From pycyn@aol.com Fri Sep 15 11:29:20 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26879 invoked from network); 15 Sep 2000 18:27:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m4.onelist.org with QMQP; 15 Sep 2000 18:27:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r12.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.66) by mta3 with SMTP; 15 Sep 2000 18:27:40 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-r12.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.15.) id a.67.9a2a62b (6398) for ; Fri, 15 Sep 2000 14:27:15 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <67.9a2a62b.26f3c402@aol.com> Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 14:27:14 EDT Subject: Re: [lojban] RE:rape, etc. To: lojban@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 16-bit for Windows sub 41 From: pycyn@aol.com In a message dated 00-09-15 12:48:19 EDT, ken writes: << As a non-professional philosopher, I could point out that, if you spread your legs, you are giving permission, and I would also say that applies whether or not someone is holding a gun to your head. >> Thanks. I'm not sure that I would go that far down the line about where permission occurs, but it does help to make the point about the difference between permission and consent that I was looking for. So the etymology has a role here, pointing to the notion of willing agreement with the intention of the act, which is lacking in the forced cases. So what does Lojban have to offer here? Note: {tugni} is no help.