home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
/ NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #16 / NN_1992_16.iso / spool / talk / rape / 1738 < prev    next >
Encoding:
Text File  |  1992-07-24  |  1.3 KB  |  32 lines
  1. Newsgroups: talk.rape
  2. Path: sparky!uunet!stanford.edu!leland.Stanford.EDU!farthing
  3. From: farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf)
  4. Subject: Re: Question for Scott
  5. Message-ID: <1992Jul24.144105.14005@leland.Stanford.EDU>
  6. Sender: news@leland.Stanford.EDU (Mr News)
  7. Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
  8. References: <1992Jul23.122910.8875@uoft02.utoledo.edu> <1992Jul23.204414.25451@leland.Stanford.EDU> <1992Jul24.013603.8887@uoft02.utoledo.edu>
  9. Date: Fri, 24 Jul 92 14:41:05 GMT
  10. Lines: 20
  11.  
  12. In article <1992Jul24.013603.8887@uoft02.utoledo.edu> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
  13. >In article <1992Jul23.204414.25451@leland.Stanford.EDU>, farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:
  14. >> But people you know would call you gay if you reported a rape by a
  15. >> man?
  16. >> 
  17. >
  18. >Probably not to my face. However, they would probably all wonder if I contracted
  19. >AIDS during the assault.
  20. >
  21. >That is reason enough to keep it quiet.
  22.  
  23. So, it's not homophobia that would keep you from reporting it, but
  24. HIV-phobia?  If you were that worried about what people think, you
  25. could have an HIV antibody test in six months and publish the results.
  26.  
  27. Doesn't any rape victim, though, have to worry about the possibility
  28. of infection by STDs?  That has been my understanding for the
  29. rationale of having people charged (but not convicted) with rape
  30. tested for HIV infection.
  31.  
  32.