Um…[sub]what exactly is teabagging?[/sub]
I have the oddest picture of the Boston Tea Party in my head right now…*
*rigby, completely aware she has lost any street cred she may have managed to acquire.
Hypothetical situation: I’m passed out drunk the couch at a party. Someone comes up, lifts up my shirt, and videotapes it with the point of humiliating me in the future, that’s not sexual assault?
Regardless, I have a real problem with sexual assault being defined as resulting in sexual gratification. Rape, molestation, etc. is often not about the gratification resulting from the act, but the gratification of wielding power over another individual.
Note to self–read the link. Read the link. If I had read the link, my unhip-ness would never have become apparent. Gah.
And this guy seems like a real laugh riot. Is he emotionally stunted? Or just developementally delayed? (with apologies to all DDs who are decent, kind and caring folk)
I don’t know why everyone is so hung up on whether it’s a crime and, if so, what crime. There are lots of actions that are completely reprehensible and inexcusable even if not crossing the line into criminal. This would be an excellent example of that.
eleanorigby, “teabagging” is defined in the linked post in the OP.
Touching someone with one’s scrotum, usually when they’re asleep or otherwise unsuspecting. It’s often photographed or videotaped for future hilarity.
Under common usage of the term, it likely is, but depending on your jurisdiction it may or may not be a crime.
<shrugs> Talk to your local legislature, then.
**ER[/]b, your post wasn’t there when I posted! 
Ooh, I would love to be on that jury. “Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, when my client stuck his balls into the mouth of an unconscious woman, he did it to humiliate her, not to gratify himself sexually! You must set him free!” Yeah, uh huh, enjoy prison.
Personally I’d say he was guilty of rape in the 1st degree, assuming that “deviate sexual intercourse” is legally a subset of “sexual intercourse.”
Meanwhile, I’m trying to decide whether to be equally appalled at the rapist and the witness or if the witness, who stood by and did nothing, is somehow even scummier. It’s a tough call.
Even if not defined as “sexual contact”, I’m fairly certain that it qualifies as *assault * pretty much everywhere.
Yeah, it just occurred to me that I misspoke there. It can almost certainly be fit into some category of crime, but it may or may not be sexual assault.
The linked post states he placed his scrotum on the woman’s mouth, not in it. And “deviate sexual intercourse” still requires that it be an “act of sexual gratification”. I don’t think most ordinary people would consider teabagging, especially under the described circumstances, to be such. But if a prosecutor did decide that it was “deviate sexual intercourse”, then the charge would be “sodomy in the first degree”, not rape.
It is definitely assault. I can be accused of assualt just by touching a patient, so putting your scrotum anywhere on someone else better be!
Next question: why o why is this considered funny-ever? I can see arousing or humiliating or fun in bed sort of thing (I suppose) but funny as in laugh with others about it later?
There are so many worlds I am glad I’m not a part of. I just added this one to the list, just under the fart jokes and the wet willies.
No worries, Jodi . 
What the fuck ever. The statute doesn’t require penetration for it to be “deviate.” Placing his rapist balls on her mouth is every bit is criminal as putting them in her mouth.
We’re in the process of working with Every tool to sort out his/her membership status, but I figured I’d reopen this in the meantime so other posters can continue the discussion if they want.
There’s no question that it’s a criiminal act.
I can’t speak for what case law may have developed in Kentucky, but if I were defending this guy, I would certainly argue that the act isn’t sexual contact as a matter of law. (Nor is the hypothetical “Someone comes up, lifts up my shirt, and videotapes it with the point of humiliating me in the future…” a sexual assault crime). Nor is it “deviate sexual intercourse” for the same reason – the lack of proof for the “sexual gratification” element.
It’s unquestionably perverse and reprehensible, and is a crime. Just not the crimes you’re offering up.
At the very least, it’s assault and battery, isn’t it? Since there was physical contact, which would step it up from simple assault, as I understand it.
ArchitectChore’s entire post sounds like it was written by Larry the Cable Guy. Except he’s funny.
Obviosly there’s been codification of common law in mostif not all US states, and I know Bricker will correct me if I am wrong, but the common law crime is battery. A passed out victim, by her very nature, is incapable of being assaulted. So speaking in general terms, she was battered, and the codification of that crime (unwelcome touching), which may very well be now called some for of “assault” is what it is. I doubt it’s a “sex crime” though, and rightly so.
How about . . . Surreptitious Testiculation?
Verbal? Like if I yell “Fuck you!” it’s sexual assault?
Or are we talking about something along the lines of a proposition? “Hey baby, wanna let me tea bag ya?”
For the record, I’m no tea bagging apologist, or apologist for any tea baggers, or whatever. Just the verbal sexual assault thing kinda took me back. I was under the impression that it wasn’t assault until my fist touched your nose (or my scrotum your lips, as the case may be).
Some of you guys need to develop a better continuum of outrage. The act described was immature, crude and abusive, but it pales in comparison to violent rape or actual sexual assault. Seriously, get some bearings and quit with all this, “but what if someone stuck a baseball bat up in me while I was sleeping?” bullshit. Just cause teabagging isn’t rape or rape equivalent doesn’t mean it’s ok or legal, but jeez.
see post re: “battery”