Theos-Talk Archives (December 1996 Message tl00476)

Doss wrote:

>It was a very eye opening post. Most of the items you described are
>things most of us know. As a matter of fact just this week in my city there
>is a trial going on in which a rich and powerful 73 businessman is on
>trial for performing oral sex on a 14 year old employee who was abandoned
>by her parents and had been living with relatives and had to work for
>such basic necessities like food and clothing. In such a situation she
>was taken advantage of by this man.

"performing oral sex?" - These terms, I find, are way too gentle.  It steams
me how in rape cases, people say the rapist "forced the woman to have sex" -
excuse me, but rape is not sex, and sex is not rape.  Rape is an assault,
the only difference is the man uses his penis rather than a club, or a
knife, or whatever (although rape can include all).  Rape is an act of
violence. "Performing oral sex" on a minor is also an act of violence.  And
a fourteen year old is a minor, still a child as far as I'm concerned.  And,
if guilty, the businessman is a pedophile.  And children can be "taken
advantage of" in all situations. . .

I'm not attacking you as a person, Doss.  It's just the terminology used
here is often used to "minimize" unspeakable acts. . .and to "minimize" the
trauma these victims have undergone.

Kym