We must learn to care for our own loneliness and suffering and the loneliness and suffering of others, for within pain and isolation and loneliness one can find courage and hope and what is brave and lovely and true in life. A man who is intimate with his anger and who can express it skillfully is a man who forcefulness coexists with vulnerability and compassion, a man worthy of our trust, a man capable of deep intimacy. However, some might say that aggression is no more than a going-toward forcefulness, centered by a will to take strong action. Yet, unhealthy aggression is an intended or acted-out attack, no matter how mild or indirect it might be (as in verbal sniping). This does not mean that aggression is therefore always a bad thing, for there are times when attack is entirely appropriate, when heavy intervention is clearly called for. Another disturbing manifestation of rape happens in those instances in which a husband forces himself sexually upon his wife. This discussion begins with a lesson in history. Until recently, wife rape stood as a legal impossibility—most jurisdictions observed a marital clause through which the sanctity of marriage protected a husband from the allegation of rape. We interviewed a snowball sample of forty women who report being raped at least once by their husbands. The behavior and psychological feature of the offenders is categorized using a three-part typology. Force-only rapists used fear and intimidation to gain sexual submission. For the battering rapist, the unwanted sex act represent a simple extension of a violent physical assault upon his wife. The sadistic rapist combines physical force and perverse sexual motivations to degrade and demean his wife. There is an evolving cycle of violence and self-reflection in which the women grapple with the painful realization that they are being sexually victimized by their most intimate companion. This emotional betrayal leads to a series of emotional and behavioral countermeasures that enable the victims to compartmentalize their troubled marital relations. #RandolphHarris 1 of 19

We hope to develop a more comprehensive understanding of women’s experience of wife rape by focusing on the nature of this type of sexual violence and how women cope with it. How victims of intimate partner violence respond to the violence in their relationships has been studied by many researchers. It was found that women who are raped by their husbands are more likely than battered women to file legal charges and to try to leave their partners. However, there is no research to date that systematically documents the coping strategies of wife rape survivors. If we are to acknowledge the complexity of women’s experiences of sexual violence and the impact of that violence on their lives, women’s coping strategies must be considered. Furthermore, by exploring how women manage wife rape, we see that they are not passive victims at the time of assault nor are they passive victims in relation to the consequences of abuse. Within the lager society, wife rape is often understood as a relatively innocuous incident in which a husband wants to have sex, his wife rejects him, and he holds her down on the bed and has intercourse with her. Although a few of the women in this sample experienced this type of sexual assault, this scenario was far from the norm. Indeed, the women I interviewed described a wide range of experiences, from assaults that were relatively quick in duration and involved little physical fore to sadistic, torturous episodes that lasted for hours. I suspect that there are many other types of wife rape. Furthermore, the type of violence women experienced often changed over the course of the relationship. However, these classifications reflect how women themselves talked about their experiences of sexual violence—from being coerced to have sex when they really did not want to, to being terrorized with sadistic acts involving torture.  #RandolphHarris 2 of 19

In my study, 10 of the women descried force-only rapes. Although they were all physically battered at other times during their relationship, the sexual abuse was generally not characterized by physical violence. For example, Abigail told me, “He shoved me down on the bed very forcefully, and I said, ‘What are you doing?’…No, I don’t want this.’ And there [were] n preliminaries and no tenderness. Nothing. And he entered me and it was painful and I just remember being so repulsed.” The women in the force-only category descried incidents of sexual abuse devoid of excessive physical violence. However, they talked about their fear of physical violence if they resisted their partners’ sexual advances. As Cory told me, “If I resisted, he would beat me up, so I learned not to resist and I just gave in.” Several other women in this force-only category experienced severe physical violence at other times during their relationship, and their fear of the physical repercussions is what motivated many of them not to resist their partners’ sexual advances. However, it is significant to note that these women were not freely consenting to have intercourse; they only acquired out of fear that physical violence would occur if they did not. Other women, although not freely choosing to have sex, did so out of a sense of obligation. Kayla said, “I thought I had to. Nobody ever told me I had the right to say no. I knew if it was yucky and I dreaded it, but I thought I had to do it.” Paula described her reasons: “He always wanted to have sex. He was jealous, and if he did not have sex with me every single day, that meant that I was with another guy and that was his theory. From the time I was 18, I had sex every single day for the first year we were married, and may I had 2 days off when I had my period. But we did it every day because he wanted to and I thought I had to.” #RandolphHarris 3 of 19

