HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hennebry@plains.NoDak.edu (Michael J. Hennebry)
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: Re: Rage (story)
Date: 21 Jul 92 15:19:10 GMT
Organization: North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND

In article <1992Jul20.173952.8783@uoft02.utoledo.edu> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
<In article <19224@plains.NoDak.edu>, hennebry@plains.NoDak.edu (Michael J. Hennebry) writes:
<> If that were the case, then no witnesses could ever be forced to give
<> <testimony.
<> 
<> I'm aware of that. I'm also aware that that is not how it works in the
<> real world. Taken literally what I wrote is exactly what the fifth amendment
<> implies.
<
<I would like to see your refernces for this, as it is opposite what we 
<learned in Criminal Procedure--Adjudications last semester.

I wrote that that was not how it worked in the real world. I did not write
that it ever worked that way in the real world. Why expect a citation?
When literally any testimony on the subject of a crime is testimony
against oneself, then taken literally a prohibition against requiring a
person to testify against himself prohibits requiring literally any
testimony on the subject. That is tautological.

<> <...                           If she is being charged, THEN the fifth amendment
<> <is an absolute. ...
<> 
<> Maybe today. Have you read the paper next week?
<
<Martians may land next week and conquer the world. You may speculate on the
<judicial system tossing out hundreds of years old standards sometimes soon,
<I see no such trend.

I do.  Non-self-incrimination may very well go the way of due process,
just compensation, the right to confront one's accuser, and the right
to trial by jury.  I even have some idea of the rationalization that
might be used, but I'd rather not be spreading such ideas.

<> <the prosection can ask that she be compelled to give testimont anyway, but
<> <the Constitution protects her by assuring that her testimony may not be used
<> <against her in further proceedings.
<> 
<> Immunity is not automatically given, nor automatically enforced. One can
<> do heavy time or be executed waiting for one's rights to be enforced.
<
<Sure. You have to request it from the judge. If they decline, you file a
<motion in limine to the appellate court immediately. 
<
<As for doing heavy time, or being executed, how does that apply to the given
<hypothetical?

It means that she could spend several deccades in the electric chair while
appeals are being denied.

-- 
Mike   hennebry@plains.NoDak.edu
"This dream is brought to you by Sharassin of Shan. Dreams and
communication wizardry of all sorts at reasonable rates."  --  Sharassin of Shan
Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: Re: Sex fantasies--men, women, other.
Date: 30 Jul 92 08:00:17 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

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

> 
> Provided, I suppose that all she wants is the most trivial sex with a
> not necessarily terribly attractive partner.  Not all sexual fantasies
> satisify this condition.

A woman who can not get someone at least as attractive as she is is doing
something horribly wrong.

> 
> Examples:
> 
> A woman who is anorgasmic during vaginal-penial sex might fantasize about 
> a vaginal-penial orgasm and never achieve such, even by going to bars and 
> picking up the less than averagely sensitive men who are there abouts.

Sadly, NOBODY gets any guarantees that when they actually get around to acting
out their fantasies, it will be as good as the fantasy. Isn't there an old
saying that expectation is better than actualization.

> 
> A woman might fantasize about having her vagina licked by one man while
> another man licks her nipples and again not easily succeed in satisfying
> this fantasy from a bar pick-up.

Which od you perceive as easier--for a woman to go out and get picked up by two
guys, or for a man to go out and acquire two women???

> 
> 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?


> 
> Frankly if men "score" one time in three I don't really think that this is
> too different from sex on demand - or much different from one time in
> one.

Lets see, only having 1/3 as many options open is the same as having every
option open. Despite the fact that 2/3 of the women are simply not going to be
interested, that is the same as being a woman and having (virtually) all of the
women available.

Now let's factor in the pain from rejection (pain or twinges, I don't believe
many men ever get completley past it) and the fact that before you walk you,
you have to consider rejection. Women only have to consider whether or not they 
are going to be happy with the whole event AFTER it is over. Which, of course,
men must also consider.


DC


Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: synth@deepthought.unm.edu (Synth F. Oberheim)
Subject: Re: DC: I didn't threaten Amy ...
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 20:16:34 GMT
Organization: SynthMedia Productions Ltd.: The Danes Call It Quality


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

Kimmy> ... I was brought up to believe that men have a sacred duty to
Kimmy> respect and honor women.  To protect them from harm at *ALL* cost.
Kimmy> To treat them as equals ...  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

While I admire your nobility, I can't help but point out that this is
very sexist.  Women are not so incapable of taking care of themselves
to warrant constant "protection" from men.  Lend them help when asked
or needed, otherwise allow them their own strength.


