From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: Ataylor practices Hitler's 'Big Lie'
Date: 28 Aug 92 16:00:22 EST
Distribution: talk
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

Cogratulations to Ataylor for yet ANOTHER post where he tries, ever so
desperately, to twists my posts into something they simply do not say.

I normally admire perseverance, but the least you could do is try another NEW
dishonest tactic Ataylor. (unless, of course this is the ONLY one you ever had
the capacity to learn.)

Oh well, let's see what lies/stupudity you have THIS time.

(The really upsetting thing is I have already explained where you are wrong on
these posts before. Can't your feeble reptile brain understand even the
simplest english when it is repeatedly explained to you over and over?)

In article <ATAYLOR.92Aug28084552@gauss.nmsu.edu>, ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy) writes:
> 
> 	I'm tired of Cosgrove's whining. Here is one of his posts
> 	complete.
> 
> 	Perhaps he can get into a flamefight with himself.....
> =================================================================
> From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
> Newsgroups: talk.rape
> Subject: Re: Critisizing the victim?
> Date: 5 Aug 92 11:52:54 EST
> Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services
> 
> In article <1992Aug5.015425.9604@news.cs.indiana.edu>, Amy Young Leith <alyoung@kiwi.ucs.indiana.edu> writes:
>> In article <VwuLoB2w164w@cellar.org> hacksaw@cellar.org (Hacksaw) writes:
>> 
>>>  I agree that one never asks to be raped, and that it is never the victim's
>>>fault. But, in some cases, I believe too much sympathy is given to the
>>>victim; she comes out looking like a saint. Is it wrong to critisize her
>>>too?
>> 
>> I can't believe your analogy... 
>> 
>>>  I'll make this analogy. A guy owns and expensive car and is naive enough
>>>to bring it into a the city. He locks the car, and goes off to do his 
>>>business. Ten seconds later the car is gone. No doubt there was a crime 
>>>committed here, and he didn't ask for it to be committed. We look at this 
>>>guy as an idiot for bringing such a nice car into a high-crime area.
>> 
>> I don't care how bad the world is, any civilized society SHOULD
>> *EXPECT* responsible, mature, respectful behavior between it's
>> members.  To settle for less, regardless of the reason, is only
>> condemning that behavior.  I should have the right to own whatever I
>> wish, and to take it wherever I wish within the law.  If someone is
>> going to violate MY rights, I sure as hell should not be blamed for
>> it.  

Christ Ataylor! You have already been flamed publicly once for trying to pass
this part off as mine. See where it says "Hacksaw" up there? You have a gripe
with his post, take it up with him. Stop trying to pin the above words as my own
where you ALREADY know I didn't write this. This was discussed ad nausium, and
you still try to use it. Sad. Very sad. Are you practicing Hitler's "Big Lie"?

(My words finally start below)

> 
> Listen, if I walk down the street with cash bulging from my pockets (low-cut
> dress, no bra), alone (alone), in a bad section of town (virtually anywhere
> without good lights and other people present), when I get mugged (raped), what
> are you going to tell me?
> 
> 1. Shame on those horrible segments of our society! You have the right to walk
> wherever you want, at any time, and not have people violate your rights by
> stealing from you.
> 
> 2. What a stupid thing to do! You should know better than that.

GO back an re-read the prior answer to your sickly claim over this. I have
already stated that BOTH of these are extremes which no one should ever choose!
The reason they were presented was so people could see BOTH extremes were wrong.

Now, I can understand you missing the sarcasm the first time around. However,
this has ALREADY been explained to you. Were you sleeping? Did your
brain-damaged brain forget?

Oh, right. More of your ONLY technique over and over--repeat the same thing in
the slim hopes that no one notices you have no argument. (And, are only arguing
over nothing.)

> 
> Your world is an idealistic place which we must all try to achieve. However,
> until we achieve Utopia, some of us relaize we have to live in this world. If
> the man walking down the street with the bulging cash was stupid, the woman in
> the bad situation she should know to avoid is also stupid. Yes or no, your
> opinion?


Did I saw the man who was robbed is stupid? Did I say the woman who was raped
is stupid?

NO! And you know it you pathetic excuse for a human! You have been told this
before--several times! 

The man acts stupidly by placing himself at risk in an obviously high-risk
situation he courts danger. He is begging to be mugged. If he should be lucky
enough not to get mugged, it does not change the fact he acted like a fool by
taking an easily circumvented high risk.

My question to you, and everyone else, which you have attacked me for asking,
but never tried to answer, is how is SHE any different than he is?

No one here has ever tried to distinguish the two hypos.

All they have attempted to do is flame me for calling her stupid. (And I am
supposed to act mature and gentle with these slime? I think not.)


> 
>> 
>>>  I tend to look at some rape victims as "idiots" for putting themselves
>>>into a situation. The girl, half-drunk, going into a guys apartment late
>>>at night. The girl walking down a dark street wearing clothes that leave
>>>nothing to the imagination. These are some instances that come to mind.

Hacksaw wrote this part, and you already KNOW that fact. Pathetic. Most people
when their lies are pointed out will eventually have some kind of dignity that
prevents them from continuing onward.

Except, of course, for the pathological liar (i.e. YOU).

>> 
>> I'm going to stay calm, really, I am.  
>> 
>> As a woman, I expect to be given the same rights and respect that any
>> man gets.  A person, ANY person, regardless of sex or age, should have
>> the secure knowledge that their person is safe.  If they are denied
>> that, NOTHING that they can do can make that any worse of a crime. 
> 
> Any man who leaves his bicycle parked on campus unlocked an unattended is
> INVITING crime. Any man who leaves his windows down and his Bloupunt in the
> dash should have his premiums paid up and no deductible. Any man who walks down
> back alleys he is unfamiliar with is either incredibly naieve, or sits back and
> says, "I know the risk, I'll take my chances."
> 
> 
> Sure, any man has the right to do any of these things, and it would be nice to
> live in a a society where his rights are respected. However, any man, or woman,
> who believes such a world exists, or expects it to exist, is being stupid.

Here I say a person who BELIEVES the world IS safe is a stupid person. THAT I
still believe, and would gladly debate with anyone. (As, it is not a subject
which has another side.)

Please note the following phrase, and copy it down onto a sheet of paper:

"At no time does the above paragraph say that, as you have claimed I have said,
'Rape victims are stupid.'  It DOES say that anyone who believes, or is
counting on, a safe world, is stupid and ignoring the harsh reality of life."

Now, as you obvioulsy do not understand what that means, take it to some
remedial reading teacher who will explain to you the complex words and thoughts
contained therein. Maybe then a light will come on and you will realize just
how far your oars have been out of the water.

> 
> Please, do not go off on a tangent, simply answer the questions and address
> these issues.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Darrell M. Crosgrove
> 

As usual, you have missed the call for debate on the issues raised, created
your own fantasy issues, and wander blindly through life.

(Five bucks says his shoes are either untied, or tied together if he has just
put them on.)

DC