Speaking

"Don't underestimate 

The Power of Your Speech

Now, y'know,

Western Culture is Phallogocentric 

let's say it - so lets just say 

"Yeah, alright, that's just fine - " :

That's exactly what it is, it's predicated on the idea of
The Logos.

The Logos is 

The Sacred Element 

of Western Culture

and what does that mean...?

It means that -

Your Capacity for Speech is

DIVINE

It's 

The Thing That Generates 

Order Out of Chaos

and then 

(sometimes)

Turns Pathological Order into Chaos

When It Has To

DON'T UNDERESTIMATE 

THE POWER OF 

TRUTH

There's nothing more Power-full

Now, in order speak 

what you regard as The Truth,

You Have to Let Go of The Outcome

You have to think,

"Alright, I am going to 

Say What I Think --

Stupid as I am

Biased as I am

Ignorant as I am

I am going to State What I Think, 

as clearly as I can,

and I am going to 

Live With the Consequences

NO MATTER 

WHAT THEY ARE.  

NOTHING BRINGS A BETTER WORLD INTO BEING THAN THE STATED TRUTH

 

" All the ideas which had been bubbling in his mind since the lonesome days of hunger in Vienna now found an outlet, and an inner energy which had not been observable in his make-up burst forth. He prodded his timid committee into organizing bigger meetings. He personally typed out and distributed invitations. 

Later he recalled how once, after he had distributed eighty of these, ”we sat waiting for the masses who were expected to appear. An hour late, the ’chairman’ had to open the ’meeting.’ We were again seven, the old seven." 

But he was not to be discouraged. He increased the number of invitations by having them mimeographed. He collected a few marks to insert a notice of a meeting in a local newspaper. 

”The success,” he says, ”was positively amazing. One hundred and eleven people were present.” 

Hitler was to make his first ”public” speech, following the main address by a ”Munich professor.” Harrer, nominal head of the party, objected. 

”This gentleman, who was certainly otherwise honest,” Hitler relates, ”just happened to be convinced that I might be capable of doing certain things, but not of speaking. I spoke for thirty minutes, and what before I had simply felt within me, without in any way knowing it, was now proved by reality : 

"I could SPEAK!”

Your Power of Speech is

DIVINE

Hitler knows that -

WHY DON'T YOU...?

[Old Skool Russell T. Davies Ref., there]

Stormy Weather

DoublePlusUnGood - An Incomplete Listing of Not-Good Things by Jordan B. Peterson

" Order can become excessive, and that’s not good, but chaos can swamp us, so we drown—and that is also not good. "

= 57 = 57 = 57=

" It is seriously not good to have your kidneys fail. Dialysis is no picnic. 

Transplantation surgery occurs after long waiting, at high risk and great expense. 

To lose all that because you don’t take your medication? How could people do that to themselves? How could this possibly be? 

It’s complicated, to be fair. Many people who receive a transplanted organ are isolated, or beset by multiple physical health problems (to say nothing of problems associated with unemployment or family crisis). 

They may be cognitively impaired or depressed. They may not entirely trust their doctor, or understand the necessity of the medication. Maybe they can barely afford the drugs, and ration them, desperately and unproductively. 

But—and this is the amazing thing—imagine that it isn’t you who feels sick. It’s your dog. 

So, you take him to the vet. The vet gives you a prescription. What happens then? You have just as many reasons to distrust a vet as a doctor. 

Furthermore, if you cared so little for your pet that you weren’t concerned with what improper, substandard or error-ridden prescription he might be given, you wouldn’t have taken him to the vet in the first place. 

Thus, you care. Your actions prove it. 

In fact, on average, you care more. People are better at filling and properly administering prescription medication to their pets than to themselves. That’s not good. Even from your pet’s perspective, it’s not good. 

Your pet (probably) loves you, and would be happier if you took your medication. "

= 57 = 57 = 57=

" If we weren’t circling around town and countryside we were at a party. Some relatively young adult (or some relatively creepy older adult) would open his house to friends. It would then become temporary home to all manner of party crashers, many of whom started out seriously undesirable or quickly become that way when drinking. A party might also happen accidentally, when some teenager’s unwitting parents had left town. 

In that case, the occupants of the cars or trucks always cruising around would notice house lights on, but household car absent. This was not good. Things could get seriously out of hand.

Chris had a psychotic break in his thirties, after flirting with insanity for many years. Not long afterward, he committed suicide. 