These women were no less upset or humiliated than other wife rape survivors, simply because these incidents were devoid of excess force. Indeed, Lisa told me that after each rape, “I was real upset and I would cry afterwards. I felt so terrible and it didn’t even bother him. He didn’t care.” Noelle, who had been raped by an acquaintance when she was a teenager, was particularly traumatized by her husband’s attack. She said, “That’s [rape] the worst thing he could have done knowing my background and knowing how I felt about the issue—it’s a violation of trust and commitment and the whole bit and compound it with knowing my background, and it was the worst thing he could have done to me.” Thus, we see that the women in this sample who experienced force-only rape suffered serious emotional consequences from being raped by their partners even though they did not suffer from excessive physical violence. All of the women in this sample experienced physical violence at some point during their relationship, and several were severely bettered by their partners. Again, this is probably the result of my sample, which was drawn largely from a battered woman’s shelter. Not all women who are raped by their partners are battered wives. However, wife rape is more likely to occur in marriages characterized by extreme physical violence. In this study, women who had been severely battered talked about common injuries, such as black eyes, broken bones, blood clots in their heads, and knife wounds. In a particularly violent incident, Nina described how her partner (who was angered by her pregnancy) dragged her into the woods, where he beat and raped her and then sued a knife to slice open her abdomen. #RandolphHarris 4 of 19

While not all of the women in my sample were subjected to such extreme forms of physical violence, about 70 percent of them experienced battering rapes at some point. For some, the physical violence regularly accompanied the sexual abuse. For example,  Barbara told me, “He would fight me and then he would always rip all of my clothes off me. I don’t have hardly any clothes left because he always ripped off my clothes, and I was naked. Then he would try to lay on me and put it in. Sometimes I was able to fight him off, and I would fight like wild, and he wouldn’t be able to get it in. But usually he would [succeed in penetrating her], and he put me in the hospital a lot. He broke my nose and my jaw and cut my wrists.” For many women, like Karen, the rape followed on the heels of the physical abuse when their partners were attempting to reconcile. For example, Jen said, “He sexually assaulted me a couple of times and always after he beat me up. He would want sex, and he would actually think in his own mind that he really hadn’t done anything.” Melissa told me, “He would beat me and then take it. He would choke me. He put his elbow in my throat and choked me. He would throw anything he could get his hands on—ashtrays, or whatever, he broke my fingers and hands. He was real violent. He threw knives at me, and he would throw me naked into the street and pour cold water on me and make me stay out there in the winter…then he would make me have sex and then go and eat a sandwich. I never understood how he could do that. How can you do that to somebody?” #RandolphHarris 5 of 19

Other women in this sample experienced battering rapes frequently, but not necessarily all the time. For example, Sonya experienced both force-only rapes and battering rapes at various times in her relationship. She said, “Sometimes we would go to bed, and he would push my legs aside and force sex on me. Or he would grab my head and force me [to give him oral sex]…Other times he would beat the crap out of me in bed or hold a gun to my head to force me. The third type of wide rape, sadistic rape, was experienced by a total of hone of the women in this sample at some point in their relationships. These women characterized their experiences not only as physically violent but also as involving “perverse” acts or torture. Seven women experienced both battering rapes and sadistic rapes. However, two were always sadistically raped—for both this occurred more than 20 times during the course of their relationships. For example, Tanya was regularly choked to the point of passing out and then raped by her partner. She told me, “He was really into watching porno movies, and he tried to make me do all sorts of things. And I [didn’t] like it. He hurt my stomach so bad because I was pregnant, and he was making me do these things. I think he’s a sadist—he pulls my hair and punches me and slaps me and makes me pass out.” For several of the women in this study, bondage was a usual occurrence in their experiences of sexual violence. Lorraine, who was regularly sadistically raped, remembered, “just waking up and being tied to the bed by m arms and legs, and the things that woke me up was him touching me [vaginally] with a feather and me waking up in shock. #RandolphHarris 6 of 19

