25
   

1 in 5 women get raped?

 
 
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Feb, 2015 02:11 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
Representative Angela Romero, Democrat of Salt Lake City, proposed removing the “has not consented” line on the grounds that it was unnecessary and a potential loophole. If someone’s unconscious, it’s rape—because they cannot consent.


According to Angela Romero, what my girlfriend did to me was rape. I was unconscious when she started. The question is whether previous consent matters. I say it doesn't.

If you say that any sex with a sleeping partner is rape, then I was raped.

As far male house guest? I feel the same way. Someone with whom I have an active sexual relationship has the right to give me oral sex while I am sleeping. Of course, any house guest that I don't have an active sexual relationship with doesn't have that consent.

I don't believe that what my girlfriend did to me was any sort of crime. That seems to be the disagreement in Utah.
bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Reply Fri 6 Feb, 2015 02:27 pm
@maxdancona,
I'm saying you know whether it was rape or not, why are you so bent on not allowing that same choice to rape victims? Where's your Libertarian right to self-hood and free speech now, Spartacus?

Don't you think that people ought to be self responsible for their actions, that if a girl gets what she deserves for getting drunk at a frat why isn't a drunk frat as responsible for his actions and results for tapping the drunk co-ed to begin with? They're both drunk, why aren't they both responsible for the results? And seriously. Consider yourself. As a dedicated out there BDSMer, don't you consider rape fantasy with real women even when you're sober and not dipped in latex? Be honest.
maxdancona
 
  2  
Reply Fri 6 Feb, 2015 02:31 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
What's wrong with equality?

A man and a woman who get drunk and have sex should be equally responsible for their actions. If you believe in equality, then saying that one is responsible simply because of his gender doesn't make sense.

Someone's actions should not be judged by their gender. Isn't that a basic principle of equality?

0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  4  
Reply Fri 6 Feb, 2015 02:38 pm
@maxdancona,
Quote:
If you say that any sex with a sleeping partner is rape, then I was raped.

No one says that. That's not how rape is legally defined. Rape involves penetration of a bodily opening with a genital organ, other body part, or an object. You aren't being penetrated when someone gives you oral sex, it may be a sexual assault, but it's not legally rape.

If you don't even know the correct legal definition of rape, you shouldn't even comment on the topic.
Quote:
I don't believe that what my girlfriend did to me was any sort of crime. That seems to be the disagreement in Utah.

No, that's not the disagreement in Utah. You don't understand that either.

Sexual intercourse, or penetrative contact, with an unconscious person is already a crime of rape in all 50 states--including Utah. Other forms of sexual contacts with an unconscious person would be sexual assaults in those states. It doesn't matter if you're married to the person, or if you have an ongoing sexual relationship with them, sexual contacts with someone who is unconscious are not legal. You can't legally have sexual contacts with your girlfriend if she's in a coma or an alcohol blackout, or a particularly deep sleep.

The disagreement in Utah is due to shocking ignorance of the already existing laws on the part of some lawmakers.
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Reply Fri 6 Feb, 2015 05:09 pm
'Teabagging' hazing ritual alleged at CDTA
Source: Times Union

By Brendan J. Lyons

Albany

A former mechanic for the Capital District Transportation Authority filed a federal lawsuit Thursday alleging his co-workers held him down and pressed their genitals into his head two years ago as part of a bizarre hazing ritual that took place on his last day at work for the authority.

The lawsuit — which names CDTA and six employees as defendants, including CEO Carm Basile — seeks unspecified damages and claims the November 2013 incident caused the mechanic to suffer "severe anxiety and depression" and "seek psychological counseling" as a result of what happened. In addition to civil rights violations, the claim states that the incident was an assault under state law.

The federal lawsuit includes a photograph of the incident depicting the former mechanic, Kevin Hoit, pinned face-down on the ground while two men, including one wearing a CDTA uniform, are straddled over him. One of the men has his pants pulled down and is kneeling over Hoit's head. The photograph shows a CDTA bus in the background and another person in a blue CDTA shirt taking photos.

In addition, another supervisor also allegedly photographed the incident, according to the lawsuit.

FULL story at link.



Image attached to federal complaint against the Capital District Transportation Authority and others. (Provided photo)

Read more: http://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Bizarre-hazing-ritual-alleged-6065819.php


http://ww2.hdnux.com/photos/34/44/50/7490065/7/628x471.jpg
0 Replies
 
nononono
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 6 Feb, 2015 06:37 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
No, you weren't raped--that act does not fit the legal definition of rape--there was no penetration of any of your bodily openings


And that's why the legal definition of rape is biased against men and needs to be changed. That's why laws (like for instance "Yes Means Yes") are set up by the feminist influenced government to entrap men.

What Max experienced, I believe would be considered "Made To Penetrate" under the law. Because his penis penetrated her mouth, but Max did not initiate this act and was in fact unconscious.

