Rape Rampant In US Military

Post Reply
User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 74295
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Rape Rampant In US Military

Post by JimC » Thu Dec 23, 2010 9:21 am

Charlou wrote:In this instance, it's kinda more about being pro discussing and aiming to resolve a serious human rights abuse issue wherever there is one. There are often threads about human rights abuses that go on in other cultures ... the application of sharia law, for example ... but no-one here takes those personally. If there's a problem with rape in the US military then it should be raised and discussed. The fact that it happens elsewhere doesn't detract from the importance of discussing it in this case.
Absolutely agreed, and that would go for the Aussie military as well...

However, the OP was raised with an unstated implication that rape within US military forces was:

a) abnormally high, and that this was:

b) symptomatic of a generalised US malaise of some kind...

which requires data of the right kind to answer
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

Meekychuppet
Seriously, what happened?
Posts: 4193
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 8:19 pm
Contact:

Re: Rape Rampant In US Military

Post by Meekychuppet » Thu Dec 23, 2010 9:50 am

sandinista wrote:
GreyICE wrote:Wooooowwwww. This is one of the best jobs at lying through artistic quoting I've ever seen in my life.
haha, artistic quoting? You flatter me, in reality I just grabbed a few paragraphs instead of posting the entire article, that's why I posted the link.
Meekychuppet wrote:
sandinista wrote:
Ian wrote:Yawn. Compare the numbers to a cross-section of college campuses and get back to us.
go for it. Not surprised that a story of rampant rape gets a "yawn" from Ian. Not surprised at all.
It gave me a boner.
I think you're joking, unfortunately I don't think ian was.
I think his point is that if there is no difference then the OP should read 'US military has same rape problem as the rest of the world'. Attacking the military undermines the problem and only adds to your portfolio of America-bashing-for-the-sake-of-bashing-America rhetoric. You are insulting a great number of rape victims by framing a global problem in a military only context.
Rum wrote:Does it occur to you that you have subscribed to the model of maleness you seem to be pushing in order to justify your innately hostile and aggressive nature? I have noticed it often and even wondered if it might be some sort of personality disorder. You should consider this possibility.

Rum wrote:Did I leave out being a twat? (With ref to your sig)
Things Rum has diagnosed me with to date: "personality disorder", autism, Aspergers.
eRvin wrote:People can see what a fucking freak you are. Have you not noticed all the disparaging comments you get?
rum wrote:What a cunt you are. Truly.

User avatar
Blondie
Forum Desperado
Posts: 1196
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 3:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Rape Rampant In US Military

Post by Blondie » Thu Dec 23, 2010 10:06 am

Gallstones wrote:
Anthroban wrote: Is it rape if he gets off on it?
Especially.
You are just being a shit.
How would his enjoying being raped make it somehow 'more' of a rape? There are some sickos out there with rape fetishes. I think the act of initiating sexual activity with someone prior to their giving consent does not make it rape then and there. It becomes classified as rape later, post facto as it were, dependent upon how the person 'raped' feels about it.

So, no. I'm not being a shit.
In this world there's two kinds of people: Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig.

When you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk.

Happy Trails. :)

Meekychuppet
Seriously, what happened?
Posts: 4193
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 8:19 pm
Contact:

Re: Rape Rampant In US Military

Post by Meekychuppet » Thu Dec 23, 2010 10:08 am

Anthroban wrote:
Gallstones wrote:
Anthroban wrote: Is it rape if he gets off on it?
Especially.
You are just being a shit.
How would his enjoying being raped make it somehow 'more' of a rape? There are some sickos out there with rape fetishes. I think the act of initiating sexual activity with someone prior to their giving consent does not make it rape then and there. It becomes classified as rape later, post facto as it were, dependent upon how the person 'raped' feels about it.

So, no. I'm not being a shit.
Don't forget surprise sex. That's a factor
Rum wrote:Does it occur to you that you have subscribed to the model of maleness you seem to be pushing in order to justify your innately hostile and aggressive nature? I have noticed it often and even wondered if it might be some sort of personality disorder. You should consider this possibility.

