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.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Edwarda who wrote (35188)	4/18/1999 4:07:00 PM
From: E	Respond to of 108807

No, Edwarda, you don't get to circumvent language and reason and the experience of other women by raising your voice and saying even louder that you were raped once, and you felt your particular rape experience wasn't sexual for the rapist. I hope you understand that my aim here is not to convince anyone to grant that all rapes are 'sexual,' but only that some rapes are sexual. After that has been granted, we can engage in any discussion you propose about how to distinguish rapes which are sexual for the rapist from those which are not. I said this in an earlier post, to which you were not listening: <<<<The man who raped my sister was unquestionably having sex. My sister was there, and that's what she says, differing from Edwarda on this point. >>>> Respond to the scenario I presented earlier. You believe yours differed from this. I won't argue about that; as you say, i wasn't there monitoring his sexual arousal level. As I said last night more than once, some men get off on violence. In fact, it is close to definitional, when we're talking about serial rapists: violence against women turns them on and gets them off. In this scenario is the rape a sexual experience for the rapist, as my sister's was for her rapist. <<<... and focus here on whether the rapist who spots a victim, stalks her with an erection, becomes increasingly aroused as he closes in on her, traps her, terrorizes her (increasing his sexual excitation, because these guys are excited by the fear of their victim,) reaches his point of maximum erection, produces precoital fluid, tears her clothes off or makes her undress, touches her breasts, penetrates her, and comes, sweating and moaning, is having a sexual experience.>>> I think the statement that all rapes are non sexual is cant. And the fact that you were raped by one individual whom you feel wasn't sexually excited and having a sexual experience doesn't throw any light on the question however loudly you say it. So was my sister, and she disagrees. We are surely not at the point where every individual who experiences the horror of rape is entitled to generalize his or her impression of that singular experience to all reported rapes and to exclude contrary testimony of other women and of rapists themselves and other conflicting evidence. You can't intend to be claiming this! It is solipsism gone mad and militant! So now let's get back to the question: Is the rape scenario in bold above a sexual experience for the rapist? I am pleading with you to answer this question, Edwarda! Then those who want to can attempt here to distinguish among rapes the ones that are sexual experiences for the rapist from the ones that are not.

To: Edwarda who wrote (35188)	4/18/1999 4:15:00 PM
From: nihil	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

It is obvious that there are many kinds of rape. E-model rape is fully sexual with sexual organs as the means and the end. Many others D-type -- domination rape uses sexual organs as the instrument or means but domination as the end. I'd like to introduce another kind, of which I have perhaps been guilty -- N-type rape. The man, pursuing sexual objectives, is aggressive and ignores signals and even words denying his pursuit. Sometimes the woman resists physically, but in a way the man can convince himself is playful not serious. And then denying, she consents, she participates, she expresses her love and great satisfaction in the best way she can. The couple fall in love, despite the one way intention at the start. At first, denying, she changes her mind. The man -- a rapist -- because he does not have her consent to sex, is guilty of a crime. The woman, forgiving him, can crush him with guilt whenever she needs to. The man, pardoned by her late consent, denies to himself that he raped her. "Good" girls are taught that they must not consent to sex before marriage, and then that they must submit to her husband's lust. Many girls burn with sexual desire, cannot ask for sex, and are content to be seduced without their consent. They feel terrible (honestly) about their seduction. The "good" boy is taught that he must not engage in any sex of any kind. He masturbates in secret or with other boys. He feels guilty. He is attracted to a pretty girl, but is often too shy to ask her out and try out sexual moves on her. He kisses her and if she really is a "good" sexless girl she sits there motionless, lips closed, and he knows she disapproves of him. Or if she's "bad" she opens her lips and he knows not what to do. They fumble with each other. Two babes in arms. If he is "successful", he may be guilty of rape (in some states). She is too young to consent. But if she had not egged him on (they both think) nothing would have happened except an embarrassing silence. This is teen-age rape a very common kind I think. Ordinary men, many of them, commit T-type and N-type rape. Most escape punishment, even in their minds. Some are proud of their "triumphs." Others feel guilty even if they wed the girls they have raped. Others are surprised in their old age when they are accused of earlier rape by their long-time wives. Few are innocent.