[From Bruce Nevin (980710.0556 EDT)]
Rick, you are much concerned with the rapist and his victim. Why would a
rape victim be "willing"? I suggest that what is going on is extortion.
The victim of extortion is free to refuse to obey the instructions of the
extortionist, but at the risk of undergoing the dire consequences that the
extortionist threatens to inflict. The consequences themselves do not
necessarily coerce the actions that the extortionist demands. The
extortionist could say "give me that money in your hand or I'll make you
give it to me." In that case, the threat might be to forcibly remove the
money. That's a clear threat of coercion. But the extortionist could also
say "give me the money or I'll reveal that skeleton in your closet." If the
victim says "I don't care," and the extortionist reveals all in a press
conference, the action of the extortionist does not cause the demanded
action (it does not cause money to move from the victim to the extortionist).
Even so with the "willing" rape victim. Typically she is afraid of being
killed, or disfigured, or maimed, or being caused pain, or all of these.
None of the threatened injuries in themselves cause the actions that the
rapist experiences as coitus, not in the way that an arm wrestler causes
actions that he experiences as his hand forward pressing the other's hand
down against the table. They cause conflict in the victim. To resolve the
conflict, the victim is likely to give up control of one perception for the
sake of regaining control of another.
We can refer to extortion as a form of coercion if you like. It will
require a different model. And we have to be clear which type of coercion
we are referring to. As is often the case, words are ambiguous, models are
not. So there is simple coercion (the actions of one control the other's
means of acting); and there is coercion by threat and extortion. We have a
generic sort of model of the first, the spreadsheet. We have no model of
the second. And you get to say that schoolteachers are extortionists,
carrying out an indirect form of coercion. It sounds like you'll be happy
with that.
Can you model it? It might look a lot like the diagram of cooperation that
I posted (980709.0923 EDT). The difference between extortion and
cooperation is that the extortionist can control the state of the
environmental contingency eff(ab), which here is the means of extortion,
the thing that causes pain. That's the qix-sx-rx/Cx-ox-eff(ab) loop,
affecting the state of eff(ab).
ra+
>
pa+ --> Ca+ -->
^ |
> >
> >
> _______|_______________
> > >
>_____|___________ rx |
> > \ | |
> > --> Cx ----------------
> > > \ | |
> ra | \ ra'={rb} |
> > > \ | |
pa --> Ca --> | pa'--> Ca' --> |
···
> > > > V Extortionist
sa> >oa> >sx> >sa'| |oa'| |ox|
--------------------------------------------------------
qia <---- qoa qix ^ qoa' qox
^ \ effa | | ________/
> \ | \ /
---\ ------>eff(ab)<----\-----------
\ \ | Environment
\______ \_______ |
> > >
> effb | V
qob' V qob ------> qib
--------------------------------------------------------
>ob'| |sb'| |ob| |sb| Victim
> > > >
<--|Cb'|<--pb' <--|Cb|<-----pb
> \ | |
rb'={ra} \ rb |
>_________\__________| |
\ | |
\__|_____________|
> >
> V
<-- Cb+ <-- pb+
>
rb+
Maybe that doesn't cover all the cases, but it's a start. The tall guy with
the bad back says "lift your end of the couch higher or I'm gonna make you
drop it." The short guy really doesn't want to damage the couch. That's
extortion. Call it a form of coercion if that's important to you.
Bruce Nevin