Thanks. This is really the crux of this pitting and not the quibbling over legalities. The fact that anyone would cite such a blatantly misogynistic and abusive episode as a “funniest moment” is eminently pittable, regardless of the legal technicalities. The poster himself seemed to be completely oblivious to how offensive his little anecdote was. He sounds like the exact kind of frat-boy asshole that serves to confirm the stereotypes.
Bricker, you better voir dire the shit out of me if I end up on your jury because arguing for acquittal on the grounds of lack of sexual gratification would go nowhere with me. He wanted to humiliate her? Fine. He did it to get off. Guilty, rot in prison.
Uh, read the statute title. The legislature named it “rape.”
Is it OK for me to use the word “rape” when the state uses the word “rape”?
My fluttery hear is anything but uber-heterosexual, and before this thread, I never would have considered teabagging (in the circumstances described in the original thread) to automatically be sexual. Just because an act involves someone’s genitals doesn’t automatically make it a sexual act, else getting kicked in the nuts would be considered a come-on.
Not that I’m defending or condoning the practice, by any means. AC and his friends sound stupid, gross, and incredibly immature. But rapists? Eh.
you found “intercourse” in this situation, where? you need to look that word up. it doesn’t mean what you think it does.
How you want to label it is beside the point. The point is that the act (whatever you want to call it) of imposing sexual contact on an unconscious victim is not made more or less offensive by the gender of either party.
in this situation, I should say. My guess is that some form of penetration, digital, foreign object, coitus, is required ny almost every statute concerning the matter. the post in question refers to the nutsack in question being laid on not in the mouth. it will be an important distinction
I’m sorry- I do know the difference between assault and battery, but I used the wrong term here.
Who is claiming that if a female did this to a male it would only be horseplay? I would be as disgusted and want charges pressed if the genders were reversed. I think anyone would, no?
At the very least-these guys have shown they are trogdolytes. What goes around, comes around-or so I hope.
It depends on the definition of “sexual gratification”, which does not seem to be spelled out in the statutes.
I found this article from a couple of years ago regarding the inadmissibility of undercover officer testimony in cases where an officer was investigating prostitution, and received “sexual gratification” in the course of investigation:
So apparently it’s not cut and dried, and if a jury decided that simply the sensation received by the perpretrator counted as sexual gratification, he could be convicted of First Degree Sodomy:
Unconsciousness is included in the definition of physically helpless.
I think you would find very few people wanting to press charges if the genders were reversed.
I’m pretty sure the “deviate sexual intercourse” being referred to is forcible anal penetration.
… is still committing sexual battery. wtf?
No, of course not, but that isn’t what I said. I said, in essence, that the act of “teabagging” is sexual no matter how people might want to play off that it’s just a practical joke. When you put your genitals on someone, it’s sexual. It might only be a teensy tiny bit sexual, and it might be a hell of a lot more like dogs humping for dominance, but pretending there is absolutely no sexual motivation or gratification involved is completely disingenous.
No. Per the definitions, it includes “any act of sexual gratification involving the sex organs of one person and the mouth or anus of another”.
Oh, wait, forcible oral sex, too. Still, no evidence of penetration.
Well, then that is fucked up and should be fought. That’s a societal issue, one that men and women should protest against. It seems like you are saying that because a woman wouldn’t be charged, that a man shouldn’t be? Or am I picking up the wrong subtext here? (I hope so I am wrong).
While the breast thing is also sexual battery IMO, there is the small matter of breasts not being genitals. If the guy wakes up to find himself being smothered by uninvited pussy, is *that * just harmless fun?
I’m not advocating 25 years in the clink. However, I think there’s a distinction to be made between “picking fights with smaller kids” and “waiting for a smaller kid to fall asleep and then punching him” which is a more apt analogy.
I wouldn’t. With either gender. Seriously, it’s just a ballsack. It’s not the end of the world. Filling out the police report would consume more time than I’d be willing to dedicate to the matter, never mind about a trial and all the crap associated with that.
Let’s say I’m sitting in my cube at work, reading this thread, and it gives me a great idea. I shuck down my pants and creep over to my female co-worker sitting at her computer, tap her on the shoulder, and when she turns around I grab the back of her head and smash her face into my junk, causing her to emit a muffled scream.
Aside from finding my employment rather quickly terminated, what sort of punishment could I expect to receive? Does the fact that the girl in the “teabagging” story is unconscious, and presumably unaware of the fact she’s having some stranger’s nuts placed on her mouth to humiliate her, change the nature of the assault somehow?
If the shitheads in the story had yanked the girl’s shirt down to expose a boob (also while she was sleeping) would that be considered sexual assault? I’m trying to understand what the criteria are. The act certainly was intended to humiliate, it seems to fit within the definition of assault, and it involved the sex organs of the assailant. How is that not sexual assault?
Did you people not read Architect Chore’s post? She tried to use one of their comfortors to sleep on AND she wetted a bit of his towel. I don’t think what they did to her was unfair at all.
Ok, let’s clarify. So what happened to Abner Louima, for example, wouldn’t be sexual assault because the cops involved weren’t seeking sexual gratification?
Don’t forget that she bragged about her sorority. I mean come on.