Did his heavy marijuana use play a magnifying role, or was it understandable self-medication? Use of physician-prescribed drugs for pain has, after all, decreased in marijuana-legal states such as Colorado. Maybe the pot made things better for Chris, not worse. 

Maybe it eased his suffering, instead of exacerbating his instability. Was it the nihilistic philosophy he nurtured that paved the way to his eventual breakdown? Was that nihilism, in turn, a consequence of genuine ill health, or just an intellectual rationalization of his unwillingness to dive responsibly into life? 

Why did he—like his cousin, like my other friends—continually choose people who, and places that, were not good for him? "

= 57 = 57 = 57=

" We might start by considering the all-too-black-and-white words themselves: “success” or “failure.” 

You are either a success, a comprehensive, singular, overall good thing, or its opposite, a failure, a comprehensive, singular, irredeemably bad thing. 

The words imply no alternative and no middle ground. However, in a World as complex as urs, such generalizations (really, such failure to differentiate) are a sign of naive, unsophisticated or even malevolent analysis. 

There are vital degrees and gradations of value obliterated by this binary system, and the consequences are not good. "

= 57 = 57 = 57 =

" The neglect and mistreatment that is part and parcel of poorly structured or even entirely absent disciplinary approaches can be deliberate—motivated by explicit, conscious (if misguided) parental motives. 

But more often than not, modern parents are simply paralyzed by the fear that they will no longer be liked or even loved by their children if they chastise them for any reason. 

They want their children’s friendship above all, and are willing to sacrifice respect to get it. This is not good. 


A child will have many friends, but only two parents—if that—and parents are more, not less, than friends. 

Negative emotions, like their positive counterparts, help us learn. We need to learn, because we’re stupid and easily damaged. 

We can die. That’s not good, and we don’t feel good about it. 

If we did, we would seek death, and then we would die. "

= 57 = 57 = 57=

" Every child should also be taught to comply gracefully with the expectations of civil society. This does not mean crushed into mindless ideological conformity. It means instead that parents must reward those attitudes and actions that will bring their child success in the world outside the family, and use threat and punishment when necessary to eliminate behaviours that will lead to misery and failure. There’s a tight window of opportunity for this, as well, so getting it right quickly matters. If a child has not been taught to behave properly by the age of four, it will forever be difficult for him or her to make friends. The research literature is quite clear on this. This matters, because peers are the primary source of socialization after the age of four. Rejected children cease to develop, because they are alienated from their peers. They fall further and further behind, as the other children continue to progress. 

Thus, the friendless child too often becomes the lonely, antisocial or depressed teenager and adult. This is not good. 

Much more of our sanity than we commonly realize is a consequence of our fortunate immersion in a social community. We must be continually reminded to think and act properly. When we drift, people that care for and love us nudge us in small ways. "

= 57 = 57 = 57=

" Each human being has an immense capacity for evil. Each human being understands, a priori, perhaps not what is good, but certainly what is not. And if there is something that is not good, then there is something that is good. If the worst sin is the torment of others, merely for the sake of the suffering produced—then the good is whatever is diametrically opposed to that. The Good is whatever stops such things from happening. "

= 57 = 57 = 57=

" If existence is good, then the clearest and cleanest and most correct relationship with it is also good. If existence is not good, by contrast, you’re lost. Nothing will save you—certainly not the petty rebellions, murky thinking and obscurantist blindness that constitute deceit. 

Is existence good? You have to take a terrible risk to find out. Live in Truth, or live in deceit, face the consequences, and draw your conclusions. "

= 57 = 57 = 57=

" In my clinical practice, I talk and I listen. I talk more to some people, and listen more to others. Many of the people I listen to have no one else to talk to. Some of them are truly alone in the world. There are far more people like that than you think. You don’t meet them, because they are alone. Others are surrounded by tyrants or narcissists or drunks or traumatized people or professional victims. Some are not good at articulating themselves. They go off on tangents. They repeat themselves. They say vague and contradictory things. They’re hard to listen to. Others have terrible things happening around them. They have parents with Alzheimer’s or sick children. There’s not much time left over for their personal concerns. "

= 57 = 57 = 57 =

" At this rate, there will be very few men in most university disciplines in fifteen years. This is not good news for men. It might even be catastrophic news for men. 