"Made to Penetrate" is a sexual assault definition that was created from a gynocentric view that male victims of rape somehow suffer less than female victims of rape.

When an underage 15 year old boy is raped by his 34 year old teacher, the definition under the law is "Made to penetrate."

"Made to penetrate" also carries lesser punishment under the law than "Rape" does. Even though both these acts are in fact rape. Government has decided to protect men less than it does women, and to punish men more than it does women. FOR THE EXACT SAME CRIME.

That is the dictionary definition of institutionalized bias and prejudice. Government, and law enforcement are biased against men. That is a fact.

And if you people don't consider what I wrote here to be a legitimate discussion of the topic without "mudslinging", then you all have pretty creative definitions of things...
firefly
 
  4  
Reply Fri 6 Feb, 2015 08:31 pm
@nononono,
Quote:

And that's why the legal definition of rape is biased against men and needs to be changed. That's why laws (like for instance "Yes Means Yes") are set up by the feminist influenced government to entrap men.

The current federal definition of rape is:
Quote:
The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.” The definition is used by the FBI to collect information from local law enforcement agencies about reported rapes.
http://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/attorney-general-eric-holder-announces-revisions-to-the-uniform-crime-reports-definition-of-rape

Similarly, the CDC defines rape as:
Quote:
Among women, rape includes vaginal, oral, or anal penetration by a male using his penis. It also includes vaginal or anal penetration by a male or female using their fingers or an object.

-Among men, rape includes oral or anal penetration by a male using his penis. It also includes anal penetration by a male or female using their fingers or an object.


Such a penetrative act can be committed by either gender on the other gender, or by males on males, or females on females. It does not protect women more than men. The definition of consent is determined by each state--it is gender neutral.
Quote:
What Max experienced, I believe would be considered "Made To Penetrate" under the law. Because his penis penetrated her mouth, but Max did not initiate this act and was in fact unconscious.

Max wasn't made to penetrate, Max wasn't made to do anything--he was asleep, totally passive. He definitely was not orally penetrated by the sex organ of another person--he was not raped. His girl friend could be considered guilty of a sexual assault against him, since, being asleep, he could not consent in advance of her actions.
Quote:

When an underage 15 year old boy is raped by his 34 year old teacher, the definition under the law is "Made to penetrate."

No, you are wrong. That would be statutory rape-- sexual intercourse with a minor who cannot legally give consent to any sexual contact with an adult. It is child sexual abuse. If the teacher is a male, sodomy charges might be added.

I'm not aware that any states currently have a sexual assault charge called "made to penetrate". Which states are you alleging have enacted such a sexual assault charge into their criminal code.?

You don't know the difference between someone penetrating your body, and your being forced to penetrate the body of another person? Rolling Eyes Those are quite different acts, and not equivalent.

Although not codified into law, being "made to penetrate" has been considered as a category of sexual victimization by the CDC researchers for The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey, who distinguish it from rape. But at present, it remains a research category and not part of criminal law in any state.
Quote:
Being made to penetrate is a form of sexual victimization distinct from rape that is particularly unique to males and, to our knowledge, has not been explicitly measured in previous national studies. It is possible that rape questions in prior studies captured the experience of being made to penetrate someone else, resulting in higher prevalence estimates for male rape in those studies.

Most rapes of men are committed by other men--these fit the current legal definition of rape, and these rape laws offer equal protection to both males and females.

You may have avoided mud-slinging, but your post is mainly filled with very inaccurate information



nononono
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 6 Feb, 2015 09:27 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
Such a penetrative act can be committed by either gender on the other gender, or by males on males, or females on females. It does not protect women more than men.


And heterosexual sex is by definition a penis going into a vagina. Therefore the current laws DO protect women more than men. Because during heterosexual sex, one gender does the the penetrating, one does not.

Quote:
Max wasn't made to penetrate, Max wasn't made to do anything--he was asleep, totally passive. He definitely was not orally penetrated by the sex organ of another person--he was not raped.


Max was indeed "made to penetrate". His dick was put inside her mouth by his girlfriend, was it not? Hmmm?

You are attempting to undermine his (very valid) point. Let's say his girlfriend woke him up by putting his penis inside her vagina and humping him. According to the current definition of "rape" that would not be "rape". It would be considered "Made to penetrate."

Now reverse the participants. Max wakes his girlfriend up by putting his penis inside her and humping her. In this instance his girlfriend could legally claim "rape" and the state could prosecute Max accordingly.

Both these situations involve people being made to participate in sex while unconscious, but only one under the law is viewed as "rape". Literally the only difference in these scenarios is the gender of the person initiating the sexual contact. The intent and desired outcome are exactly the same.

