From: tb13@ellis.uchicago.edu (leon joel gross)
Subject: Re: Man rapes Man
Reply-To: tb13@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 18:30:24 GMT

In article <GPRIORES.93Jan7125615@fish.oracle.com> gpriores@oracle.com (gordon prioreschi) writes:
>In article <1993Jan6.001106.8530@midway.uchicago.edu> tb13@ellis.uchicago.edu (leon joel gross) writes:
>> In article <GPRIORES.93Jan5113335@fish.oracle.com> gpriores@oracle.com (gordon prioreschi) writes:
>>>In article <1993Jan4.163415.3330@midway.uchicago.edu> tb13@ellis.uchicago.edu (leon joel gross) writes:
>>>> [The word "gay" is] offensive for a variety
>>>>of reasons for a variety of people. 
>>>Tell that to the organizers of San Francisco's annual "Gay Pride" parade.
>> Go back and read the context.
>> It's offensive in this context; the context was one of calling a
>>rape of a man by a man 'gay'. 
>
>I thought you were objecting to the use of the word "gay" in
>general, not specifically in the context of rape.

You were wrong.

>If I remember the context correctly, the case cited was one of "gay
>acquaintance rape"; I did assume that the principals were gay.

That's the problem; when you hear 'gay' rape, you assume the 
participants are gay, and they might not be.

> It
>doesn't matter, though:

Yes it does.
>> Is the act gay?  Probably not.
>
>The act of sexual contact between two men, consensual or not, is by
>definition homosexual, even if the participants are not. 

Whose definition?  This is insane. In some countries they torture
prisoners by hooking up electrodes to their genetals.  Under our
laws, in addition to other crimes, this is sexual assault.  Is it
'homosexual?'.  Remember that sexual assault is a violent crime
(in Illinois, Class X, like kidnapping and attempted murder).
So is kicking someone in the crotch.  Is that 'homosexual'?  It's
assault, and it might even be considered sexual assault (I don't
know the law on this.)  


>> I assume that gay people would be offended by calling a rape 'gay'.

>Would I be offended if a rape were called "straight"? Probably not.

But part of what drives homophobia is the fear that gay men will
rape or violate straight men.   If you were afraid of being beat
up because people thought of straight men as rapists, (assuming
for the sake of the argument that you are straight, since I don't
know) then it would be parallel. 

>> And I assume that male survivors who are straight do not want to
>>think of themselves as 'gay' or having participated in a 'gay'
>>action.

>They probably don't want to think of themselves as having been
>sexually used by a man, either, but that doesn't change the fact that
>they have.

They have been violated and have been used in a violent way.

>> I never said the word 'gay' was offensive. The word 'Jew' is not
>>offensive, but the description of banking fraud as 'jewish' is.
>
>The description of rape in general as "gay" would be offensive (as
>well as ridiculous). 

But some people refer to all male-male rape as 'gay', and that is
offensive and ridiculous.  There is a lot of male-male rape in 
prisons;  in most cases, neither the attacker or victim is gay.
It's incorrect to call male-male rape gay.

>"Jewish" is an adjective that is not applicable to the act of fraud
>itself; clearly, in describing a banking fraud as "Jewish" I would be
>describing some person or organization involved, not the fraud itself.

But that's the problem.  It is true that Ivan Boesky is Jewish.
Are his crimes Jewish crimes?  Remember, there are anti-semitic
stereotypes about Jews controlling banks, and money.  I would
object to calling this a Jewish crime, even though Boesky is Jewsh.

>Not so with rape. Describing a rape as "homosexual" or "gay" clarifies
>the description of the act itself; it doesn't necessarily describe any
>of the principals. 

Why not just say 'a man raped a man'?  
Or rape of a man by a man?

>I can describe exactly how the act of "gay" rape
>differs from "regular" rape; I cannot do the same with "Jewish"
>banking fraud.

What's 'regular' rape?  What's that supposed to mean?
Is it a man raping a woman that he knows?  That he doesn't know?
A man raping a child that he knows?  That he doesn't know?
A man raping a male child?  A female child?  A woman raping
a male child?   A woman raping a female child?

Seeing 'gay rape' as not 'regular' rape, means that victims
are not treated equally by law enforcement, social services,
etc.  These organizations do not treat male and female victims
equally (because most of the training is about female victims,
the advocacy groups and activist groups are feminist, and people
have their own views on gender, preference, etc) which is
contrary to equal protection under the law. 
	
>Thus, it is semantically (if not politically) correct to use the term
>"homosexual [or gay] rape".

When a 13 year -old boy is raped (e.g. one of Dahmer's victims), 
what about it is gay or homosexual?  Most men who attack boys
are straight.  For the attacker it's about power, not sex.  For
the victims, it's violence.  Why consider this a homosexual act?
 
>> Too bad there is nothing in news.announce about teaching people
>>to read and quote in context.

>Too bad there is nothing in news.announce about teaching people not to
>make silly, gratuitous inflammatory comments.

You admitted yourself that your objection was based on a misreading.

And someone elsee wotte about the damage done to male survivors when
people (including themselves) think of the rape as 'gay' or 
'homosexual.'  This is pretty wide-spread, almost universal. If you
care about this, you can actually read stuff  (books, training
manuals, articles, etc), or talk to male survivors.  If you don't
care about them and their problems, and demonstrate that in 
talk.rape,  then expect negative responses.
>
>                                        Cordially,
>
>                                             -g

Leon Gross
I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV>
Newsgroups: talk.rape