But it’s also not good news for women. "

= 57 = 57 = 57 =

" They’re normal. But you could think about taking her to see a physiotherapist.” So, we did. The physiotherapist tried to rotate Mikhaila’s heel. It didn’t move. That was not good. The physio told us, “Your daughter has juvenile rheumatoid arthritis.” This was not what we wanted to hear. We did not like that physiotherapist. We went back to the medical clinic. Another physician there told us to take Mikhaila to the Hospital for Sick Children. The doctor said, “Take her to the emergency room. That way, you will be able to see a rheumatologist quickly.” Mikhaila had arthritis, all right. The physio, bearer of unwelcome news, was correct. Thirty-seven affected joints. Severe polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). Cause? Unknown. Prognosis? Multiple early joint replacements. "

= 57 = 57 = 57 =

" We talked to a new doctor. He listened carefully. Then he helped Mikhaila. First, he prescribed T3s, the same medication her grandfather had briefly shared. This was brave. Physicians face a lot of pressure to avoid the prescription of opiates—not least to children. But opiates work. Soon, however, the Tylenol was insufficient. She started taking oxycontin, an opioid known pejoratively as hillbilly heroin. This controlled her pain, but produced other problems. Tammy took Mikhaila out for lunch a week after the prescription started. She could have been drunk. Her speech was slurred. Her head nodded. This was not good. "

= 57 = 57 = 57 =

" The next set of questions—and answers—had to do with the development of character. 

Q: What shall I say to a faithless brother? 

A: The King of the Damned is a poor judge of Being. 

It is my firm belief that the best way to fix the world—a handyman’s dream, if ever there was one—is to fix yourself, as we discussed in Rule 6. 

Anything else is presumptuous. Anything else risks harm, stemming from your ignorance and lack of skill. 

But that’s OK. There’s plenty to do, right where you are. 

After all, your specific personal faults detrimentally affect the world. Your conscious, voluntary sins (because no other word really works) makes things worse than they have to be. 

Your inaction, inertia and cynicism removes from The World that part of you that could learn to quell suffering and make peace. 

That’s not good. 

There are endless reasons to despair of the world, and to become angry and resentful and to seek revenge. "

A Masterly Defence

The Doctor turned to the boatman, a Mr. Robbins, and shouted at him : "Is it in sight, yet?"

The boatman nodded and pointed with a rather dirty finger. Ho looked towards the island to which they were heading, and now, as they rounded a headland, she could see a very large isolated house, something on the lines of a French château. "That's where they've got him," Robbins shouted. "It's a disgrace, if you ask me."

"Not large enough?" said The Doctor, trying to make a joke.

Robbins shook his head, taking The Doctor seriously.

"If you ask me," he shouted, "if you really wants my opinion, as an ordinary man in the street, as a taxpayer, that's got to pay for all the guards and everthing, I'll tell you what they should have done." He drew a finger swiftly across his throat. "That's what he deserved."

Mr. Robbins, the boatman, was expressing a widely-held view as to what should have happened to The Master. It was not without reason. Through Doctor Who, Jo had known about The Master for some time, She had been with The Doctor, a thousand years into The Future and on another planet, when The Master had tried to take control of the Doomsday Weapon in his quest for universal power. 

More recently The Master had brought himself directly to the attention of the public on Earth by his efforts to conspire with dæmons, using psionic science to release the powers of a monster called Azal. [ See DOCTOR WHO AND THE  DÆMONS ] 

It was this that had brought about his downfall. He had been finally trapped and arrested by Brigadier Lethbridge Stewart of the United Nations Intelligence Taskforce - UNIT- and put on trial at a special Court of Justice. Although the horror of capital punishment had long been established  [abolished] in Great Britain, many people had wanted to see The Master put to death. 

To the amazement of the Brigadier, however, The Doctor had made a personal plea to the Court for The Master's life to be spared. Naturally The Doctor could not explain in public that both he and The Master were not really of this planet and that at one time both had been Time Lords. No Court would have believed him! But in his plea, The Doctor talked of The Master's better qualities - his intelligence, and his occasional wit and good humour. Jo well remembered The Doctor's final words to the Judges : 

"My Lords, I beg you to spare the prisoner's life, for by so doing you will acknowledge that there is always the possibility of redemption, and that is an important principle for us all. If we do not believe that anyone, even the worst criminal, can be saved from wickedness, then in what can we ever believe?" 

After six hours of private discussion the Judges had decided to sentence The Master to life-long imprisonment. They did not realise that in the case of a Time Lord, "life-long" might mean a thousand years!