===============================================================================
    :: :: :: :: ::     Synth F.    synth@deepthought.unm.edu    U S E N E T   
 :: :: :: :: :: :: ::  Oberheim    synth@yenta.alb.nm.us             in color!
===============================================================================
"Be good to your friends, or else they may develop psychokinetic abilities
 and destroy Tokyo."  -- 6
Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: kaarts@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Kenneth John Aarts)
Subject: Re: More on fantasies and discussing one or two (was) Re: Rape in any form ...
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 14:51:13 GMT

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
From: snyeva01@uctvax.uct.ac.za
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: rape - lust apology
Date: 27 Jul 92 11:33:04 GMT
Organization: University of Cape Town

apology to come :

I am very sorry, but it seems as if someone got hold of my password and had
some fun. The posting labelled "rape - lust" was not written by me Evan Snyman
and I totally dissociate myself from any such sentiment.

I hope this will never happen again.
Evan Snyman.
From: hennebry@plains.NoDak.edu (Michael J. Hennebry)
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: Re: Rage (story)
Date: 22 Jul 92 15:12:27 GMT
Organization: North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND

In article <1992Jul21.142431.8816@uoft02.utoledo.edu> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
<In article <19253@plains.NoDak.edu>, hennebry@plains.NoDak.edu (Michael J. Hennebry) writes:
<> I do.  Non-self-incrimination may very well go the way of due process,
<> just compensation, the right to confront one's accuser, and the right
<> to trial by jury.  I even have some idea of the rationalization that
<> might be used, but I'd rather not be spreading such ideas.
<
<What due process rights are you taking about? ...

Ever hear of RICO?

<...                                           What right to confront
<one's accuser has been compromised? ...

When children testify the defendant is sometimes replaced by a video
camera. The witness doesn't see the person the state is trying to
destroy.

<...                                 Trial by jury--compromised???
<Where are you getting these notions???

At least one state supreme court justice refered to the phenomenon as
"guilty anyway". I call it "the insanity offense". The prosecution can
do what ever illegal and constitiutional crap it feels like and when
it gets to the appeals court the appeals court decides that the
defendant was so obviously guilty anyway that he doesn't deserve or
get a new trial. Juries are supposed to decide whether a particular
set of evidence is good enough for conviction. I think the justice
was from Virginia.

<Only after she is found guilty. She mst be on trial for that to happen. If she
<is on trial, THEN her fifth amendment protection kicks in, and the state can
<not force her to testify. You will not find an exception to that.
<
<And, if her counsel asked for immunity, her prior testimony on the subject can
<not be used.

She probably gave her name and address to a grand jury before she
thought of asking for immunity. Then she had to testify without
immunity about anything that happened while she had that name or address.
Her testimony gets used against her. She spends ten years in the electric
chair. This might be mistaken for an honest mistake, so there is some
chance that her conviction will be reversed. If the appeals court
recognises lawlessness when it sees it, it is likely to just make
some comment on the egregiousness of the crime or the zealousness with
which her rights were enforced and uphold the conviction.

-- 
Mike   hennebry@plains.NoDak.edu
"This dream is brought to you by Sharassin of Shan. Dreams and
communication wizardry of all sorts at reasonable rates."  --  Sharassin of Shan
From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: Question for Scott
Date: 22 Jul 92 23:56:47 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

In article <SCG.92Jul22164540@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>, scg@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Scott Goehring) writes:

> (lots of self-glorifying posting deleted)

Listen Scott, I choose my friends, you choose yours. I will not let someone
like you tel me how to run my life or make my decisions. If you don't like
it, move to alt.TS.

But, I still put the question to you, and I have deleted everything else just
to make it real hard for you to snake out of it:

Would you ever tell a woman she should not care what society thought
after she had been raped, and that it was her duty to report the crime?
Would you ever tell her that if her friends or co-workers might look at her 
differently, or not promote her, she should 'raise the standards' she uses
to make friends.

Listen, you reported your incident. Great. Here's a cookie. It will go good
with the additional degrading the police gave you.

Now, why do you feel compelled to tell other people how they conduct their own
lives? Just cause you reported it gives you the right to tell other men they
should report it if it happens to them? And if it wrecks their lives, oh well?

You'd never be so insensitive to say it to a woman, so why do you say it to a
man? Men more obligated to society than women are? Men less concerned with
their lives than women are?

What is your justification???

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.

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?

