From: chapin@cbnewsc.cb.att.com ( Tom Chapin )
Subject: Re: Adults, Children and sex
Organization:  Hickory Ridge - Lisle, IL
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 22:27:42 GMT

Richard Soyack writes:
>Jeffrey Boser writes:
>>	rape is sex without consent.   they are saying that
>>they had experiences where such consent was denied, and no
>>sex took place.
>>how the hell does that equate to rape?  or abuse?
>
>I guess you didn't know that its rape when adults have sex
>with children.  Its attempted rape when adults attempt to have
>sex with children.  Is that clear?

Nope, it's playing the game of slippery-slidey definitions.  

One definition of rape sees it as any sexual act which causes
physical or emotional harm against the wishes of the other.
The other sees rape as a legal term which may or may not have
any genuine connection with the first definition.

The game consists of invoking the second definition any time
someone discusses the first, and the first definition any time
someone tries to discuss the second.

>>				They were saying that they
>>had situations where there was no force, no power, where they
>>werent afraid of saying [no]...
>
>No force?  No power?  Adults have power of children.  Their
>size alone gives them an implied force when making a suggestion...

The examples given in contradiction of this theory demonstrated
that this "implied force" had no effect in those experiences they
related.  Theory refuted by counterexample.

The reason the theory is incorrect is the same reason why certain
feminists are incorrect in assuming all sexuality is rape because
men are larger than women.  Physical size is power in only some
situations and can be far "outweighed" by other forms of power.
In our society, women and children have far more power than men
because our society gives them the ability to call on both other
men as individuals or groups, or call upon the full power of
entire social institutions (such as legal or police) to overcome
the power of an individual man.  "Women and children first" is
but one example of the power to call upon the power of others
which we deliberately give those we deem weaker in our society.

As I already stated, even as young as age three I had already been
socialized to realize the existence and reality of the power I had
over those physically larger than I, and, having been physically
abused by some in a caretaker position, I was already aware that
choosing not to call upon that power was a conscious decision on my
part based on the costs/benefits if I were to use that power.

>				I would suggest you worry
>less about the offense I gave those arguing that there is
>nothing wrong with children being seen as sex objects and
>worry more about the effect of this on the children.

Those posting on this topic have dealt with precisely this issue,
and have unequivocably stated that they as children dealt
with just such situations without harmful effects.  Amazing that
people can read words and not see them.  Some women have related
experiences of rape and noted that the men didn't seem to even hear
their cries to stop.  We who are relating out own experiences
are seeing (luckily in a less traumatic circumstance) just how
such situations occur where we find ourselves dealing with someone
who is so involved in what is going on in their own mind and
fantasies that they simply cannot hear what we are saying.

-- 
	     tom chapin                tjc@hrcce.att.com
Newsgroups: soc.men