“And he had this thing about taking pictures of it all and trying to open me up [vaginally]. So he would use his fist and other objects and then make me do exercises on the toilet to tighten [my vagina] up again. The women who described sadistic incidents of sexual assault suffered particularly severe physical and emotional trauma as a result of the violence. This is likely the result of both the terroristic nature of the assaults they experienced and the great frequency with which they were raped by their partners. Aggression militates against intimacy, keeping relationships in the shallows, marooned from any significant healing and deepening. To get to the heart of aggression, to undo its armoring without stranding ourselves from our anger and capacity to take care of ourselves, is a great undertaking, at once vulnerable and empowering, made possible in part through devoting yourself to empathy, compassion, vulnerability, cultivating intimacy with your shame, fear, and anger, sympathetic joy, no name-calling, skillful anger, and having a conscious rant. Aggression is not just a matter of physiology or social conditioning, but a result of biological, psychological, and social factors operating in conjunction. We can begin with facing our aggressiveness; then unearth the anger that underlies it, developing more and more intimacy with that anger, eventually feeling deeply empowered, simultaneously vulnerable and filled with a healing courage. There is undeniable growth in such work, requiring both a keenly discerning awareness and a full “yes” to passion, bringing together heart, guts, and head in ways that sever our highest good. Some people may need to go to anger management class to deal with this aggression. #RandolphHarris 7 of 19

In the sociological study of different species of human organizations, such as political movement, professional bodies, local communities, or families, it has proved very useful to put the question of appropriate personal attachment: in what ways is the member obliged to give oneself up to the organization, and in what ways is one expected to hold oneself off from it? This questions helps us to see that the individual is known by the social bonds that hold one, and that through these bonds one is held to something that is a social entity with a boundary and a life substance of its own. In looking at behavior in social situations one finds that the same key question helps us to bring together and understand many of the scattered details of things we know about interactional activity. There is a reason, then, to view a social gathering as a little society, one that gives body to a social occasion, and to view the niceties of social conduct as the institutionalized bonds that tie us to the gathering. There is reason to move from an interactional point of view to one that derives from the study of basic social structures. A social gathering may be only a filmy pinpoint of social organization, but however minuscule it is, there is reason to examine it sociologically. When we see the gathering as something that must embody the social occasion in which it occurs, we have some added reasons for giving it weight. Persons who differ little in status within an organization may find themselves with quite different interaction obligations at a given moment; those with quite different statuses within the organization may find themselves currently cast in the same interaction role. #RandolphHarris 8 of 19

Some rules of conduct can best be studied by looking at the conduct of the Chairman of the Board; but there are other rules that can be best studied by looking at Board meetings themselves. The study of situational obligations is different from the study of social role obligations. Of course, as suggested, the individual may employ situational improprieties (and also proprieties) to say something about one’s relationship to a community, a social establishment, a kinship network, a two-person bond, and any other unit of social organization one might care to mention. We find that our little inhabitations are carefully tied into a network, that the waste products of our serious activities are worked into a pattern, and that his network and this pattern are made to carry important social functions. Surely this is a credit to the thoroughness with which our lives are pressed into the service of society. What the individual thinks of as the niceties of social conduct are in fact rules for guiding one in one’s attachment to and detachment from social gatherings, the niceties themselves providing one the idiom for manifesting this. One often follows these rules with very little thought, paying what one feels is but a small tribute to convention. However, should one be caught acting improperly, or catch others doing so, the embarrassment can be surprisingly deep. One may rationalize this response by reference to such things as the invidious class implications of uncouth acts (as when one become angered at someone for chewing gum too loudly, or for sniffing). However, underlying this is the feeling that the other has not properly given oneself up to the gathering, and, beyond the gathering itself, the social occasion. #RandolphHarris 9 of 19

