Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Philosopher who wrote (73813)	9/3/2003 3:38:24 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

I wondered whether this was typical of the feminist movement in general. Don't know. Haven't followed the case. Don't know any NOW members. Waiting until there's real information rather than speculation before I engage, which I probably will since I'm a basketball fan. IMO, your local NOW chapter should not be engaging this matter yet, either, unless they just want to discuss general principles. And they certainly shouldn't be addressing it publicly. The feminist "party line" is that no woman makes up an accusation of rape Of course some women make up accusations of rape. It's preposterous to think that never happens. This could very well be one of those cases. It seems to have some of the earmarks. Their other conflict is with the equally strong feminist "party line" position that the victim should never be put on trial and that her previous sexual experiences I agree with the party line on this. No one deserves to be raped, even a prostitute. It's way too easy to make the "she asked for it excuse" and that shouldn't be tolerated. The only prior-acts info about the victim that's relevant and allowable, IMO, speaks to the credibility of the victim as a witness. There is nothing she could have done that "asked for it." Nothing. Having said that, I don't think that all rape victims should formally accuse their rapists. Seems to me that a woman in a hotel room fooling around with a stranger and then suddenly deciding not to follow through, unless she had a really, really good reason for renegging, ought to go home, lick her wounds, and reconsider her life style rather than go to the police. The sisterhood should informally encourage her to do so. This gal apparently doesn't make a good test case any more than Justice Moore does. Their allies should give them the proverbial good swift kick instead of waving banners and charging windmills. The most interesting thing coming out of this so far to me is a reopening of the discussion about naming rape victims. Some pundits are beginning to suggest that we do and I agree.

To: The Philosopher who wrote (73813)	9/9/2003 8:07:02 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Their other conflict is with the equally strong feminist "party line" position that the victim should never be put on trial and that her previous sexual experiences, and even her life experiences which may allow juries to think that she somehow desereved to be raped by the way she had dressed, or acted, or such in the past, should be completely out of bounds. Its funny that I read your post about this today. Last night I saw the movie "Town Without Pity" "Synopsis: In a post-World War II German town, four American soldiers are facing trial for the rape of a young girl, but the fact that she's a nymphette, given to enticing men, might help them avoid the death penalty. " hollywood.com "When four young American soldiers are accused of raping a girl from a German village near their camp, Major Steve Garrett is assigned the distasteful task of defending them. It soon becomes clear that the Army, the villagers, and even the girl's family are more interested in revenge than in the welfare of the distraught victim. Garrett is faced with the dilemma of destroying the girl on the witness stand in order to save the lives of his clients." imdb.com