The British authorities had then been faced with a big problem : where was The Master to be imprisoned? Birgadier Lethbridge-Stewart had then written a long letter directly to the Prime Minister, trying to explain that The Master was no ordinary prisoner. It was no good putting him in even the most top ssecurity prion. For one thing, he had the ability to hypnotise people.

Generally, hypnotists can only use their powers ovever other people who want to be hypnotised; but The Master had only to speak to a potential victim in a certain way, and - unless they were very strong minded - he had them under his spell. The Doctor had also written a long letter to the Prime Minister. he had endorsed the Brigadier's warning but then added a point of his own. When criminals, even murderers are sentenced to 'life' imprisonment, they usually only serve about ten years; this is because when a judge says 'life' he really means that the length of time in prison can be determined by the Prison Department, depending on a prisoner's good behaviour and chances of leading a good life if he is eventually released. 

But in the case of The Master, the Judges had specifically said "life-long", which meant until The Master had died of old age. The Doctor, therefore had asked the Prime Minister to use his compassion and to grant The Master very considerate treatment. 

"The Master's loss of freedom," The Doctor had written, "will be punishment enough, I suggest that in your wisdom you create a special prison for him, where he will be able to live reasonable comfort, and where he will have the opportunity to pursue his intellectual interests."

The Prime Minister had taken the advice of both the Brigadier and The Doctor. At enormous expense, a huge château on an off-shore island had been bought by the Government and turned into a top security prison - for just one prisoner. What the Prime Minister had done may have been right and proper, but it had cost taxpayers like Mr. Robbins the boatman a great deal of money. So, many people like Mr. Robbins - millions of them - had good reason to feel that The Master should have been put to death, and as quickly as possible.

Compulsory Voter ID Laws are Anti-British and Fascist

I am a Law-Abiding, Tax-Paying British Citizen, 

and I find your demand 

IMPERTINENT, not to say RUDE, and ILLEGAL.

I DO NOT have to prove that I am NOT a criminal to exercise my Civil Rights.

Daryll Rowe

"All Manifestations Of Male Sexuality Are Going To Be Brought Under Legal Control And Regulation."

- Jordan Peterson

"More groupie nonsense - you know what this is showin'?

There is new trend around the country, that's showing up on major college campuses, and They want to change the definition of "Rape"  - They wanna add a clause in there so "Rape"  is not just forcible rape, if you seduce  a woman, that's also  "Rape" ;

And They want it so that if you cause a woman to be sexually aroused, so that she submits to sex, They want that to be declarred to be "Rape" .

They want magazines, movies, books, TV Shows labelled,

WARNING : May Be Sexually Arousing to Young Females

And They've even issued policies to various and sundry classes of Freshmen that tell the boys, 

They have to ask

3 Times -

It's not okay to seduce a girl.

You have to specifically ask :
"Do you wanna have sex?"

before you start. 

Then, once you're in the middle of The Act, you're supposed to ask :

"Is it okay to continue?"

And then, before you cum, you get to ask,

"Is it okay if I finish now..?"

And They wanna have it so that if a girl submits to sex with somebody, and she feels remorse afterwards, The Boy should be expelled from school so that she doesn't have to eyeball him the rest of her school career..."

- Judge Joe Brown

The Man Who Deliberately Infected Five Gay Men With HIV Has Been Jailed For Life

Daryll Rowe became the first person in England to be convicted of intentionally spreading the virus after infecting five men and attempting to infect five more. 

[ Why? No motive, except for "He's Crazy " - except that the balance of consensus amongst court-appointed shrinks say he isn't - BUT he does not believe that HIV is the cause of AIDS (which it isn't) - SO, how can he plan or premeditate to infect others deliberately...? ]

One of his victims told BuzzFeed News: "He's got what he deserved."

[ By that same logic - so did you ]

Patrick Strudwick

April 18, 2018, at 2:25 p.m.

Gareth Fuller / PA Wire / PA images

There were 10 victims. Half contracted the virus. Half did not. But Daryll Rowe intended to infect all of them.

On Wednesday, six months after being found guilty of five counts of causing grievous bodily harm with intent and another five of attempted GBH with intent, Rowe, 27, was sentenced to life in prison, with a minimum term of 12 years.

Given the time he has already spent on remand, that means he will have to serve a minimum of 10 years and 253 days from now before being eligible for parole.

Shortly after the sentence, one of Rowe's victims – the youngest of the 10 men who gave evidence against him – spoke to BuzzFeed News.

