marshall wrote:
FrankStein wrote:
As I read and understand rape laws in the UK and the US, it specifically involves a phallus' forceable entry into a vagina. My problem is that I do not understand how a phallus, exclusively erect from sexual excitement, could remain so and actually "complete the act" without this excitement being present throughout the event. If someone could explain just how the woman could achieve said "rape" without the erotic participation of the man, I would be happy to hear it.
Just because someone "gets hard" doesn't mean they consent to sex. Equating sexual arousal to consent is the way male rapists try to make their victim feel guilty. It's not uncommon for both rapist and victim to be aroused.
People apparently refer to it as their bodies letting them down, and feel shame for having an orgasm while being raped since they don't know how commonly it occurs. Physiology doesn't necessarily match psychology.
For that matter, if two people are in the middle of sex, and one person does something which makes the other person want them to stop everything, everything has to stop. Pulling out a steak knife and starting to make threats could qualify as a reason to just continue and keep your objections to yourself for the time being. Just the act of making threats (if it isn't an agreed-upon game) makes it rape. Change the sexes around in your mind if you doubt it.
_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade