From: phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)
Subject: Re: Coercion
Organization: Generally in favor of, but mostly random.
Distribution: ba
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 15:51:44 GMT

In article <1992Oct8.170357.3271@island.COM> guido@island.COM (Guido Marx) writes:
    >In article <1992Oct7.150621.22776@netcom.com> phil@netcom.com
    >(Phil Ronzone) writes:
    >>Coercion is the use of force to influence a person.
    >>
    >Is coercion ONLY the use (or implicitly, the threat of the
    >use) of force, or can it take other more subtle forms ?
    >
    >>Coercion is not trade, nor is it voluntary, mutually desired
    >>(note the word mutual) transaction(s).
    >>
    >Then does blackmail qualify as coercion ?

See below.

    >However, if she says no I doubt that both parties to the
    >transaction will be happy. I think that we can all agree that
    >she does indeed have the right no decline, even though that
    >might make John unhappy.

No, I don't think she makes John unhappy. John is horny and lustful (shall
we assume) -- he will still be so after the refusal. He was as unhappy before
as he is after.

Of course, if John is some type of fascist pig, that believes that whatever
he wants he should have and some has wronged him if he is denied, then
yes, he may be even more unhappy. But that is a pathological case, of
an individual barely held in check by the law.

I knew an asshole like that once -- he kept trying to buy a coworkers
restored Mustang, which the coworker had no desire of selling. This guy
actually kept getting madder because the coworker wouldn't sell it to
him. What a shit.

    >>If Mary says no, and John pulls out a firearm and coerces
    >>mary into a sexual act (rape), then Mary has been coerced.
    >>
    >What if he instead takes out a folder containing photographs
    >of Mary in a variety of sex acts (said photos taken without
    >her knowledge). He goes on to tell her that he is going to
    >give these photos to her parents/spouse/so if she doesn't
    >have sex with him. Is this coercion (note: no force or threat
    >of force was used) ? If she consents, is it rape ?

Suppose Mary then grabs the photographs and destroys them? End of subject.

Oh, John has the negatives somewhere else? O.K., Mary goes there and
destroys them.

From your (incomplete) situation, John had NO right to those photographs.
Those are derivitive works (property of Mary). Mary has every right to
recover her stolen property.

If someone steals from you, they have commited a defacto case of INITIATION
of coercion, even if it was unknown to you at the moment. If I shoot
you from the back and kill you, you probably never would have known it, but
I have still initiated coercion against you.

In the same way, initiation of coercion has happend to Mary.




Now, let's suppose that Mary did know about those photographs, let's
say nudes taken early in her career when she was naive, and that she did
sign an (unlimited) models release.

Now John says, sleep with me or I'll show the world these photographs.



Well, Mary now faces an ethical dilemna -- her past youthful discretions
now catch up with her. Happens all the time -- look at all the actresses
that have this happen.

In this case, as stated, no, blackmail is not immoral.

Is it unfair? Probably. Then again, freedom has the ultimate price --
responsibilities for your actions. There is NO bankruptcy clause for
morality -- you can say, oh well, all the shit/stupid/immoral things
I've down -- wipe them off the face of the earth and let me start over.



Of course, I wonder about Mary -- she has brought this largely onto
herself. She agreed to the pictures. Worse, she has "friends" that
allow her to be suscpetible to this kind of blackmail. She should
have friends, that if approach by John offering to seel them pictures
of her naked, should very very coldly tell the guy where to go.

This works because apparently Mary has no friends that would delight in her
discomfort.

And of course, it's no big deal if John tries to sell them to strangers.
They are likely to get better pictures of prettier women in commonly
available mens magazines.






-- 
phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)

If all the contributions of Dead White Males, a.k.a. Dead White Loathsome
Oppressors, were to vanish, you'd have the Politically Correct(tm) Loathsome
Oppressors using dull rocks to hunt and the Politically Correct Women of
Vision and Strength(tm) using leaves for tampons.

These opinions are MINE, and you can't have 'em!  (But I'll rent 'em cheap ...)