"I'm overwhelmed knowing he's in jail. I'm just so glad that I can finally put all of this behind me," he said. As one of the five men who did not contract the virus, he added, "Maybe the people who weren't as lucky as me can move on knowing he's got what he's deserved."

Handing down her sentence at Brighton magistrates court, Judge Christine Henson QC told Rowe that he posed a "significant risk to the public" and she could not see how or when he would no longer do so.

The judge told Rowe he had embarked upon a "deliberate campaign" to infect other men with HIV and was the first person in England to be sentenced for this offence.

Her sentencing remarks were extensive and damning, detailing his crimes, his pattern of behaviour and his repeated attempts to escape detection and justice.

"You deceived all of the men into thinking you were HIV-negative," she said. When he did use a condom, he "deliberately sabotaged it". Furthermore, she added, "You sent many abusive and mocking messages. You knew exactly what you were doing."

Judge Henson quoted some of the assessments conducted by psychiatrists examining Rowe.

"Dr Saoud noted in his report... that your offending is associated with a ‘significant degree of rage, control, sadism and violence that requires further exploration’ 

[ I.e., "it makes no sense - not even crazy sense..."] 

... She describes your behaviour during the commission of these offences as highly predatory, controlling and manipulative. 

She assesses your risk of serious harm to gay men [ is that a motive..? No. Why gay men? He is one - and clearly not a self-loather ] as high and a risk that is considered imminent."

One psychiatrist, said the judge, believed there were sufficient indication of "borderline personality disorder", which is characterised by extreme and sometimes swift mood changes. 

[ BUT she would not diagnose him with BPD, because he quite clearly doesn't have it - he ha has a sick sense of humour and unfashionable political beliefs about virology ]

Another did not believe there were enough evidence to confirm that Rowe has a personality disorder.

However, said Henson, "Both consultant forensic psychiatrists agree that the seriousness of your case is directly linked into deceiving men into high risk anal intercourse when you had not taken antiretroviral medication...

Both agree that your motivation behind your offending is complex, particularly given your denial and rationalisation of your offending."

Given the complexity of the case, its unique characteristics and the international attention it will provoke, the judge in summing up her remarks made clear that, "this sentencing exercise is not about stigmatising those with an HIV diagnosis, nor should it detract from that medical progress that has been made since the 1980s regarding the treatment of those with HIV."

[ WHAT Progress...? ]

In conclusion, she said, "I have reminded myself of recent authorities regarding discretionary life sentences which remains a sentence of last resort reserved for offending of the upmost gravity – this is such a case. The sentence I impose therefore is a sentence of life imprisonment."

Ahead of sentencing, the court heard from Rowe's victims in a series of impact statements revealing how his actions had affected them. 

One spoke of now often contemplating suicide. 

[ Thats normal for gay men, historically. ]

Another man said he suffers regular panic attacks.

[ Likewise. ]

"When I told myself and those closest to me that I was gay it was the most terrifying and liberating experience of my life," said another victim in his impact statement. 

"But having my vulnerability used against me will stay with me forever."

[ So will a pregnancy. ]

He added, "I never thought I'd be someone to think about suicide," but that following his experiences with Rowe that is exactly what he contemplated.

Rowe, dressed in a grey suit, remained impassive throughout. 

His expression was blank. 

[ "Can't You Understand I'm Not Guilty of Anything??! - Manson ]

It remained so through all the victim statements. One said that what Rowe had done to him had had a "shattering effect" on his life. "I felt like a walking, talking disease. I lost my place in this world. I fell into a very dark place."

[ Sex with Strangers will have that effect on you - the liasons tend towards beinf sordid, shallow and degrading devoid of any real or meaningful quality of Trust or Loyalty, and annonymous partners tend to betray you (or rob you) at the drop of a hat - because, why not...? ]

The oldest of his victims, who is in his forties, said in his victim statement how much he worries about the impact of the virus in his later life and the limiting effect the diagnosis has on one's ability to travel and work in certain countries. 

[ WTF - Seriously..?? ]

Compounding everything, his statement said, was that, "Mr Rowe has never shown any sympathy of compassion. He has shown only arrogance, selfishness and an utter lack of humanity."

Brighton Magistrates' Court

Alamy

Brighton Magistrates' Court

Many of the victims said they had needed therapy. 

[ No Shit! Better late than never..... ]

One had been admitted to a residential mental health centre.

[ HIV makes you neurotic...? No shit. ]

Judge Henson said the victims had described "living with a life sentence".