And that's why sexual assault laws are not "gender neutral." If they were "gender neutral", the laws would focus on the act itself instead of the genitals of the perpetrator.

Quote:
No, you are wrong. That would be statutory rape-- sexual intercourse with a minor who cannot legally give consent to any sexual contact with an adult. It is child sexual abuse. If the teacher is a male, sodomy charges might be added.


And yet most instances of teachers sexually abusing minors statistically are instances where a female is the perpetrator. And in most of the instances, a female perpetrator gets a lesser sentence than a male who commits the same crime. Of course this is consistent with males in general receiving harsher sentences for ALL crimes than females do. This is what's known as "The Sentencing Gap". This is something that you've never acknowledged, even though it is a clear indicator of bias against men by the judicial system.

Quote:
I'm not aware that any states currently have a sexual assault charge called "made to penetrate". Which states are you alleging have enacted such a sexual assault charge into their criminal code.?


I will post articles about made to penetrate in separate posts.

Quote:
You don't know the difference between someone penetrating your body, and your being forced to penetrate the body of another person? Those are quite different acts, and not equivalent.


In the hypothetical examples I gave of Max and his girlfriend no, they're the same thing. The intent is the exact same. How are they any different? They're both instances where one person is being forced to have sex against their will.

Quote:
You may have avoided mud-slinging, but your post is mainly filled with very inaccurate information


And you're showing obvious sexism and bigotry when you make the assertion that violating a man is a lesser crime than violating a woman. Just because one person has outer gentitals as oppossed to inner genitals, that doesn't make the violation of personal space any less egregious.

nononono
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 6 Feb, 2015 09:28 pm
@nononono,
The CDC’s Rape Numbers Are Misleading

Men reported being “made to penetrate” at virtually the same rates as women reported rape

“CDC: Nearly 1 in 5 Women Raped.” “One in Five U.S. Women Has Been Raped: CDC Survey.” These alarming headlines were typical of the coverage of last week’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report on sexual and intimate violence in the United States. The CDC study—the second in two years—seems to support a radical feminist narrative that has been gaining mainstream attention recently: that modern America is a “rape culture” saturated with misogynistic violence. But a closer look at the data, obtained from telephone surveys done in 2011, yields a far more complex picture and raises some surprising question about gender, victimization, and bias.

Both critics and supporters of the CDC’s methodology note the striking disparity between CDC figures and the Justice Department’s crime statistics based on the National Crime Victimization Survey (which includes crimes unreported to the police). While the CDC estimates that nearly 2 million adult American women were raped in 2011 and nearly 6.7 million suffered some other form of sexual violence, the NCVS estimate for that year was 238,000 rapes and sexual assaults.

New Republic reporter Claire Groden points out that while the NCVS focuses on criminal acts, the CDC’s National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey asks about instances of forced sex which respondents may or may not regard as crimes. Yet it is worth noting that in the early 1990s, the NCVS was redesigned to elicit more reports of sexual and domestic violence that may not fit the conventional mold of criminal attacks. In addition to being asked directly about rape, attempted rape or sexual assault, respondents now get a follow-up question about “forced or unwanted sexual acts” committed by a stranger, a casual acquaintance, or someone they know well.

The CDC study goes much further in asking about specific unwanted acts. But there are other important differences. For one, CDC survey respondents are not asked whether anyone has used physical force or threats to make them engage in a sexual activity, but “how many” people have done this (in their lifetime and in the past year). This wording removes the extra hurdle of admitting that such a violation has happened, and thus encourages more reporting. But could it also create “false positives” by nudging people toward the assumption that the default answer is affirmative—especially when preceded by a battery of other questions and statements about sexually coercive behavior?

A much bigger problem is the wording of the question measuring “incapacitated rape” (which accounted for nearly two-thirds of the CDC’s estimate of rapes that occurred in the past year). Respondents were asked about sexual acts that happened when they were “drunk, high, drugged, or passed out and unable to consent.” This seems to imply that “unable to consent” is only one of the variables and to include situations in which a person is intoxicated—perhaps enough to have impaired judgment—but not incapacitated as the legal definition of rape requires.

A CDC spokesperson told The New Republic that “being unable to consent is key to the CDC’s definition of rape.” Presumably, this is conveyed by the introduction to the question about alcohol- and drug-enabled rape: “Sometimes sex happens when a person is unable to consent to it or stop it from happening because they were drunk, high, drugged, or passed out from alcohol, drugs, or medications.” However, in a telephone survey, some people may focus only on the question itself and let the introduction slide by.

Moreover, the introductory message ends with an advisory that may create more confusion: “Please remember that even if someone uses alcohol or drugs, what happens to them is not their fault.” Obviously, the intended point is that even if you got drunk, you’re not to blame for being raped. But this vaguely phrased reminder could also be taken to mean that it’s not your fault if you do something stupid while drunk or on drugs. At no point are respondents given any instructions that could result in fewer reports of alleged victimization: for instance, that they should not include instances in which they had voluntary sex while drunk but not incapacitated.

