Are you a potential rapist?

[Broken Glass Can]

I saw the exchange below on a newsgroup. Do you think all men are potential rapists? Is it slander to post the names of randomly selected men as potential rapists?

(timothy shimeall) writes:
> I haven't seen any discussion of this in soc.feminism, and would like
> to know if the readers have any reaction.
>
> A group of students in an art class at the University of Maryland
> picked a bunch of names at random from the campus phone book,
> selecting for one apparent gender, and posted those names publically
> as potential criminals.

The students in the art class did not pick the names at random.
The students "named every identifiable male in the student
directory"
The names were posted as potential rapists. This was a
response to the increase in campus violence against women.

>
> When the named people protested at this apparent slander, the work was
> defended philosophical grounds by the school administration.
>
> Do you feel that the students were sexist? (Does it depend on the
> sex of the students involved?)

The students did not say that the men were rapists, just
that they were potential rapists. Which, if you think
about it, is true--out of the male student body at UMD,
I am sure that some of them are rapists. I would say
that here at UMD there are approximately 15,000 men
attending the school...so, anyone with statistics?
>
> Given that the students were women in a "feminist" art class, the names
> they used for their "art" were all names of men, and the Poster read
> "Notice: These Men are Potential Rapists" do you feel that the men
> were slandered?
>
> Why or why not?
> Tim
>
> Note: The facts are abstracted from a posting in soc.men...
> The questions are mine.
>
> Disclaimer: I speak for NO organization.

The names were not used for art. The list was used to
start conversations about the high incidence of violence
against women on this campus.

I do not feel that the men were slandered. No one said
that ALL of the men were indeed rapists, just pointing
out that you may know someone who is a rapist.

I don't think that I personally would have been
involved with something like this...I don't think
that it created much positive response. I believe
that we should be more aware about potential rapists,
and that more action should be taken against rapists.

I just wanted to post something because I am currently
attending the University of Maryland, and I wanted
to clear up some things...Anna M. Winkler

source (http://www.usenet.com/newsgroups/talk.rape/msg09558.html)

[Russ McGinley]

Damn I thought this was gonna be a quiz.

[Jakesta]

Someone should put up a potential bitches list and put all of the female names on it. Make sure that the word bitch is in all caps. That shoudl piss the feminazis off.

[stabn]

This type of drivel is best ignored and not spread.

[SpearsBritney]

It is completely natural to murder, rape and steal what ever you want (or die trying). It is only societies' coditioning that curtails what would be a perfectly natural "psychopathic" state.

[CallMeIshmael]

http://us.movies1.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/paramount_pictures/mean_girls/tim_meadows/microphone.jpg

I don't even like girls. IM ASEXUAL!

[CharlesDarwin]

[ QUOTE ]
It is completely natural to murder, rape and steal what ever you want (or die trying). It is only societies' coditioning that curtails what would be a perfectly natural "psychopathic" state.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not correct.

[CallMeIshmael]

[ QUOTE ]
It is completely natural to murder, rape and steal what ever you want (or die trying). It is only societies' coditioning that curtails what would be a perfectly natural "psychopathic" state.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're joking right?

[tbach24]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It is completely natural to murder, rape and steal what ever you want (or die trying). It is only societies' coditioning that curtails what would be a perfectly natural "psychopathic" state.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

No. You are not allowed to use your account for posts other than the ones you have previously. Like the ones where Darwinism is in effect or not or w/e. Use your real account for other stuff.

[SpearsBritney]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It is completely natural to murder, rape and steal what ever you want (or die trying). It is only societies' coditioning that curtails what would be a perfectly natural "psychopathic" state.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're joking right?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not at all.

[Jakesta]

Shut the [censored] up Tbach. You are not the arbiter of gimmick accounts.

[tbach24]

I'm glad you agree with me.

[SpearsBritney]

[ QUOTE ]
Shut the [censored] up Tbach. You are not the arbiter of gimmick accounts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jakesta = Charles Darwin????

[CharlesDarwin]

[ QUOTE ]
No. You are not allowed to use your account for posts other than the ones you have previously. Like the ones where Darwinism is in effect or not or w/e. Use your real account for other stuff.

[/ QUOTE ]

The claim that humans are genetically programmed to murder/rape others is related to Meism.

[tbach24]

Jakesta = Dead

Please don't quote him, I'm trying not to read what he says. Flame wars -EV

[tbach24]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No. You are not allowed to use your account for posts other than the ones you have previously. Like the ones where Darwinism is in effect or not or w/e. Use your real account for other stuff.