Rum wrote:Did I leave out being a twat? (With ref to your sig)
Things Rum has diagnosed me with to date: "personality disorder", autism, Aspergers.
eRvin wrote:People can see what a fucking freak you are. Have you not noticed all the disparaging comments you get?
rum wrote:What a cunt you are. Truly.

User avatar
GreyICE
Account Suspended at Member's Request
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 10:27 pm

Re: Rape Rampant In US Military

Post by GreyICE » Thu Dec 23, 2010 2:34 pm

Coito ergo sum wrote:If they are sources that have a clear bias against the middle eastern country in question, then sure, I'll disregard it.

I also will disregard any article that says something is "rampant" and then proceeds to cite ZERO statistics to show that anything is "rampant." If the claim is that rape is rampant, there would be statistics, not just anecdotal examples, of the rampant-ness.
It is a fairly big problem in the military, and the US military acknowledges this, and is taking steps to reduce the occurrences. The report cited, although positive about the future, was pretty clear that it's not great at the moment. Frankly, I'd prefer it if the military was doing a lot better than a college campus.

I mean did anyone else besides me actually read the OP?
Gallstones, I believe you know how to contact me. The rest of you? I could not possibly even care.

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Rape Rampant In US Military

Post by Coito ergo sum » Thu Dec 23, 2010 4:18 pm

Charlou wrote: I certainly don't believe it's unique to the US and I don't think shining a light on this aspect of it negates the importance of addressing any other, similar abuses elsewhere, but one does wonder about the institutionalised culture behind it in a so-called civilised western country ...
...if indeed there is an institutionalized culture behind it, which has not yet been established.

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Rape Rampant In US Military

Post by Coito ergo sum » Thu Dec 23, 2010 4:30 pm

GreyICE wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote:If they are sources that have a clear bias against the middle eastern country in question, then sure, I'll disregard it.

I also will disregard any article that says something is "rampant" and then proceeds to cite ZERO statistics to show that anything is "rampant." If the claim is that rape is rampant, there would be statistics, not just anecdotal examples, of the rampant-ness.
It is a fairly big problem in the military, and the US military acknowledges this, and is taking steps to reduce the occurrences. The report cited, although positive about the future, was pretty clear that it's not great at the moment. Frankly, I'd prefer it if the military was doing a lot better than a college campus.

I mean did anyone else besides me actually read the OP?
Rape is a big problem everywhere, and steps should be taken everywhere to reduce its occurrence. There has been no showing, however, that for some reason it is worse in the military than anywhere else.

There was no "report" cited. There was what amounted to an opinion piece without evidence. The only thing we can conclude from the report is that crimes in the military occur, and some of those crimes are rapes. From the only stat in the article about how many rapes occurred, it doesn't demonstrate that anything is "rampant" (I take it from the context that what is meant is "rife; widespread; unrestrained").

Yes - I read the whole article carefully, which is why I can say unequivocally that the article was poorly substantiated and provides insufficient proof to support its assertions. It was also written by a guy who routinely writes hatchet-job pieces because he has a hard-on for bashing the U.S., and it's not surprising it would be picked up by zcommunications, which is openly anti-American.

So, while I think all instances of rape should be prosecuted, IMHO the article merely cites inflammatory anecdotes to sully the American military as some sort of a craven, lascivious, violent bunch of sex maniacs and everyone from the generals on down to the JAG attorneys laugh off the plight of rape victims while twirling their mustaches. I think such assertions, however, should require a modicum of evidence.

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Rape Rampant In US Military

Post by Coito ergo sum » Thu Dec 23, 2010 4:39 pm

sandinista wrote:
maiforpeace wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote:More stats?

Canada is fifth in the world in rapes: 0.733089 per 1,000 people, which is more than twice as many per thousand as occur in the United States 0.301318 per 1,000 people. http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_r ... per-capita

So, Sandy and the rest of the Canucks have some 'splainin' to do....you need to cut down on the "rampant" rape up there in the Great White North.
Oops. :hehe:
...but again, because rape is happening elsewhere doesn't make it more acceptable.
Nobody said it did. It also doesn't make it "rampant" in the military, or worse in the military than anywhere else.

