From: garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: Men's Issues Newsbrief
Date: 5 Sep 92 00:45:45 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.Bu2y4A.Jqy.2
Distribution: na
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon

In article <1992Sep4.214744.6540@cbnewsk.cb.att.com> noraa@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (aaron.l.hoffmeyer) writes:
#In article <Bu2Grt.M4t.2@cs.cmu.edu> garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:
##In article <1992Sep1.024134.7681@leland.Stanford.EDU> farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:
###In article <1992Aug29.040317.18445@cbnewsk.cb.att.com> noraa@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (aaron.l.hoffmeyer) writes:
##
##[one man's fictional account of a conception deleted]
##
####Is this rape?  He never consented.  He was not penetrated.
##
###It is rape.  The man is not able to give his consent to sex, thus it's
###rape.
##
##Of course it would be, if it really happened.  I think that
##Hoffmeyer was being a bit dishonest when he mixed fact and 
##fiction in his article.
##
#
#Oh, come on, Susan.  I picked a "hypothetical" example that defies the
#classic language of typical rape definitions in state laws.  Just
#because it was from a fictional book doesn't mean that it couldn't
#happen or that it didn't happen.  In fact, I chose it because it wasz
#familiar to so many people - all those that read the book and all those
#that saw the movie (although I don't recall the explanation of the
#specifics of the sex act being very clear in the movie, but some folks
#who had only seen the movie recognized it immediately anyway).  The
#whole point was that so many of us read this passage of saw it in the
#movie, but how many of us thought to themselves, "My God, this is rape."
#Which it was - no doubt.  If you don't believe me, ask Farthing.

I said that it would be rape if it really happened above.

Do you think that it happened?

I recognized it as rape when I read the book.  I also recognized
it as fiction, in particular, fiction written by a man who 
often makes his characters behave in extreme ways.  

I understand your motivation - it isn't a traditional rape, and
perhaps some people didn't recognize it as such.  Your point
wouldn't have been lost, though, if you had indicated the
source of the story.

###Of course, you know these staunch feminists who frankly don't respect
###men and their suffering.  If they're not becoming lesbians, killing
###their babies, or engaging in witchcraft, they're becoming nurses so
###they can rape unconscious men at will.  This is something Pat
###Robertson should add to his list of the perversions feminists want to
###inflict on the rest of us God-fearing folk.
##
#
#I love Farthing's anger.  Yes Farthing, I was being a pig.  how big of
#you to notice.

Maybe I do understand why you were reluctant to admit that
this scenario was the product of a man's imagination.

##Irving also created a bizarre group of "feminists" who
##mutilated themselves to protest a rape and mutilation.
##(I've seen some people argue that rape was the central 
##theme of _Garp_.)  Few people would cite "Ellen Jamesians"
##as an example of radical feminists, though.
##
#
#Yuck.  The Ellen Jamesians, I thought, were the epitomy of radical
#feminists.  Cutting out their tongues to protest a brutal rape of a
#young girl.  Why does self-mutilation help to fix the problem?  It was
#a completely emotional reaction.  

Luckily, people who hate women (or in your code, feminists) as
much as you do are rare.  

Can you cite any real-world group that has done anything like
this?  

#Oh, did you notice that Irving (as in
#John - not Washington) had one of these "Ellen Jamesians" murder Garp
#at the end of the book/movie (in fact, it was Garp's neighbor, who
#-even though he never did anything to him, was quite sure that he had
#somehow molested her when she was a child - you know - those memories
#of how some big, bad evil man abused you when you were three years
#old)?  

This explanation of the muderis not from Irving's book or the movie 
version, but is a product of Hoffmeyer's imagination.  There is
nothing about memories of being molested in either.  Why Hoffmeyer
has chosen to lie about this, I'm not sure.  (The character
who killed Garp was portrayed as emotionally unstable
throughout the book.)

Get this straight, Hoffmeyer - some children are molested.
Ridiculing them is despicable.  

#Doesn't say much about what Irving thought of all those "Ellen
#Jamesians," does it?

This is absurd.  They were products of his own creation -
they were purposefully made to be ridiculous caricatures.
I've yet to hear anyone express admiration for them, other
than a few fictional characters in the book.

Susan
Newsgroups: soc.men