For many feminists, questioning claims of rampant sexual violence in our society amounts to misogynist “rape denial.” However, if the CDC figures are to be taken at face value, then we must also conclude that, far from being a product of patriarchal violence against women, “rape culture” is a two-way street, with plenty of female perpetrators and male victims.

How could that be? After all, very few men in the CDC study were classified as victims of rape: 1.7 percent in their lifetime, and too few for a reliable estimate in the past year. But these numbers refer only to men who have been forced into anal sex or made to perform oral sex on another male. Nearly 7 percent of men, however, reported that at some point in their lives, they were “made to penetrate” another person—usually in reference to vaginal intercourse, receiving oral sex, or performing oral sex on a woman. This was not classified as rape, but as “other sexual violence.”

And now the real surprise: when asked about experiences in the last 12 months, men reported being “made to penetrate”—either by physical force or due to intoxication—at virtually the same rates as women reported rape (both 1.1 percent in 2010, and 1.7 and 1.6 respectively in 2011).

In other words, if being made to penetrate someone was counted as rape—and why shouldn’t it be?—then the headlines could have focused on a truly sensational CDC finding: that women rape men as often as men rape women.

The CDC also reports that men account for over a third of those experiencing another form of sexual violence—“sexual coercion.” That was defined as being pressured into sexual activity by psychological means: lies or false promises, threats to end a relationship or spread negative gossip, or “making repeated requests” for sex and expressing unhappiness at being turned down.

Should we, then, regard sexual violence as a reciprocal problem? Getting away from the simplistic and adversarial “war against women” model is undoubtedly a positive step, as is admitting that women are human beings with the capacity for aggression and wrongdoing—including sexual assault. On the other hand, most of us would agree that to equate a victim of violent rape and a man who engages in a drunken sexual act he wouldn’t have chosen when sober is to trivialize a terrible crime. It is safe to assume that the vast majority of the CDC’s male respondents who were “made to penetrate” someone would not call themselves rape victims—and with good reason.

But if that’s the case, it is just as misleading to equate a woman’s experience of alcohol-addled sex with the experience of a rape victim who is either physically overpowered or attacked when genuinely incapacitated. For purely biological reasons, there is little doubt that adult victims of such crimes are mostly female—though male children and adolescents are at fairly high risk: as criminologists Richard Felson and Patrick Cundiff report in a fascinating recent analysis, a 15-year-old male is considerably more likely to be sexually assaulted than a woman over 40. The CDC reports that 12.3 percent of female victims were 10 or younger at the time of their first completed rape victimization; for male victims, that number is 27.8 percent.

We must either start treating sexual assault as a gender-neutral issue or stop using the CDC’s inflated statistics. Few would deny that sex crimes in America are a real, serious, and tragic problem. But studies of sexual violence should use accurate and clear definitions of rape and sexual assault, rather than lump these criminal acts together with a wide range of unsavory but non-criminal scenarios of men—and women—behaving badly.

http://time.com/3393442/cdc-rape-numbers/
nononono
 
  0  
Reply Fri 6 Feb, 2015 09:32 pm
@nononono,
The Hard Truth About Girl-on-Guy Rape

When a guy is "made to penetrate" a female, is it rape? Long-suffering male victims are turning to Reddit to break their silence

Charlie woke up to a blank-faced girl straddling him. He had been disrobed, was erect, and as her hips began to shift in short, quick movements, he realized he was inside of her. Frozen with disbelief, Charlie laid still. He faked climaxing, hoping it would prompt her to dismount and leave the room. Eventually she did, but only after he rolled to his side and pretended to sleep.

The next morning Charlie wasn’t sure what to think. Had an underclassman he knew only by name really entered his dorm room and had her way with him as he slept? It all seemed so absurd, like the makings of an awkward wet dream. Except Charlie had zero interest in this girl. He had never spoken to her, kissed her or even tried to catch her eye. He felt neither lucky nor flattered, just extremely perturbed.

“The most traumatic part was the complete assumption of consent,” he tells me nearly two decades later. “I was physically revolted by the experience. It just felt so shockingly wrong.”

The concept of a woman forcing a man into a sex act can seem paradoxical, if not physiologically impossible. The assumption, likely shared by Charlie’s abuser, is that guys are always in the mood and an erection constitutes consent; but there’s a uniquely afflicted class of male victims who would strongly disagree. Lost in a cultural blind spot, they have been left to suffer in silence without resources and often without the empathy of family or friends.

