Physics Department
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 92 14:29:33 GMT

In article <1992Jul30.080017.9055@uoft02.utoledo.edu> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
>In article <1992Jul29.174229.2756@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>, rpetsche@mrg.tmc.edu (Rolfe G. Petschek) writes:

>> I did not satisfy my former lover's fantasy to be fantasy-raped.  I am
>> unaware if she ever succeeded in satisfy this fantasy.
>
>One woman, who did not get her fantasy fulfilled by you, is anecdotal. But,
>I'll ask you this--Have you declined offers of sex more than you have been
>turned down/rebuffed? Or, like most men, have you gone down in flames more
>times than you have refused women's advances? Hmmmm?

Bearing in mind the fact that a woman's advances are commonly, given our
society, more subtle than a man's I think that I am about even (but
don't really know, of course).  I'm afraid that generally I was not asked
(and did not ask) my potential partners "wanna fuck?" so counting is
hard as it is never immediate if advances to first sexual intercourse
were discouraged by one partner if the other partner actually would have 
consented to such intercourse in the possible future.

On the more particular question of is it easier for a woman to satisfy 
her fantasies than a man again I simply do not know if I have more 
commonly satisfied fantasies or had them satisfied.  Generally speaking 
I have satisfactory sex with my partner(s) but they are not explicit as 
to whether I have satisfied fantasies (or indeed what these fantasies are).  
Actually it would seem to me easier for a man to satisfy his fantasies in 
our society during one-on-one heterosexual sex for the simple reason that 
this inevitably involves one man and one woman and the man, generally, is 
more controling of the nature of the actual act than the woman.
--
Rolfe G. Petschek			Petschek@cwru.bitnet
Associate Professor of Physics		rgp@po.cwru.edu
Case Western Reserve University		(216)368-4035 
Cleveland Oh 44106-7079
Newsgroups: talk.rape