User avatar
sandinista
Posts: 2546
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 9:15 pm
About me: It’s a plot, but busta can you tell me who’s greedier?
Big corporations, the pigs or the media?
Contact:

Re: Rape Rampant In US Military

Post by sandinista » Thu Dec 23, 2010 6:30 pm

Meekychuppet wrote:
sandinista wrote:
GreyICE wrote:Wooooowwwww. This is one of the best jobs at lying through artistic quoting I've ever seen in my life.
haha, artistic quoting? You flatter me, in reality I just grabbed a few paragraphs instead of posting the entire article, that's why I posted the link.
Meekychuppet wrote:
sandinista wrote:
Ian wrote:Yawn. Compare the numbers to a cross-section of college campuses and get back to us.
go for it. Not surprised that a story of rampant rape gets a "yawn" from Ian. Not surprised at all.
It gave me a boner.
I think you're joking, unfortunately I don't think ian was.
I think his point is that if there is no difference then the OP should read 'US military has same rape problem as the rest of the world'. Attacking the military undermines the problem and only adds to your portfolio of America-bashing-for-the-sake-of-bashing-America rhetoric. You are insulting a great number of rape victims by framing a global problem in a military only context.
The US military doesn't have the same problem as the rest of the world. What other workplace is like that described in the OP? Attacking the military does not "undermine" the problem. :funny: Insulting rape victims, what a whole slew of bullshit packed into two lines :o
Our struggle is not against actual corrupt individuals, but against those in power in general, against their authority, against the global order and the ideological mystification which sustains it.

User avatar
Gallstones
Supreme Absolute And Exclusive Ruler Of The World
Posts: 8888
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:56 am
About me: A fleck on a flake on a speck.

Re: Rape Rampant In US Military

Post by Gallstones » Thu Dec 23, 2010 6:35 pm

Anthroban wrote:
Gallstones wrote:
Anthroban wrote: Is it rape if he gets off on it?
Especially.
You are just being a shit.
How would his enjoying being raped make it somehow 'more' of a rape? There are some sickos out there with rape fetishes. I think the act of initiating sexual activity with someone prior to their giving consent does not make it rape then and there. It becomes classified as rape later, post facto as it were, dependent upon how the person 'raped' feels about it.

So, no. I'm not being a shit.
Wow.

Playing rape fantasy when all parties consent and know what they are doing is quite a different circumstance to being violently assaulted.
But here’s the thing about rights. They’re not actually supposed to be voted on. That’s why they’re called rights. ~Rachel Maddow August 2010

The Second Amendment forms a fourth branch of government (an armed citizenry) in case the government goes mad. ~Larry Nutter

User avatar
sandinista
Posts: 2546
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 9:15 pm
About me: It’s a plot, but busta can you tell me who’s greedier?
Big corporations, the pigs or the media?
Contact:

Re: Rape Rampant In US Military

Post by sandinista » Thu Dec 23, 2010 6:39 pm

Part two of the report:

quoted in full so I'm not accused of "artistic quoting" :lol:
Military sexual abuse 'staggering'

Every year, rape increases at an alarming rate within American military institutions – and even males are victims of the cycle.

In fact, due to raw demographics, one can roughly surmise that most victims of sexual abuse in the military are male.

Regardless of gender, reports of victims of military sexual assault have been increasing. In 2007, there were 2,200 reports of rape in the military, whilst in 2009 saw an increase up to 3,230 reports of sexual assault.

Many of the victims suffer from Military Sexual Trauma (MST) and are shamed into silence, with numerous cases not even reported.

A disturbing trend, however, is how military officials seem to be sweeping this damaging issue under the rug and deflecting blame.

Blaming the Victim

Kira Mountjoy-Pepka of Pack Parachute, a non-profit organisation which assists sexually abused veterans, explains that the military system favours the perpetrator. "What we're seeing now, and what we’ve seen for decades, is when someone is assaulted, the military investigators create false or misleading crime reports. Then the case is dismissed, and the command persecutes the victim for false reporting."

She cites the Feres Doctrine (Feres v. United States, 340 US 135 [1950]) that made it impossible for the survivor to sue the investigators since it, "essentially prohibits people from suing the military and/or petitioning any non-military legal authority for interdiction without the military’s prior and explicit agreement and consent."