According to the Center for Disease Control’s national survey on sexual violence, more than 5 million men in the United States have been “made to penetrate” someone else in their lifetime, whether by coercion, intimidation, or because they were incapacitated. In a largely overlooked study focusing exclusively on college males, 51.2 percent of participants reported experiencing a least one incident of sexual victimization, including unwanted sexual contact (21.7 percent), sexual coercion (12.4 percent) and rape (17.1 percent). Of course, most men assume they’ll be ostracized for reporting such emasculating violations, so the real numbers are likely at lot higher.

Since that initial morning-after, Charlie tried his best to shrug off the whole thing. He was in college after all, a time when sexual encounters are habitually fleeting. But the more he replayed the story in his head, the more he realized it was actually wearing on him. “I didn’t really have the mental framework to encapsulate it as a violation at the time,” he says. “It was just a really invasive experience. All I could think was, How can I get this to end? How can I get this to end without hurting her?”

“Made to penetrate” cases are all the more complicated because of a man’s lack of autonomy over his own penis. “It was too late to tell her I wasn’t interested in having sex, because she was already having it with me,” Charlie says. “It was all so unexpected.” Just because a man gets hard doesn’t necessarily mean he’s enjoying it. As with female victims, sexual arousal can be involuntary. Even ejaculation in cases of male rape is often the result of a mechanical biological response—not a sign of hot-blooded desire.

Charlie and his abuser never spoke after the incident, and he says he spent the rest of his senior year in fear of the story getting out. He would see her whispering with her friends as they looked his way, and he grew paranoid by what she might say. “I had this worry that if anyone heard about it I would seem like a monster or a predator,” he says. “I was 20. She was 18. I was a guy. She was a girl. It was my understanding that only men can commit sex crimes, so pretty much anything would have been more believable than the truth.”

And he’s probably right. Of the 20,100 suspects arrested for forcible rape in 2010, less than 1 percent were female, a victim-perpetrator gender divide that’s all but cemented in public perception. Gender roles may have evolved in the years since Charlie’s ordeal, but our assumptions about who takes advantage of whom remain rigid, despite evidence to the contrary: A recent study of sexual violence found that women by age 18 were almost equally as likely as men to commit sexual abuse (at 48 percent and 52 percent, respectively).

It took Charlie, now a 41-year-old software developer, 15 years to start talking about what happened to him, and when he finally told a few friends their reactions went something like this: “Weird. I guess she thought you were hot.”

Reddit users, however, were more sympathetic: “Same boat as me brother,” wrote user Kuljika in response to Charlie’s confessional post. “Sleep-rape fistbump.” Forums like the often controversial Men’s Rights subreddit have become a haven for emotionally battered victims (and frustrated men in general). Like group therapy, it’s a place where they can share their stories anonymously and connect with others without feeling vulnerable. “It was really the first step towards healing for me,” says Ben, a 23-year-old male victim I spoke to who posted about his own nocturnal boner-turned-living-nightmare. “It’s good to know there are others out there.”

There are hundreds of threads dedicated to victims of female-on-male sexual abuse, many of which read like locker-room rap sessions, but with a little more empathy and advice: “Try and let go of that **** holding you back, I’m not saying it’s going to be easy,” “Good to hear that someone else has this problem” or “That’s rough. Do feel. Don’t suck it up.” Unfortunately, as with any subreddit, the conversation can get bogged down by extremists and in this case more than a few misogynists. “Some people use their experience as a crutch to hate women,” says Ben. But with few alternative resources, the Reddit community will have to do. “There’s not really another home for guys who want to talk about these things,” Charlie says. Though there are sites like MaleSurvivor.org and 1and6.org, female-on-male sexual abuse is still a marginal topic.

“It’s not like we’re infinitely powerful and women are Playdough,” says Jake. “Guys get hurt just as much. We’re just not allowed to show it.” (Corbis)
Male victims were actually excluded from the legal definition of rape until the Department of Justice updated it in 2012, 85 years after the fact. Even now, it only accounts for those men who were anally or orally raped by males. In other words, an ill-intentioned penis and a vulnerable orifice are imperative to a rape indictment. Similarly, the Oxford English Dictionary maintains that only “a man who commits rape” can be called a rapist. While quibbling over the semantics might seem petty, there are real implications, not only for victims, but also for the way statistics are influenced.

In the CDC’s national survey of sexual violence, for example, “made to penetrate” is not included as a form of rape. If it were, incidents of male rape would rise from 1 in 71 to a staggering 1 in 16 nationally (female rape is just under 1 in 5). The majority of the offenders of male victims would also be female.

The authors of the survey, which is sponsored by the Violence Against Women Act, maintain that being “made to penetrate” is a form of sexual victimization unique to males, and therefore independent of rape. As a consequence, “made to penetrate” cases seem less criminal, and certainly less provocative. In a situation like Charlie’s, the distinction appears to make sense: “Most people think of rape as a violent attempt to hurt another person. I don’t really know what was going through this girl’s head at the time, but I don’t think she was there to traumatize me. I guess she just wanted to have sex with me and assumed that’d be ok.”