[ Unless They cure it (which They still claim to be activly trying to do, and working continuously towards accomplishing (which is nonsense of course) - its not reasonable to assume, even if they each had full-blown AIDS (which none of them in-fact do - they have just tested antibody-positive on either one or a series of Western Blot / ELISA kit tests - 50% of them, that is, and EXACTLY 50% of them, at that.... ]

The Daryll Rowe case was unique in legal history. Never before in English law had anyone been found guilty of deliberately intending to infect others with HIV – only recklessly. 

But never before had the police had such a vast trove of evidence necessary to prove intent. 

[ Intent to do what..? Have endless, continuous, comp

That evidence was hundreds of messages that Rowe had sent and exchanged with the men he met through messaging and hook-up apps like Grindr and Whatsapp.

During the trial in October and November 2017, through the testimony of witnesses and the messages that were read out, the court heard repeated abusive comments so multitudinous as to both form a clear pattern of behaviour and to express clearly his intention: to infect the men he had sex with.

One of the men who testified, and who had previously given an exclusive interview to BuzzFeed News, told how Rowe said to him following sex, which he believed had been protected, that in fact it was not. "Haha I hope you enjoyed my cum inside you," Rowe told him, before describing his method: "I ripped the condom so burn."

To another man, the court heard, Rowe said: "I have HIV LOL. Oops!" followed by, "I'm riddled." To his youngest victim he exchanged hundreds of messages toying with him, admitting he had put him at risk, and then denying it. The prosecution read many of these messages aloud in one of the most dramatic scenes in court.

Some of the men Rowe told he was using a condom but wasn't, or removed it during sex. With others, he wore a condom that he had tampered with. When police arrested him for the final time – after absconding – they found several condoms with the tips cut off.

Deborah Gold, chief executive of the National AIDS Trust (NAT) said: "This is an exceptional case – the only ever prosecution in the UK of intentional transmission of HIV. Such intentional transmission is serious and deplorable, but this one off case must seen in context.

"People living with HIV are at the forefront of campaigns and work to prevent HIV, and the vast majority are on treatment and therefore cannot pass HIV on. It is vital that this case is not used as an excuse to add to the unacceptable stigma that people living with HIV experience."

The court also heard that Rowe refused to take HIV medication. Antiretrovirals when adhered to properly make it impossible to pass the virus on. But shortly after being diagnosed, Rowe had become what some refer to as an "Aids denialist", refusing to believe HIV causes Aids and that the treatment, which has been proven by millions to work, is a fabricated conspiracy by the pharmaceutical industry.

Instead, Rowe drank his own urine, believing this would cure his HIV. It did not.


[ How do you know? Show your evidence. ]

Rapine

The English word rape retains the Latin meaning in literary language, but the meaning is obscured by the more current meaning of “sexual violation”. The word is akin to rapine, rapture, raptor, rapacious and ravish, and referred to the more general violations, such as looting, destruction, and capture of citizens, that are inflicted upon a town or country during war, e.g. the Rape of Nanking. 

The Oxford English Dictionary gives the definition “the act of carrying away a person, especially a woman, by force” besides the more general “the act of taking anything by force” (marked as obsolete) and the more specific “violation or ravishing of a woman”.

English rape was in use since the 14th century in the general sense of “seize prey, take by force”, from raper, an Old French legal term for “to seize”, in turn from Latin rapere “seize, carry off by force, abduct”. The Latin term was also used for sexual violation, but not always. 

It is contested that the legendary event known as “The Rape of the Sabine Women”, while ultimately motivated sexually, did not entail sexual violation of the Sabine women on the spot, who were instead abducted, and then implored by the Romans to marry them (as opposed to striking a deal with their fathers or brothers first, as would have been required by law).

Though the sexual connotation is today dominant, the word “rape” can be used in a non-sexual context in literary English. In Alexander Pope’s The Rape of the Lock, the title means “the theft of a lock [of hair]”, exaggerating a trivial violation against a person. 

In the twentieth century, the classically trained J. R. R. Tolkien used the word with its old meaning of “seizing and taking away” in his The Silmarillion. The musical comedy The Fantasticks has a controversial song (“It Depends on What You Pay”) about “an old-fashioned rape”. Compare also the adjective “rapacious” which retains the generic meaning of greedy and grasping.

In Roman Catholic canon law, raptio refers to the legal prohibition of matrimony if the bride was abducted forcibly (Canon 1089 CIC).

DWEMs