"If you're a victim and you report this crime and the military mishandles the investigation, you can't sue them," she explains, "I feel if this were taken up by Congress as an issue it would be exposed that the military is operating against the Constitution by denying victims their first amendment rights. The military always has their own investigators investigate [these cases], and that doesn’t seem like justice to me."

The military goes to great lengths to protect the perpetrators, and that deters survivors from reporting. The incidences of sexual trauma in the military are staggering.

The Department of Defence claims to have a zero-tolerance policy towards sexual assault in the ranks, but figures indicate otherwise.

According to the US Department of Veterans Affairs, the rate of sexual assault on women in the military is twice that in the civilian population. A Government Accountability Office report concluded that most victims stay silent because of "the belief that nothing would be done; fear of ostracism, harassment, or ridicule and concern that peers would gossip."

While a civilian rape victim is ensured confidential advice from his or her doctors, lawyers and advocates, the only access a military rape survivor has is to a chaplain.

Compared with a 40 per cent arrest rate for sex crimes among civilians, only eight per cent of investigated cases in the military lead to prosecution.

After Congress mandated it do so in 2006, the Pentagon started a comprehensive programme to track incidents. That year, there were 2,974 reported cases of rape and sexual assault in the military. Of these, only 292 cases resulted in trials, and those netted only 181 prosecutions of perpetrators.

Nearly half the cases are dismissed for lack of adequate proof or due to the death of the victim. Less than 11 per cent of the cases result in a court martial. Often, those prosecuted merely suffer a reduction in rank or pay, and 80 per cent receive an honourable discharge nonetheless.

The victim, on the other hand, risks ending his or her career when they file charges.

Signed, the commander

Faced with the threat of possible persecution and losing their jobs and professional credibility, most soldiers prefer to remain silent about their traumas. Not that silence helps, because records reveal that less than one-third of the women have been able to maintain their careers in the military after having been assaulted.

When presented with these dismal statistics in an interview with ABC News last year, former Principal Undersecretary of Defence for Personnel and Readiness, Michael Dominguez said, "Yes, we absolutely have to get better. Secretary [Robert] Gates himself is driving this initiative this year to improve our ability to investigate, to prosecute and convict. This is not where we want to be."

Dominguez’s replacement, Clifford Stanley, issued a Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2010-12 on December 30, 2009. It addresses the need to "Establish a culture free of sexual assault", and puts forth goals of 90 per cent "awareness" and 80 per cent "confidence" in the sexual assault prevention and response program by the end of 2015, with no specific mention of the means to accomplish these goals.

Those plans do not fill Susan Avila Smith with confidence. She is director of the advocacy group Women Organising for Women and she projects a dismal picture.

"The people I work with go all the way back to WWII. The stories are almost exactly the same. It has always been covered up. Still the drill sergeants, chaplains, and doctors appear to be the worst perpetrators. So when these guys are convicted, rather than punishing to the fullest extent, they can give them a letter of reprimand which means Tommy was bad, signed The Commander. That letter comes out of his personnel file before he moves on to the next unit, so it’s like nothing happened."

Military 'aware' of the crisis

Pentagon spokesperson Cynthia Smith assured Al Jazeera, "We understand this is very important for everyone to get involved in preventing sexual assault, and are calling on everyone to get involved, step in, and watch each others’ backs. We understand that one sexual assault is too many in the Department of Defence (DOD). We have an office working on prevention and response"

The office she alludes to is the Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office (SAPRO), which is responsible for the oversight of the DOD’s sexual assault policy.

In 2008 Kaye Whitley, Director of SAPRO, was subpoenaed to testify at a hearing of the Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs but was ordered by the military not to do so.

At a second oversight hearing she did appear and confessed to the members of Congress, "I was given a direct order by my supervisor to get back in the van and go back," she said.

At an MST Congressional hearing on February 3, 2010, highlighted was what many see as the problem – the military investigating itself for criminal acts of sexual assault and rape committed by its personnel, as well as the naming of Task Force members and the work of the Task Force being delayed for three years.

