Bianca

[mikebailey at speakeasy.net]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: MalignD at aol.com [mailto:MalignD at aol.com]
> Subject: Re: Bianca
> 
> << having been a kid, I remember having a scale of values that I still 
> consider sane: being molested is bad but being injured or killed is worse. >>
> 
> I know someone who, as a kid, was sodomized against his will, by force, and I 
> think he would gladly trade that in for a broken leg.
>
against his will, by force, would probably involve injury anyway...
I'm geeky enough that I do have a fairly precise notion of how disgusting, painful and damaging (and especially - how frequent and by whom) the sex would have to be, in order to trump a broken leg. I have a friend who had a compound fracture, and I watched him suffer with surgeries, crutches and lawsuits for 7 years.
I don't know that he would trade that experience for being sexually molested. I would, though, based on my incomplete knowledge of both. I suppose the p-list isn't the place to place conditions on the amount of tissue damage, humiliation etc that I would consider to be equivalent to a broken leg (also, how bad of a broken leg, to be thorough?), in fact maybe there isn't really a suitable forum for these morose deliberations. But gee, I'm not saying it's good. Either one. I don't wish sexual molestation or physical harm on anyone. I'll read about either one - though I tend to prefer more upbeat subject matter as a general rule - but practice neither. Let me leave it at that. 



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20061110/97698388/attachment.html>