[/ QUOTE ]

The claim that humans are genetically programmed to murder/rape others is related to Meism.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, but I suspect only nerds know that. Everyone knows about the Darwinism that is the elimination of the weaker, so staying with that would be good.

I lol'ed with the "meism"

[CallMeIshmael]

[ QUOTE ]
Not at all.

[/ QUOTE ]


Rape is debatable, and probably close to correct. But, murder is most defintely not correct.

[SpearsBritney]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Not at all.

[/ QUOTE ]


Rape is debatable, and probably close to correct. But, murder is most defintely not correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

Murder is probably the MOST correct.

[CallMeIshmael]

[ QUOTE ]
Murder is probably the MOST correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

Im not 100% sure what you are saying.

IM not saying that, in a world without society murder wouldnt happen. It would.

But, it seems that you are implying that without these societies we would me rampant with murder. And this is not true.

[CallMeIshmael]

Also, fwiw, from society comes A LOT of murder.

[FMThe2nd]

One night at a party I was really drunk and went into a bedroom to pass out. Next thing I know, this chick I had fooled around with a couple of times before is in there with me. We start kissing and I take her pants and underwear off. I asked her if I could bang her and she said no (we hadn't ever had sex before but had come close), but I went ahead and stuck it in her anyway.

She didn't tell me to stop and didn't try to physically resist, so I banged her until completion. After that I passed out. She never said anything to me about it the next day or any time after that, and we even fooled around a few times after. Was it rape?

[SpearsBritney]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Murder is probably the MOST correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

Im not 100% sure what you are saying.

IM not saying that, in a world without society murder wouldnt happen. It would.

But, it seems that you are implying that without these societies we would me rampant with murder. And this is not true.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, ok. This isn't quite what I mean. I am simply saying that without an implanted code of conduct, your natural instincts would not be overridden by "moral" compliance or "fear" of punishment. You would quite naturally behave like an animal when facing an enemy or potential mate.

My use of the word "murder" is not to imply senseless killing, but that we would likely fight to the death (or serious injury) for food, mates, and territory.

What did you think that primortial rage that boils up when Nancy Grace speaks was meant for? /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[CallMeIshmael]

[ QUOTE ]
Oh, ok. This isn't quite what I mean. I am simply saying that without an implanted code of conduct, your natural instincts would not be overridden by "moral" compliance or "fear" of punishment. You would quite naturally behave like an animal when facing an enemy or potential mate.

My use of the word "murder" is not to imply senseless killing, but that we would likely fight to the death (or serious injury) for food, mates, and territory.

What did you think that primortial rage that boils up when Nancy Grace speaks was meant for? /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]


OH.. Ok. I see what you mean now, but I still think it is exagerated.

A) A significant number of murders are precipitated by society

B) Weaponry is a product of society

C) Human mating is natually (I believe, though I forget this stuff) semi-monogomous with some dipping into polygyny, and this doesnt bring the type of murders that you might find in other species.

[ChipWrecked]

[ QUOTE ]
Was it rape?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. It was fantasy. You had passed out.

[SpearsBritney]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Oh, ok. This isn't quite what I mean. I am simply saying that without an implanted code of conduct, your natural instincts would not be overridden by "moral" compliance or "fear" of punishment. You would quite naturally behave like an animal when facing an enemy or potential mate.

My use of the word "murder" is not to imply senseless killing, but that we would likely fight to the death (or serious injury) for food, mates, and territory.

What did you think that primortial rage that boils up when Nancy Grace speaks was meant for? /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]


OH.. Ok. I see what you mean now, but I still think it is exagerated.

A) A significant number of murders are precipitated by society

B) Weaponry is a product of society

C) Human mating is natually (I believe, though I forget this stuff) semi-monogomous with some dipping into polygyny, and this doesnt bring the type of murders that you might find in other species.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand what you are saying, but I think you are mistaken about humans being naturally manogomous. I'm sure you've found yourself attracted to more than one woman in your lifetime, and would assume even at times when you were "with" another.

I personally believe that without societies' instilled moral guidelines, you wouldn't hesitate for a second to mate with more than one woman, and at the same time be quick to stop anyone else from trying to do the same.

