Text 25788, 150 rader
Skriven 2015-06-22 19:29:56 av Lee Lofaso (2:203/2)
  Kommentar till text 25784 av Bill McGarrity (17976.2fidonews)
Ärende: When Rape Is Rape
=========================
Hello Bill,

 MvV>>>> I think it is more a matter of different culture.

 BM>>> Glad to hear rape is non-existent in the Netherlands then.  Seems as
 BM>>> if you and Liechtenstein share that honor.

 MvV>>> You are putting words into my mouth. AGAIN.

 BM>> Not really.

 LL>> Yes really.

 MvV>>> I never claimed rape is non-existant in The Netherlands. What I wrote
 MvV>>> was that I do not recall to ever have been in the situation you
 MvV>>> described.

 BM>> You brought up culture in the discussion.

 LL>> If I understand Michiel correctly, it was only in a manner LL>of
 BM> speaking.

 BM>> Culture would have to do with the generalization of a society.
 BM>> Therefore my statement.

 LL>> Society is part of a culture.  Not the other way around.

 BM> Not exactly as there could be many different cultures within a society.

That is a misconception many people have.  The reality is
the opposite of people think.  For example, the Cajun people
were here before there was a United States.  Oh, there were
Native Americans around.  And those people still exist, as
well.  Cajuns have their own culture, language, etc.  That
culture will survive long after the United States ceases
to exist.  Unnerstan'?

Society, in this case American society, wants to make
culture its own, to shape it into its own making.  But
doing so would change that culture into something it
is not and could never be.

I have seen this, and have experienced this, firsthand
with the "Americanization" of the Cajun culture.  My first
language is Cajun, not English.  I grew up speaking French,
learning the Pledge of Allegiance and singing the Star-
Spangled Banner in French rather than in English.  My
teacher in kindergarten spoke only French and not a word
of English, so as to leave us no choice.

In first grade that all changed.  Teachers forced me
to speak English, and took a ruler hitting my little
hands whenever I spoke with a forked tongue.  They
also did this to all the other kids who tried to rebel,
so all I did was grin, knowing the world was mine ...

 LL>> Rape is a crime of violence, not of passion.  It makes no
 LL>> difference where the act occurs, as it remains an act of
 LL>> violence.

 BM>> Regarding you and the described situation over never being BM>in a
 BM> situation I described, alcohol was never consumed at any BM>of the parties
 BM> you attended?  Or is it the effects of alcohol BM>on Dutch women are
 BM> totally alien?

 LL>> Rape is about violence, having nothing to do with passion or
 LL>> the consumption of alcohol.  Okay, the consumption of alcohol
 LL>> might make somebody become violent, but that is not what you
 LL>> are trying to argue.  You are trying to say the more one drinks,
 LL>> the more passionate one becomes.  The drunker one is, the more
 LL>> passionate one becomes.  IOW, total hogwash and nonsesne.

 BM> Answer me this... party, alcohol, interest, passion... woman then decides
NO
 BM> but is far past the means to stop it.

And a man (or woman) physically accosts her.  IOW, rapes her.
Commits an act of violence, against her will.  Whether she is
able to resist or not is irrelevant.  An act of violence has
occurred, against her will.  In most societies that would be
considered as being a crime.  A criminal act.

 BM>> Here is my point.  I am 99.99% sure you've, at one time in your life,
 BM> consumed enough alcohol to cloud your judgement.

Not while I am performing onstage.  Offstage, maybe.  But
never onstage.  Except for one time when I was in college.
It was kind of racist, as it was 19 white guys dressed in
gray, and 1 black dressed in a white t-shirt and blue jeans,
all sharing a bottle of whiskey, while singing "Dixie" in
semi-coherent unison.  And to think it was all televised.
The audience did not know it, and neither did the professors
until after we finished, that none of us were sober.

 LL>> Most people who get drunk (whether deliberately or not) never
 LL>> commit acts of violence (such as rape, murder, etc.).  But some
 LL>> do.  Does that mean that alcohol should be banned, as it once
 LL>> was in the US?

 BM> No one said that.  I was discussing an instance where rape is possible due
 BM> to the limited functions of the woman to say and MEAN no when a male is
has
 BM> been aroused and he has limited mental functions due to the alcohol as
 BM> well.

A woman who is inebriated is far easier to victimize than a woman
who is sober and able to fight back (resist her attacker).

Most men (and women) who have been aroused are able to control
their urges - even if drunk.  Those who are unable to do so are
criminals.  Or criminally insane.

 BM> [...]

 BM> Sorry Lee but the rest of your arguement was just going off on a tangent
 BM> that had nothing to do with the original discussion.

Either rape is a crime of passion or it is not.
Since passion is not a crime, then rape cannot by definition
be a crime of passion.

So what kind of crime is rape?

The only kind of crime it can be - a crime of violence.

You see, every crime has to have a victim.
Without a victim, there can be no crime.

Some people enjoy experiencing acts of violence.
Some people even go so far as to pay people to inflict
acts of violence upon them.  But that is not a crime,
as there is no victim.

However, in the case of rape, it is an act of violence
against the will of another.  Meaning there is most definitely
a victim.

 BM> Everyone knows rape occurs and normally without involvement of alcohol.  I
 BM> wasn't questioning that.  My discussion was a specific instance.

Meaning people who have been drinking are more likely to
commit acts of violence than people who have not been drinking?
I know Navy gals who can drink you under the table and be nice
as can be.  But I wouldn't want to mess with them or try to
cross them in any way.  :)

--Lee

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
 * Origin: news://felten.yi.org (2:203/2)