More than to any family or club, more than to any class or gender, more than to an nation, the individual belongs to gatherings, and one had best show that one is a member in good standing. The ultimate penalty for breaking the riles is harsh. Just as we fill our jails with those who transgress the legal order, so we partly fill our asylums with those who act unsuitably—the first kind of institution being used to protect our lives and property; the second, to protect our gatherings and occasions. The reason much of society is in such a disarray today and because laws are not enforced and people accept bad behavior as a norm and it is becoming so outrageous that it is causing a pandemic. In reliving the years that we have suffered in despair, we often weep for all the pain and suffering we have to endure; we weep for our beautiful angles that have experienced fantastic terror. Our hearts become filled with anguish as we remember the horrible ending to our relationships. Memories of our loved ones will always remain alive and real in our hearts. They leave the deepest feelings of compassion and love in all the souls that love us so dearly. All the despair and repressed emotions will be truly revealed, as the pleasant memories as well as our tragic memories are embedded with our beings. Our loved ones are apart of us and very real in our minds. We must hold on to these experiences and allow them to enhance our lives and our understanding of other human beings. Only then will our lives have meaning and our agonies and pain not suffered in vain. By accepting and submitting to our own loneliness, new and beautiful values will be revealed. #RandolphHarris 10 of 19

What is school? School is an organization for the transmission to a certain number of prepared people of knowledge coming from the higher mind. The most essential thing in school is the knowledge that comes from higher mind. This means that schools cannot be formed arbitrarily without the participation of people who have obtained knowledge in schools. Another very important fact is the selection effected by the school, that is, the selection of students. Only people of a certain preparation and a certain level of understanding are admitted. A school cannot be open to all, it cannot even be open to many. A school is always a closed circle with the instructor in the center. Schools can be of very different levels depending on the preparation and the level of being of the students. The higher the level of the school, the greater the demands made upon the students. Why are schools necessary? Before speaking of why schools are necessary, it must be realized for whom schools are necessary, because schools are not necessary to those people who already realize the inadequacy of knowledge collected by the ordinary mind and who feel that, by themselves, with their own strength they can neither resolve the problems which surround them nor find the right way. Only such people are capable of overcoming the difficulties connected with school work and only for them are schools necessary. #RandolphHarris 11 of 19

In order to understand why schools are necessary it must be realised that the knowledge which comes from men of higher mind can be transmitted only to a very limited number of people simultaneously and with necessary observance of a whole series of definite conditions which must be well known to the instructor of the school and without which knowledge cannot be transmitted correctly. The existence of these conditions and the impossibility of doing without them explains the necessity of an organization. The transmission of knowledge demands efforts both on the part of one who receives it and on the part of one who gives it. The organization facilitates these efforts or marks them possible. These conditions cannot come by themselves. A school can only be organized according to a certain definite plan worked out and known long ago. There can be nothing arbitrary and improvised in schools. However, schools can be of different type corresponding to different ways. Different ways will be spoke of later. Can it be explained in what these conditions consist? These conditions are connected with a definite property of man’s nature, namely, that there are two sides of man which, in man’s general development, ought to develop simultaneously and in parallel: knowledge and being. People know, or think they know, what knowledge is and to a certain extent they understand the relativity of knowledge. However, they do not know what being is and they do not understand the relativity of being and the fact that knowledge depends on being. #RandolphHarris 12 of 19

Meanwhile the development of knowledge without corresponding development of being or development of knowledge gives wrong results. Schools are necessary in order to avoid such one-sided development and the undesirable results connected with it. The conditions of school teaching are such that form the very first steps work progress simultaneously along two lines, along the line of knowledge and along the line of being. From the first day at school a man begins to study mechanicalness and to struggle against mechanicalness in himself, against involuntary actions, against unnecessary talk, against imagination, against day-dreaming and against sleep. It is explained to one that one’s knowledge depends on one’s being. In making one step along the line of knowledge a man must make a step along the line of being. The principles of school work, all the demands made upon one, the rules which one must remember, all help one to study one’s being and work to change it. Why is knowledge necessary? The aim of a man who realizes his state and his position becomes a change of being. This change is so difficult that it would, in fact, be impossible if knowledge was not there to help one. Can a change of being, that is, the attainment of a certain level of being, give knowledge? No, it cannot. Knowledge and being express two sides of man’s nature which can develop and grow, but they require different effort for their development. On what does understanding depend, on knowledge or being? Neither knowledge nor being separately can give right understanding. The reason for this is that understanding is the resultant of knowledge and being. A growth of understanding is possible only with a simultaneous growth of knowledge and being. If one outgrows the other too much, understanding cannot develop in the right direction. #RandolphHarris 13 of 19