Of course, for even the gentlest male sleep-rapist, “I assumed she’d be into it” doesn’t exactly fly in court. Consent reigns supreme, and to pursue a female without it is to invite culpability. In “made to penetrate” cases, the line is often far more ambiguous. Still, there are plenty of female aggressors who don’t leave much to interpretation.

“I didn’t call it rape at the time because it didn’t even occur to me that I could be raped,” says Ben, who agreed to speak with me over Skype. “All I knew was that what happened to me was not ok. It was a horrifying situation.”

Ben was sexually assaulted by an ex-girlfriend three years ago after she broke into his home in the middle of the night. Like Charlie, he woke up to his intruder sitting on top of him, his penis stiff and penetrating her.

“It was a uniquely violating experience because between morning wood and what she was doing to me, I couldn’t keep myself from getting hard,” he says. “I just felt completely helpless.”

Ben’s ex had been abusive throughout the relationship, both physically and verbally. She would often threaten suicide in order to force him to do various things, from abandoning his friends to pleasuring her. The night she broke into his house she had slashed up her legs in a fit of psychotic rage, screaming that she would kill herself if he didn’t satisfy her every wish. By morning there were bloodstains splattered across his sheets.

Just as with female victims of sexual violence, more than 1 in 4 men are abused at the hands of an intimate partner. According to the CDC, of the 5,451,000 who report having been “made to penetrate,” 45 percent were victimized by a current or former girlfriend, 45 percent by an acquaintance, and just 5 percent by a stranger. But while male abusers tend to achieve their ends through physical means, women often employ more psychological methods, like extortion: I’ll say you hit me. I’ll divorce you. I’ll kill myself. I’ll kill you.

Women also pursue their victims in situations when they’re more vulnerable, whether drunk, sleeping, sick, drugged or demoralized by psychological venom.

“When I realized what was happening I was paralyzed both mentally and physically,” Ben says. “She had convinced me that everything was my fault. That I was the one hurting her. It was awful. I just felt really alone.”

Ben’s ex also threatened to tell the authorities that he had raped her if he dared tell anyone about what had happened, a variation on an intimidation tactic commonly associated with male-on-female rape. Victims are often told, “No one will believe you.” However, only female abusers can say, “Not only won’t anyone believe you, but they’ll believe me because I am a woman. There’s proof that we had a sexual encounter, and I can use that against you.”

Even without diabolical exes to worry about, it’s pretty hard for the average American male to know how to process the mental shrapnel. Bro culture can exacerbate the feelings of denial and shame victims often experience—guys are told to man up, don’t be such a pussy, grow some balls—and in the end, they’re a lot less likely to seek help.

According to the CDC’s survey, men who have been victimized by an intimate partner experience poorer physical and mental health than those who haven’t. And recent studies of sexually victimized college males show increased instances of hostility, depression, substance abuse, sexual risk-taking behavior and its opposite, sexual dysfunction.

Jake, a 39-year-old video game developer, hasn’t had sex since he escaped a sadistic relationship two years ago. “Hell, I can’t even masturbate sometimes because I get too upset,” he wrote in a candid post on Reddit.

Like Ben, Jake’s girlfriend assaulted him verbally and physically, and she often refused to take no for an answer. “She extorted sex from me on multiple occasions and threatened to kick me out,” he says, in a conversation over Skype. “I felt really ashamed, but it wasn’t a situation that brute strength could have gotten me out of.”

Jake had also been abused as a child and had spent a lifetime trying to move past it, only to get derailed by someone he thought he could trust. Facing clinical depression and severe intimacy issues, he sought professional help, but couldn’t find a therapist who would take him at his word. “There was this overwhelming idea that because she was ‘giving me sex’ that I should be inherently grateful no matter what,” he says. “It was like people couldn’t see me as a human being who could in fact be hurt.”

Ben’s life went down hill too. He would wake up to get stoned and then drink himself to sleep, self-medicating in an effort to cope with his mounting anxiety. “The thing that really stood out to me was how little support there was and the amount of disbelief,” he says, noting that his current girlfriend was holding his hand “for moral support.” He eventually stopped bringing up the abuse altogether, even with the therapists he saw to deal the consequences. “It’s hard to speak about it openly without getting shamed,” he says.

Learning how to navigate relationships has been especially difficult. “It’s like you’ve got this siren going off that is drowning out all of your rational thoughts,” he says. “All I can hear is, Be careful, protect yourself, she’s going to hurt you.” He also has trouble performing in bed and describes sex as something like “wandering a mine field,” always wary of the negative triggers it could set off.