DC





Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: synth@deepthought.unm.edu (Synth F. Oberheim)
Subject: Re: Rape in any form ...
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 07:44:55 GMT
Organization: SynthMedia Productions Ltd.: The Danes Call It Quality
	<SYNTH.92Jul23215930@deepthought.unm.edu>
	<1992Jul24.074849.8894@uoft02.utoledo.edu>


dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:

dc> synth@deepthought.unm.edu (Synth F. Oberheim) writes:
> This is the essence of a question I posed to DC a while back -- how
> can someone who has experienced and witnessed such trauma continue to
> fantasize about rape?  Wouldn't the reality utterly dissolve the
> fantasy in the person's head?  What is going on in the person's head --
> is the reality being acknowledged and integrated into the fantasy
> somehow?  Perhaps someone here with an introspective edge could
> enlighten us.

dc> ... It may even be something as extreme as just one, really
dc> humiliating that (nasty word for a female here) who dicked you
dc> over and felt no remorse about stringing you along while she slept
dc> with other guys.

The key element I was looking for was how you have already experienced,
through the other females in your life, the "reality" elements of
trauma and horror, and then continue to indulge in the fantasy after
being educated first-hand.  My guess is that your fantasy of humiliating 
your ex is really just simple revenge, and does not involve some sense
of satisfaction in giving her lasting emotional and psychological
scarring, loss of intimacy or sociability, recurring nightmares, etc.
(Or does it ...?)  

dc> Is that so different than fantasizing about walking up to your
dc> boss in public, and telling him off before tossing scalding coffe
dc> into his face or crotch?                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

To complete this analogy I would say "no" -- IF the one doing the
fantasizing had also, in real life, spent a few years working with
burn trauma patients, or something to that effect ...

dc> Most of us have done a variant of this,
dc> and we all understand it is a normal thing to fantasize about.

Is this like the third time I've had to correct you on this?  Re-read
the articles that you yourself have posted -- the scientific community
does not KNOW if it is "normal" or "okay" to fantasize about rape.
Please stop contending that it is.

dc> We leave out of fantasies we would rather not associate with.
dc> When it comes to a rape fantasy, the same applies.

We do this anyway -- the difference I was looking for is someone who
has seen first-hand what rape actually does to others.


===============================================================================
    :: :: :: :: ::     Synth F.    synth@deepthought.unm.edu    U S E N E T   
 :: :: :: :: :: :: ::  Oberheim    synth@yenta.alb.nm.us             in color!
===============================================================================
FROM 1992 GM CAR OWNER'S MANUAL: "If you get gasoline on you and then something
                                  ignites it, you could be badly burned."
From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: Sex fantasies--men, women, other.
Date: 29 Jul 92 11:16:53 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

In article <SCG.92Jul29084550@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>, scg@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Scott Goehring) writes:

> 
> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
> 
>>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. 
> 
> Doesn't it generally take two (or more) to fulfill a sexual fantasy?
> How it is any different for women?  A woman needs a willing partner
> (male or female), just as a man does.
> 
> I suspect there is an underlying assumption that you're making.
> Perhaps something about how men are always ready to perform?

Assumption? No. Fact. All a woman must do to go out and get laid, provided she
is even average, is to go out and make herself available. If there are males
available, she'll get what she wants. The limiting factor for women is that
they inhibit their desire to go out and score. (Most women I've talked to on
this subject eventually concede they can get it whenever they want, provided
they are willing to 'act like a slut.' Virtally all of the males I have talked
with on the subject envy the fact that they have to wait for a woman to come in
and pick out her partner. We would be HAPPY to be called sluts if we could get
it anytime.)

Just to cite some scientific data, a team of researchers sent equally
attractive males and females into a bar to 'pick up' partners. They then
compared types of approaches (humurous, flattery, buying a drink...) that each
gender succeeded with. The male 'scoring rate' was low (I think in the 40%
overall) while the women hit 100% of the time. Even when their appraoch was
nothing more than "Hi." 

Welcome to the real world. 


> 
> By the way, some of my sexual fantasies do not involve women in any
> way.  Some require both men and women.  Please be careful not to shove
> 'sexual fantasies' into the heterosexual one-on-one mold.

Sorry, I was simply talking about the MAJORITY of times. I guess I should have
provided for every possible alternative, including bestiality, celibacy, and
mono-eroticism. 


> 
>>(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.
> 
> I find the entire concept of 'sex on demand' extremely revolting.

So? Who cares what you think when it comes to our fantasies???

DC


Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: holzman@fnalo.fnal.gov (Daniel B. Holzman)
Subject: Re: Rapmaster Kimmy D's Threat Rap
Organization: FERMILAB
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 22:55:23 GMT
X-Posted-From: fnalo.fnal.gov
X-Posted-Through: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <xapm0z+.tcmay@netcom.com>, tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May) writes:

... a load of shit, even for USENET.

