On Tue, 14 Jan 1997, Diane Wininger wrote:

> 
> The way you trivialize rape is so completely astounding to me. 2 people
> fucking is not rape! Do you understand the distiction b/w sex and rape
> because from your posts it's pretty hard to tell.
> Dworkin is not using porn to make money! I can't believe that I'm even
> wasting my time arguing about this. She has become well known by speaking
> out against the industry. Do you actually believe that she is trying to
> capitalize on that?!? Do you think that Martin Luther King was trying to use
> the civil rights movement as a get rich quick scheme? Some people are
> actually trying to get a message across.
> 
> What do you mean, "Of course the ACLU uses porn to raise money"? Are we
> supposed to take for granted that civil rights organizations will make
> decisions in favor of the highest bidder? How about the media for that
> matter?--you read Chomsky, what do you think?
> >
> I don't have any more time to spend on this argument. I have to go and do
> some work. I'll try to respond to the rest of your comments later.
> >

Wow.  I don't know if I know who you are (and I'm not sure I need to) but
I feel I ought to tell you to take a deep breath when trying to make a
rational point or two in a public debate.  I've never read anythig that
seemed to want to be read as rational on ch-scene that read as outraged
as your response.  I actually think everythign Margaret wrote makes pretty
good sense and I knw there's nothing she would vouch for in public that
she couldn't back up - she is the consumate 'netperson' and knows her
stuff.  Try to take a few more scans over your responses before you hit
the send button.

Just as an extra barb, why don't you call Dworkin and ask her how she pays
her bills?  The research factor is on the rise here, y'all... look out.


Bob