Though Charlie’s symptoms were less severe, he says he’s “certainly less interested in sex than most men are” and tends to react strongly towards aggressive women. Recently, when a girl grabbed his crotch underneath a table, he jumped up and left.

“It was completely involuntary,” he says. “There were probably more graceful ways I could have handled it, but my body just did what it wanted to do.”

http://www.vocativ.com/underworld/crime/hard-truth-girl-guy-rape/
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Feb, 2015 10:25 pm
@nononono,
Any guy who has not in his life gotten several unrequested and non consensual blowjobs has not lived
nononono
 
  2  
Reply Fri 6 Feb, 2015 10:31 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
Any guy who has not in his life gotten several unrequested and non consensual blowjobs has not lived


Gotta disagree with you here Hawk.

Unless you'd care to clarify that statement, what you're doing with it is reinforcing the same social attitude as people who claim that a 16 year old boy is "lucky" when his 30 year old female teacher has sex with him.

It's this stereotype of men "Always" wanting sex that feminists are using against men to not only stack the laws up against them, but also to stack public opinion against them.

Men are not walking hard-ons; walking dildos for women's enjoyment when they decide to use their female privilege to use men. For instance, I will admit myself that I rarely have a desire for sex these days.

Sorry Hawk, you're working against your own cause with a statement like that^
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Reply Sat 7 Feb, 2015 10:08 am
GOP Lawmaker Emphasizes Rape’s Silver Lining

by Tara Culp-Ressler Posted on February 6, 2015 at 9:19 am
7,313Share This 619Tweet This

"GOP Lawmaker Emphasizes Rape’s Silver Lining"


CREDIT: brianforwv.com

Another Republican lawmaker has waded into the debate over abortion access for rape victims, saying that abortion bans shouldn’t have exceptions for women who became pregnant from sexual assault because “what is beautiful is the child that could come from this.”

West Virginia Del. Brian Kurcaba (R) made the comments — which were first reported by Charleston Gazette staffer David Gutman — during a public hearing on Thursday. A health committee in the legislature was debating a proposed 20-week abortion ban. Kurcaba was explaining why he opposed a Democratic-sponsored amendment to add an exception for rape victims.

“Obviously rape is awful,” Kurcaba said. “What is beautiful is the child that could come from this.”

Kurbaca’s statement echoes other controversial comments from GOP politicians along the same lines. In 2012, Indiana GOP Senate candidate Richard Mourdock said that abortion bills should not include rape exceptions because pregnancies resulting from rape are a “gift from God.” Mourdock lost his election, as did several other Republicans who waded into the issue of sexual assault and abortion access during their campaigns that year.

Since then, political consultants have attempted to train GOP lawmakers about how to more sensitively talk about rape. In 2013, the National Republican Congressional Committee sat down with candidates to coach them about what to avoid, especially in races against female opponents.

Nonetheless, it’s continued to be a sticking point for the party. This controversy recently played out on the national stage when the U.S. House of Representatives split over the rape exception included in their own version of a 20-week abortion ban.

Last month, the House hoped to approve a 20-week ban on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade. That measure included a narrow exception for rape victims that required them to report their assault to the police, even though the majority of rapes are not officially reported. Several female congresswomen raised concerns about the language of the rape provision, and House leaders ended up canceling the vote at the last minute. The thousands of abortion opponents who traveled to the nation’s capital for the annual March for Life — many of whom favor abortion restrictions without any type of rape exception — were upset about the retreat.

West Virginia lawmakers didn’t back down in the same way. On Thursday, the House Health Committee ended up approving the 20-week abortion ban and rejecting the amendment that would have added a rape exception. The proposed bill does include some exceptions for fatal fetal defects and health emergencies.

The abortion ban currently advancing in West Virginia is very similar to a bill that was vetoed by Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin (D) last year. At the time, the governor — who has a record of opposing abortion — said he couldn’t approve the measure because of concerns that it violates Roe v. Wade. Although he has indicated he will make the same decision again this year, the legislature now has enough Republicans to potentially override his veto.

Social workers, medical groups, doctors, and the American Civil Liberties Union spoke out against the proposed 20-week ban on Thursday. They said it’s unconstitutional, and goes too far to interfere into the doctor-patient relationship.

In addition to West Virginia, two other states — Virginia and South Carolina — have introduced 20-week abortion bans this session. This type of restriction, which is typically based on the scientifically inaccurate theory that fetuses can feel pain after 20 weeks, has been very successful on the state level. Later abortion bans became particularly prevalent in 2013, when ten states moved to enact 20-week bans, and are currently on the books in 14 different states.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Feb, 2015 12:08 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
Quote:
“Obviously rape is awful,” Kurcaba said. “What is beautiful is the child that could come from this.”

rape victims often say this. Where is the problem?

And the rest of the story had nothing to do with the quote, it is very poor journalism.
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Sat 7 Feb, 2015 12:48 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
rape victims often say this. Where is the problem?