That was ill advised, Mr. May.  Please leave now.
-- 
Daniel B. Holzman                    | Eight Words the Witch's Rede Fufill:
HOLZMAN@FNAL.BITNET                  | An It Harm None, Do What You Will
HOLZMAN@FNALC.FNAL.GOV.INTERNET      |
                                     | All Acts of Love and Pleasure are
Love doesn't subtract,               | Her Rituals
   it multiplies    - Heinlein       |
TEAM STAR Charter Member             | Speak the Word.
Disclaimer:  Fermilab's far too large to have an opinion, let alone mine.
Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: synth@deepthought.unm.edu (Synth F. Oberheim)
Subject: Re: Rape in any form ...
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 92 04:59:30 GMT
Organization: SynthMedia Productions Ltd.: The Danes Call It Quality


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

Kimmy> I neglected to mention people who fantasize about being raped.
Kimmy> All I can say here is that I feel confident that if such a
Kimmy> person could add to that fantasy the physical, emotional, and
Kimmy> spiritual trauma suffered by a true rape victim, the 'fun'
Kimmy> would go out of the experience pretty quick.

This is the essence of a question I posed to DC a while back -- how
can someone who has experienced and witnessed such trauma continue to
fantasize about rape?  Wouldn't the reality utterly dissolve the
fantasy in the person's head?  What is going on in the person's head --
is the reality being acknowledged and integrated into the fantasy
somehow?  Perhaps someone here with an introspective edge could
enlighten us.


===============================================================================
    :: :: :: :: ::     Synth F.    synth@deepthought.unm.edu    U S E N E T   
 :: :: :: :: :: :: ::  Oberheim    synth@yenta.alb.nm.us             in color!
===============================================================================
"It is fun being in the same decade with you."
					   -- FDR to Winston Churchill, 1942
From: dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: talk.rape
Subject: Re: Kristen's Question (off the track a bit)
Date: 21 Jul 92 14:08:05 EST
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

In article <Brqu97.Awy@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>, 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'm saying that there are
> 	people out there that do believe that's what a woman wants. I'm saying
> 	that there is a rape myth out there and posting statistics about rape 
> 	fantasies without mentioning the control factor (ie people are in 
> 	control	when they fantasize versus not being in control when they are 
> 	being raped) can lend support to their false belief. That's
> 	my opinion. DC doesn't agree with me. 
> 
Not only Do I disagree, but I think that line of reasoning is dangerous. If you
post your belief that someone who reads a rape fantasy statistic will be more
inclined to believe a woman who wants to be raped, then someone who reads that
will have it in their mind that someone who sees such stats now has a new
scapegoat. Hell, you think the uniformed are more likely to go out and rape as
a result of reading that information. 

If a rapist can show he saw such stats without a warning, thus leading him to 
believe women wanted to be raped, and he uses your logic in court, should he be
found not guilty?

He raped. Place them blame on his actions. Not, a posting of rape fantasies. We
live in a country where everbody blames someone for the wrong things they
themselves have done.

I don't buy it.

>>
>>
>>>Don't get me wrong, posting statics on rape fantasies is educates
>>>people on an interesting happening in the human psyche, but, I hate
>>>to see these findings used as justification for rape.
>>
> 		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."
> 
But by saying the warnings need to be posted, you validate the rape-cause
myth the rapist uses to prove "She wanted it." He finds a post without warnings
and says he read it. Then he argues the same argument you are using, "Warnings
should have been given."

Do you want him to use the same argument you are making?

DC


Newsgroups: talk.rape
From: rpetsche@mrg.tmc.edu (Rolfe G. Petschek)
Subject: Re: Rape in any form ...
Reply-To: rpetsche@mrg.CWRU.EDU (Rolfe G. Petschek)
Organization: CWRU Physics Department
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 19:17:24 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.175429.11674@brtph560.bnr.ca> kimmyd@bnr.ca (Kimmy Posey P920) writes:

>I neglected to mention people who fantasize about being raped.  All I can say
>here is that I feel confident that if such a person could add to that fantasy
>the physical, emotional, and spiritual trauma suffered by a true rape victim,
>the 'fun' would go out of the experience pretty quick.

Many rape victims fantasize about being rape victims "for fun" after they 
have been raped.  I have known one such and many more are known.
Additionally many people who fantasize about being rapists or rape
victims would be horrified by being either.  As one example I satisfy
all three possibilities in the previous sentence.

Possibly it would be worthwhile for yourself and/or your close friend
to go to a rape crisis center or other such center for the treatment of
rape trauma.  This commonly (given your lack of respect, possibly
justified, for persons who treat the human mind) consists of discussions
with other rape victims/survivors leading to an appreciation of the normality
of the common reactions to rape and discussions of methods similar
persons have found to deal with them.  Many such persons speak highly of this
experience.
--
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