A perspective view of the ages covered by the history given in Bible records shows that the rise in spiritual power of the people of God was marked by the recognition of the existence of demoniacal hosts of evil. When the Church of God in the old and new dispensations was at the highest point of spiritual power, its leaders recognized, and drastically dealt with, the invisible forces of Satan; and when it was at the lowest, they were ignored or allowed to have free course among the people. The reality of the existence of wicked spirits by whom Satan, their prince, carries out his wok in the fallen World of men cannot be more strongly proved than by the fact that the statutes given by God to Moses on the fiery mount embodies stringent measures for dealing with the attempts of evil spirit-beings to gain power over the people of God. Moses was instructed by God to keep the camp od Israel free from their inroads by the drastic penalty of death for all who had dealings with them (Lev. 20.27). The very fact of God thus giving statutes in connection with such a subject, and the extreme penalty to be enforced for disobedience to His laws, shows in itself the existence of evil spirits, their wickedness, their ability to communicate with and influence human beings, and the necessity for uncompromising hostility to them and their works. God would not legislate about dangers which had no real existence, nor would He command the extreme penalty of death if the contact of people with evil spirit-beings of the unseen World did not necessitate such drastic dealings. The severity of the penalty obviously implies, also, that the leaders of Israel must have been given acute ability for “discerning of spirits,” so sure and so clear that they could have no doubt in deciding cases brought before them. #RandolphHarris 14 of 19

While Moses and Joshua lived and enforced the strong measures decreed by God to keep His people free from the inroads of satanic power, Israel remined in allegiance to God—at the highest point of its history; but when these leaders died, the nation sank into darkness, brought about by evil spirit-powers drawing the people into idolatry and sin. The condition of the nation in later years rose or fell because of allegiance to God, or like where America currently is, idolatrous worship of spirits (see Judges 2.19, 1 King 14.22-24; compare 2 Chron. 33.1-5, 34.1-7), and all the sins resulting therefrom. For what actually is idolatry but the worship of demons in place of God (1 Corinthians 10.20). When the new dispensation opens with the advent of Christ, we find that God-Man recognizing the existence of the satanic powers of evil and manifesting uncompromising hostility toward them and their works. As with Moses in the Old Testament, so was the abhorrence by Christ in the New. Moses was the man who knew God face to face; Christ was the Only Begotten Son of the Father, sent expressly from God to the World of men. And each definitely recognized the existence of Satan and other evil spirit-beings; each drastically dealt with them as entering and possessing men; and each waged war against them, as actively opposed to God. Taking a perspective view, from the time of Christ on throughout the early history of the Church and up to the giving of the Apocalypse and the death of the Apostle John, the manifested power of God worked among His people, and the leaders recognized and dealt with the spirits of evil. This period corresponded to the Mosaic period in the old dispensation. #RandolphHarris 15 of 19

The revolutionists’ media strategy–what Mr. Ceausescu was not alone in missing were the strategic ways in which First Wave, Second Wave, and Third Wave communications can sometimes be combined or opposed to one another. A good example is provided by religion. One of the biggest gainers from the 1989 revolutions in Eastern Europe had been the Catholic Church, long suppressed but never destroyed by the communist regimes. The church, as suggested above, was itself a mass medium, long before today’s Jim Bakkers and Jimmy Swaggerts hit the Protestant televangelical circuit, and long before Pat Roberston built so large a TV following that he was able to mount a campaign for the presidency of the United States of America. The church wields power in the World today partly because of its moral influence and economic resources, but also because it continues to serve as a mass medium. Able to reach numberless millions every Sunday morning, it makes the audience for some of the World’s top-rated television shows seem small indeed. Of course, it communicates with its members the other six days of the week as well, and in today’s World the church makes use of newspapers, online articles, magazines, and other media in support of its face-to-face communications. So long as the Catholic Church—or any other organized religion—can gather enormous flocks, and thus reach a mass audience, no government can ignore it. Some governments, as we know, have tried to extirpate the church (which is almost impossible). Others have tried peddling a substitute religion based on nationalism, Marxism, or some other doctrine. Still others compromise and try to co-opt the church. #RandolphHarris 16 of 19