The general problem is the Republican move to continually try to limit access to abortion, and to limit women's control over their own bodies and health care options.

Rape victims may well not want to give birth to a child that results from rape, and may seek to terminate the pregnancy. Bills that seek to impose more restrictive abortion bans, without providing exceptions for rape victims, are further attempts to try to force these women to bear the alleged "beautiful child" that might result from rape, whether it is wanted by them or not.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sat 7 Feb, 2015 12:50 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
The general problem is the Republican move to continually try to limit access to abortion.


Medical abortion no longer has a purpose, we should do away with it. Abortions should be done by pill, which the R's have not put any limits on so far as I know. If someone is raped then they should take a morning after pill, as standard procedure. If the rape victim has a baby growing inside of them it is their own fault.
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Feb, 2015 01:07 pm
@hawkeye10,
The issue of which type of abortion to opt for is between a woman and her doctor--the pill is not a suitable alternative for some women.

Why would you think the Republicans wouldn't put limits on use of the pill--their primary objection is to abortion, and to a woman's right to opt for abortion.
Quote:
If someone is raped then they should take a morning after pill, as standard procedure. If the rape victim has a baby growing inside of them it is their own fault.

No, the impregnation is the fault of the rapist, and how a woman chooses to address the possibility of a pregnancy, or the actuality of a pregnancy, after a rape, should be entirely her choice--it's her body.
hawkeye10
 
  3  
Reply Sat 7 Feb, 2015 01:19 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
the pill is not a suitable alternative for some women

says who? There are several types, if a person should not use one then they have others.

Quote:
The issue of which type of abortion to opt for is between a woman and her doctor
And the doctors have in their toolbox only approved drugs. THey also only have approved procedures. If delivering a fetus and letting it die is not available then they will have to use something else, as they mostly already do.
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Feb, 2015 01:28 pm
West Virginia GOP Bros Invent New Kind Of Rape: The ‘Legal’ Kind
(some of the comments after are brilliant)

West Virginia GOP Bros Invent New Kind Of Rape: The ‘Legal’ Kind


http://img.wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Todd-Akin-Reproductive-System1.jpg


Amirite fellas?

Oh, gee, is it that time of year again already? The time of year when some Republican dude opens his vomit-hole and spews some terrible words about rape? Let’s check our calendar:

http://img.wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Screen-Shot-2015-02-06-at-12.59.08-PM.png
Aw, that’s nice. Rape is awful, obvs, but rape babies are soooo the best, so let’s ban abortion in West Virginia:

The West Virginia House of Delegates began moving a bill Thursday to ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. The bill is very similar to one that was passed last year, only to be vetoed by Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin.

The bill is one of 11 introduced so far this legislative session that seek to restrict women’s access to abortion.

Do the Republican menfolk in the West Virginia House of Delegates have any other terrific fresh thoughts on rape? Sure they do, according to Charleston Gazette reporter David Gutman:

image:http://img.wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Screen-Shot-2015-02-06-at-12.44.20-PM.png


We are well-versed in the various kinds of rape Republican dudes have invented in the tiny clump of cells that are their brains: legitimate rape, honest rape, easy rape, forcible rape, gift-from-God rape, “Is it really rape if it’s your wife?” rape, et cetera and UGH.

However, “legal rape”? Pretty sure that’s a new one. Maybe Del. Matthew Rohrbach is thinking of the term “statutory rape” — which is still illegal, by the way, in case you didn’t know. But given that these insights were offered by Republican men during a hearing to justify making it Not Legal for ladies to have abortions if they are more than one second into puberty, we are not going to give Rohrbach the benefit of the doubt whatsoever, sorry, nope.

Oh, is there even more terrible that came out of this hearing? Why yes, there is, because Republican dudes were talking about rape and abortion and lady health care, so of course.

. . . .

Read more at http://wonkette.com/575361/west-virginia-gop-bros-invent-new-kind-of-rape-the-legal-kind#ucHaFiv3tWhkwPyj.99
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Sat 7 Feb, 2015 01:34 pm
@hawkeye10,
When you become pregnant, with an unwanted pregnancy, you'll be free to opt for any method of termination that you feel is the best for you. Wink

A woman's health care choices regarding abortion are her private business, to be decided upon by her and her physician, and not by you.

 

Related Topics

HOW COME . . . - Question by Setanta
Men who defend feminism? - Question by whatthefudge
Teach Men Not To Rape? - Question by nononono
Does every woman have her price...? - Question by nononono
Men Are Bad, Baaaaaaaaaaad. - Question by nononono
Misogyny - Discussion by chai2
Elliot Rodger - Question by FOUND SOUL
Best Looking Team at the Olympics? - Discussion by hawkeye10
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.1 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 08:10:44