Curious George
Veteran Member
So, your saying your posts are so weak that they can't stand on their own without the help of hyperbole, embellishment, and overkill? Gotcha. We'll keep it in mind.
And, how nice of you to characterize most people on the forum here as "idiots."
Boy, just like god, you know what the future holds. Must be nice. :slap: And just to clue you in on a bit of the male anatomy: sexual intercourse, i.e. penial insertion, requires a tumescent penis, which only arises spontaneously, as when asleep, or when a person is sexually excited. Now, some males do get sexually excited when confronted by overly aggressive women, but judging from the reaction of the boy this doesn't appear to be the case at all. Fear, and distress aren't known to be sexual stimulants. So without a compliant partner with next to no chance of having an erect penis I fail to see how she could rape (n1. (Law) the offence of forcing a person, to submit to sexual intercourse against that person's will) him.
Squim you are talking if vaginal penetration is the only form of rape. This may be true in some states, however there are many that would consider her putting her mouth on his penis as a form of rape.
You are one hundred percent wrong in your implication that a man cannot be raped if he does not have an erection.
I agree that the film wasn't rape- but it was pretty awful. And your response??? it reads very much like "eh- it wasn't THAT bad." It was horrible. The other riders reactions were horrible. I do not know the full story- maybe he made comments to her and she was "putting him in his pace" or maybe it was staged. But, very little could explain this. It was clearly an example of behavior that is wrong.