In totalitarian states the existence of an unco-opted or unsuppressed mass medium in the hands of the church is a constant threat, for there is always the danger that this channel will be made available to the political opposition. This accounts for the ferocity with which communist states tried to kill off the church or to buy it off when that proved impossible. The recognition that organized religion, whatever else it might be, is also a mass medium helps to explain many recent shifts or power. It helps explain why, so often in history, in countries as different as Iran under the Shah or South Korea under Chun Doo Hwan, economic and other popular discontents are channeled into religious movements. In Iran, of course, this canalization of protest into a religious form led to the overthrow of the Shah’s secular regime. In South Korea it led to a spectacular growth of Christianity, both Catholic and Protestant. In both countries organized religion took the place of, or merged with, a political opposition. Ironically, the more successfully a totalitarian government censors and controls all the other media of expression, the more important the church medium becomes as a potential vehicle for dissidence. It may be the only way to express opposition to regime. However, when the church opens its “channel” and expresses popular resentment from the pulpit, the medium alters the message, and the protest, which may originate in hunger or other material grievances, is recast in religious terms. This explains why movements that start out fighting for goals having little to do with religion, per se, become transmuted into religious crusades. #RandolphHarris 17 of 19

In Iran, the Ayatollah Khomeini fused class resentment and nationalist rage with religious fervor. Love of Allah + hatred of imperialism + anticapitalism = a triple-charged brand of fanaticism that turned the Middle East into a tinderbox. However, Khomeini did more than combine these three elements into a single passion. He also combined First Wave media—face-to—face exhortation by his mullahs to the faithful—with Third Wave technology—audio tapes with political messages, smuggled into the mosques, where they were played and duplicated on cheap tape recorders. To counter Khomeini, the Shah used the Second Wave media—press, radio, and television. Once Khomeini managed to overthrow the Shah and take control of the state, he also took command of these centralized Second Wave media as well. This strategy of using First and Third Wave media to combat those who control Second Wave media is common among revolutionary movements, and was even more conspicuous in China during the pro-democracy protests of 1989. The old men in Beijing who trembled when Mr. Ceausescu fell in Bucharest underestimated the power of this strategy. This will hurt you more than it hurts me. When a strategic bargainer observes that a better outside opportunity translates into a better share in a bargain, one will look for strategic moves that improve one’s outside opportunities. Moreover, one will notice that what matters is one’s outside opportunity relative to that of one’s rival. Even if one makes a commitment or a threat that lowers both parties’ outside opportunities, one will also do better in the bargaining, so long as that of the rival is damaged more severely. #RandolphHarris 18 of 19

In our example, when the union members could earn $300 a day on the outside while the management could make a profit of $500 a day using substitute employees for labor, the result of the bargaining was $400 for the union and $600 for the management. Now suppose the union members give up $100 a day of outside income to intensify their picketing, and thus reduce the management’s profit by $200 a day. Then the bargaining process gives the union a starting point of $200 ($300 minus $100) and the management $300 ($500 minus $200). The two starting points add up to $500, and the remaining $500 of daily profit from regular operation of the hotel is split equally between them. Therefore the union gets $450 and the management gets $550. The union’s threat of hurting both (but hurting the management more) had earned it an extra $50. The major league baseball players used just such a tactic in their wage negotiations in 1980. They went on stike during the exhibition season, returned to work at the start of the regular season, and threatened to strike again starting on Memorial Day weekend. To see how this “hurt the team owners more,” note that during the exhibition season the players got no salaries, while the owners earned revenue from vacationers and locals. During the regular season the players got the same salary each week. For the owner, the gate and television revenues are low initially and rise substantially during and after the Memorial Day weekend. Therefore the loss of the owners relative to that of the players was highest during the exhibition season and again starting Memorial Day weekend. It seems the players knew the right strategy. The owners gave in just before the second half of the threatened baseball strike. However, the first half actually occurred. Our theory of looking ahead and reasoning back is clearly incomplete. Why is it that agreements are not always reached before any damage is done—why are there strikes?  #RandolphHarris 19 of 19

Cresleigh Meadows at Plumas Ranch