Due largely to Mountjoy-Pepka’s work in the wake of her experiencing MST and taking action, in October 2005 then-Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld authorised the DOD Task Force on Sexual Assault in the military.

However, the DOD took three years to name the Task Force, and the group's initial meeting did not occur until August 2008. During that period, 6,000 service women and men were sexually assaulted or raped.

This same Task Force told Congress’s Military Personnel Subcommittee that, "DOD’s procedures for collecting and documenting data about military sexual assault incidents are lacking in accuracy, reliability, and validity."

Task Force leaders also told Congress that "neither victims nor other military personnel were routinely informed of the results of disciplinary actions relating to sexual assault", and "Commanders generally did not communicate case results to members of their command, and that this lack of information often led to misperceptions, rumours, and assumptions that allegations were unfounded."

Fighting back

Anuradha Bhagwati, the executive director of Service Women’s Action Network (SWAN), a group that helps military women who have been victims of sexual violence, contradicts claims by the DOD that their new programs will slow the number of MST victims. "We are seeing a disturbingly steady flow," Bhagwati said .

In addition, she told Al Jazeera, "Contrary to DOD claims that they are making it easier for MST survivors to get help, MST survivors have a much more difficult time than other vets because of the burden of proof being on them. There are concrete legal barriers in place that prevent MST survivors from getting help."

The DOD defends the policy, saying it ensures that soldiers get retained, promoted and their careers aren't destroyed.

SWAN has draft legislation in place to get rid of this policy.

Bhagwati concludes that nothing short of "radical systemic change" will solve the MST crisis in the military today.

Susan Burke is an experienced litigator in Washington, DC who served as lead counsel in five actions brought on behalf of the torture victims at Abu Ghraib prison, as well as a suit against Blackwater for killing 17 Iraqis in Baghdad.

She urges us to think of MST this way: "Think of the victims - it is a double blow - first they're physically assaulted, then the institution that is supposed to care for them does not care for them."

She claims that the DOD has done little more than give lip-service to tackle the problem. "They created different positions, SARC, SAPRO, but the problem is that there is no genuine political will to change things. It's a paper tiger…the will doesn’t exist. When you look at the career paths of perpetrators compared to the victims, the former are rising up the ranks, and the victims are leaving the military."

She is putting together a class action suit against the DOD for failure to protect service-members from MST, aims to file it in February, and hopes the case will bring significant and lasting reform in the DOD’s stance on MST.

They’ve been saying for years that they just need more time, that they’re getting their act together," Burke adds, "You can’t expect to have a properly functioning military without discipline problems being addressed, and if you can’t address rape, you have a real problem."

This is the second part of an Al Jazeera investigation into sexual abuse in the US military.
Timeline

1995: Archives of Family Medicine revealed that 90 per cent of women veterans from the 1991 US attack on Iraq and from earlier wars had been sexually harassed.

2003: American Journal of Industrial Medicine surveyed women veterans from Vietnam to the 1991 Iraq attack and found that 30 percent of them had been raped.

2004: According to a study published by the Journal of Military Medicine, of veterans from Vietnam and all wars since, 71 per cent of women soldiers have been sexually assaulted or raped while serving.

2007: The Miles Foundation, a private nonprofit organisation that provides support to victims of sexual assault in the military, received 976 reports of sexual assault in the Central Command Area of Responsibility, which includes Iraq and Afghanistan.

Christine Hansen, executive director of the foundation, said at the time that there was a steady upward trend in the number of reported cases of sexual assault, of 10 to 15 per cent each quarter.

2008: The Pentagon reported nearly 3,000 cases of women assaulted sexually in Fiscal Year 2008, an increase of 9 percent from 2007. For women serving in Iraq and Afghanistan, the increase was 25 percent.

2009: The annual report on sexual assaults states, “In FY 09, there were a total of 3,230 reports of sexual assault involving military Service members as either victims or subjects, representing an 11% increase from FY 08.”

2009: Admission by the Pentagon that approximately 80 per cent of rapes are never reported - making it the most under-documented crime in the military.
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/20 ... 71112.html
Our struggle is not against actual corrupt individuals, but against those in power in general, against their authority, against the global order and the ideological mystification which sustains it.

