You had to know that this thread was going to generate some discussion, right? Most of it not pretty.
Dude, just because you *can’t imagine * something does NOT mean that people are exaggerating the circumstances or calling something rape when it isn’t.
I have to ask—are you serious? 'Cause I can’t imagine that anyone who had been here for any length of time would pose that as a legitimate question.
Good lord. What a fucking troll.
Lordy, it’s former Senator Jesse Helms (Republican, North Carolina) all over again. He argued that rape was an unlikely possibility ever because if a woman wasn’t into it, her juices wouldn’t flow and penetration would be problematic.
Likely Jesse was calling upon his own experiences.
I thought that rape was a crime of violence and not sexual. I could be wrong but I think there are many different ways to rape someone other than just a man penetrating a woman against her will.
This could not have been a serious general question. This screams troll to me.
Is it wrong to wonder though? I know he seemed to be denying it, but I don’t deny it, just wonder why a guy would do it if there is no lubrication. It may be painful to the woman with all the friction, but it is pretty painful for the guy too. I have memories of my first and second time I have ever had sex and I bled because I wasn’t doing it right and she had no “flow.”
Sometimes juices flow because of terror. The processes that create pussy juice don’t know the difference between arousal due to fight-or-flight response and arousal due to sexual anticipation.
Take this scenario: your heart beats faster, you flush, your breath shortens, some of your muscles are tense but maybe you feel weak in the knees, your mouth waters or goes dry, you’re shaking. Now, are you frightened or filled with desire?
I’d like to know about the “aftermarket” lube products. Where the hell is VCO3 shopping?
Well, I can’t think of any acts of rape that don’t involve some sort of sexual act. It’s a crime of violence, to be sure, but it’s a crime of sexual violence.
While I’m not defending VCO3, I am a little surprised that the mods closed that before it had a chance to go to pieces. I mean, the usual policy is to wait until after it goes to pieces, right?
The thread stayed open nine whole minutes. Good modding, Rico. **VCO3 ** has posted some amazingly jerkish stuff in the past, but this one leaves me shaking my head. Is he the most ignorant asshole I’ve ever seen, or simply a troll?
And Epimetheus, do you think that female lubrication is stimulated entirely by desire, and not at all, in any cases, by physical manipulation? Would it be unimaginable that a rapist might bring some lube along with his knife or gun?
Pep Boys or Auto Zone.
What purpose would that serve?
A new low. Why am I not surprised.
Well, in GQ things are a bit different. Besides, there is a one word answer to his question : Yes.
Fighting ignorance here:
A woman can get wet without being even a tiny bit aroused, is that clear enough? Her body will naturally lubricate but her mind can be totally uninvolved with the situation. This is why a lot of women can get into sex and enjoy it, etc., but don’t come just from the sex itself, and from this stems a lot of the guilt about rape, i.e., “I was wet so I must have enjoyed it, what a terrible person I am.” Nuh-uh. That’s just a natural reaction and doesn’t necessarily correlate to enjoying it.
That there are men (and women) in the year 2007 who don’t know this frightens me a little. As for raping a woman when she’s dry, I don’t see a damn thing preventing it - it’s happened throughout the centuries and continues even now.
I wonder if VCO3 has ever heard of a substance doctors call “blood”?
Ooooh lordy… The horses are through the gate now. FTR, I dont think he was trolling, just naive. Also, his mentioning of the dryness issue has crossed my mind at least from time to time.
As a matter of fact, reading through this thread, I think I am going to have to do the following for the first time ever for me on the boards:
Cite?
To teach VCO3 a less…oh. Nevermind.
It is a crime of violence, and it is sexual.
IMO, the “rape is about power, not sex” thing was introduced and strongly defended by many people in order to get others past the idea – at one time common – that a man who raped a woman did so because he was so horny that he just couldn’t help himself. The old view was that a man needs sex and it’s up to the woman to stop him; a man didn’t rape a woman to hurt her, he raped her because he just HAD to get some.
By shifting the public’s view of rape to one that understood it as a violent attack rather than some sort of natural consequence for sexual behavior, it helped remove the stigma of rape from the victim. BUT, it also caused people to lose sight of the fact that rape IS a sexual attack, not “just” a violent one.