As far as weaponry goes, they definately make for a more efficient means of killing someone, but it is not that difficult to beat someone to death if that is your intent. After a couple of well placed stomps or smashes with a large or sharp rock, you should really only need no more than a few minutes IMO.

A significant number of murders are precipitated by society

I'm not quite sure what you mean here, but this is a with morals and laws. Imagine what it would be like without them.

[Duke]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Oh, ok. This isn't quite what I mean. I am simply saying that without an implanted code of conduct, your natural instincts would not be overridden by "moral" compliance or "fear" of punishment. You would quite naturally behave like an animal when facing an enemy or potential mate.

My use of the word "murder" is not to imply senseless killing, but that we would likely fight to the death (or serious injury) for food, mates, and territory.

What did you think that primortial rage that boils up when Nancy Grace speaks was meant for? /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]


OH.. Ok. I see what you mean now, but I still think it is exagerated.

A) A significant number of murders are precipitated by society

B) Weaponry is a product of society

C) Human mating is natually (I believe, though I forget this stuff) semi-monogomous with some dipping into polygyny, and this doesnt bring the type of murders that you might find in other species.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand what you are saying, but I think you are mistaken about humans being naturally manogomous. I'm sure you've found yourself attracted to more than one woman in your lifetime, and would assume even at times when you were "with" another.

I personally believe that without societies' instilled moral guidelines, you wouldn't hesitate for a second to mate with more than one woman, and at the same time be quick to stop anyone else from trying to do the same.

As far as weaponry goes, they definately make for a more efficient means of killing someone, but it is not that difficult to beat someone to death if that is your intent. After a couple of well placed stomps or smashes with a large or sharp rock, you should really only need no more than a few minutes IMO.

A significant number of murders are precipitated by society

I'm not quite sure what you mean here, but this is a with morals and laws. Imagine what it would be like without them.

[/ QUOTE ]

If murdering each other at will were natural, we would never have had societies. We'd be too busy killing each other.

~D

[CallMeIshmael]

[ QUOTE ]
I understand what you are saying, but I think you are mistaken about humans being naturally manogomous. I'm sure you've found yourself attracted to more than one woman in your lifetime, and would assume even at times when you were "with" another.

I personally believe that without societies' instilled moral guidelines, you wouldn't hesitate for a second to mate with more than one woman, and at the same time be quick to stop anyone else from trying to do the same.


[/ QUOTE ]

I never said monogomous. I said semi-monogamous.

But, you are wrong about how much mating would occur in a world without society.


There are many ways to study these things. One of the most popular is to look at ejaculate.

Side example: In wolves the male wolf's penis will accutally get stuck within the female's vagina after mating. This prevents other wolves from coming in and mating with that female while she is still 'ready to rock', and stealing his thunder, so to speak.

In the primates, this is accomplished my the amount of sperm per ejaculate. The more sperm the male lets rip, the more likely his sperm is to get the female pregnant (keeping in mind this is a vs thing, as in there are multiple mates)

Looking at this:

http://www.unc.edu/~nielsen/soci011/sb4/sb4013.jpg

You will see we are closest to the orangutan.

Orangutans arent walking around killing each other at the rate we are. Why?...


[ QUOTE ]
A significant number of murders are precipitated by society

I'm not quite sure what you mean here, but this is a with morals and laws. Imagine what it would be like without them.

[/ QUOTE ]


Without society there is no money. Without money there is no social hierarchy.

Also, without society there is no communication (as it is impossible to pass on)

Think of how difficult it would be to be brought to the point of murdering someone in a situation like this. When everyone's goal is simply to survive, the murder rate would DRASTICALLY decrease.

This can be seen simply by watching the other primates.

[jgorham]

I just want to know what electroejaculation is and where I can get one.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Ditto.

[whiskeytown]

way to pick up on a hot, hot topic that's burning up college campuses

...in 1993!!!! - LOL

read the time stamp of the post he talked about - this is some weirdo from 12 years ago....I read about it in books from 5 years ago or so.

could you be any more irrelevant?

RB

[HopeydaFish]

We had something similar happen at the University I went to (Carleton U. in Ottawa). A bunch of overzealous feminists from the Womyn's Centre went around with coloured chalk and wrote things like "Rapists walk through here" on the walls in the hallway, and "Rapists drink here" on the doorways of every campus bar. The campus bar owners were none too impressed...the culprits had to apologize and clean up their mess.

[meep_42]

Would it be in bad taste to have posted all the women's names as "Potential Friday Night funbags?"

-d