User avatar
Blondie
Forum Desperado
Posts: 1196
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 3:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Rape Rampant In US Military

Post by Blondie » Thu Dec 23, 2010 7:27 pm

Gallstones wrote:
Anthroban wrote:
Gallstones wrote:
Anthroban wrote: Is it rape if he gets off on it?
Especially.
You are just being a shit.
How would his enjoying being raped make it somehow 'more' of a rape? There are some sickos out there with rape fetishes. I think the act of initiating sexual activity with someone prior to their giving consent does not make it rape then and there. It becomes classified as rape later, post facto as it were, dependent upon how the person 'raped' feels about it.

So, no. I'm not being a shit.
Wow.

Playing rape fantasy when all parties consent and know what they are doing is quite a different circumstance to being violently assaulted.
That's not what I meant, or the point I was getting at. I know you're a smart cookie Gallstones, don't play lame duck with me. :P
In this world there's two kinds of people: Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig.

When you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk.

Happy Trails. :)

User avatar
GreyICE
Account Suspended at Member's Request
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 10:27 pm

Re: Rape Rampant In US Military

Post by GreyICE » Thu Dec 23, 2010 10:15 pm

I think the point she was getting at, Anthroban, is that rape is by definition non-consensual sex, or sex where one party is incapable of giving informed consent.

Everything after that is kinda just fucking noise. Unfortunately, most often given by people who say "it wasn't 'rape rape'" with finger quotes.
Gallstones, I believe you know how to contact me. The rest of you? I could not possibly even care.

User avatar
Blondie
Forum Desperado
Posts: 1196
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 3:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Rape Rampant In US Military

Post by Blondie » Thu Dec 23, 2010 11:38 pm

GreyICE wrote:I think the point she was getting at, Anthroban, is that rape is by definition non-consensual sex, or sex where one party is incapable of giving informed consent.

Everything after that is kinda just fucking noise. Unfortunately, most often given by people who say "it wasn't 'rape rape'" with finger quotes.
Everything you just wrote is just noise and fails to address what I was saying in the same way Gallstones said did, however I'm not so sure you're a smart cookie.

The point was it is more complex than "sex without consent". Some people get off on the idea, if not the act, of being "raped" - that is having sex forced upon them without their consent. The issue is when it becomes rape, don't give me that argumentum ad dictionary bullshit. Definitions are descriptive not prescriptive and not at all definite.

If such a person had sex forced upon them without their consent it is not rape, it is their fetish played out.

User avatar
Gallstones
Supreme Absolute And Exclusive Ruler Of The World
Posts: 8888
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:56 am
About me: A fleck on a flake on a speck.

Re: Rape Rampant In US Military

Post by Gallstones » Fri Dec 24, 2010 2:19 am

Anthroban wrote:
GreyICE wrote:I think the point she was getting at, Anthroban, is that rape is by definition non-consensual sex, or sex where one party is incapable of giving informed consent.

Everything after that is kinda just fucking noise. Unfortunately, most often given by people who say "it wasn't 'rape rape'" with finger quotes.
Everything you just wrote is just noise and fails to address what I was saying in the same way Gallstones said did, however I'm not so sure you're a smart cookie.

The point was it is more complex than "sex without consent". Some people get off on the idea, if not the act, of being "raped" - that is having sex forced upon them without their consent. The issue is when it becomes rape, don't give me that argumentum ad dictionary bullshit. Definitions are descriptive not prescriptive and not at all definite.

If such a person had sex forced upon them without their consent it is not rape, it is their fetish played out.
If one is taking the active, as opposed to the inadvertent passive role, seems one is taking quite a risk of being charged as a violent sex offender. Because, having made an error in judgment, one would be a violent sex offender in that instance.

As long as it remains just an idea, then there is no rape and no sex either.

Using me as a test subject for that kind of game though, might get you dead.
But here’s the thing about rights. They’re not actually supposed to be voted on. That’s why they’re called rights. ~Rachel Maddow August 2010

The Second Amendment forms a fourth branch of government (an armed citizenry) in case the government goes mad. ~Larry Nutter

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests