It's really hard to wrap my head around the idea that adult men are being "forced to penetrate" at rates anywhere near the rate that women are forcibly penetrated - if only for the simple fact that men can only be forced to penetrate when erect (a small percentage of our life experience) while it's not like women only have penetratable vaginas a small portion of the time.
why is it that people only bring up these statistics when they are trying to discredit feminists and expose what they see as feminism's hypocrisy
sexual assault on men and boys is even more underreported than sexual assault against women, and there is an even larger social stigma attached to it. are these victims destined to forever be used as pawns in arguments with no one actually advocating on their behalf? and for the record what few resources are available to these individuals come almost entirely from feminist organizations
and do you think it really matters to a five year old boy in foster care whether it's a man or a woman raping him. i'm sick of the parochial battle lines drawn around the issue, as though your genitalia determines which side of the infantile, fabricated man vs woman divide you land on, as though sexual assault, one of the most sickening and protean acts humans commit against one another, is an issue that can be reduced to 50% of the population united against the other 50%
Oh Archi, just stop. That's like saying it's a woman's fault for getting "wet" for being raped. You can have an erection and not be sexually aroused. One of the many reasons men don't come forward because they obviously alway want sex, how else could they have an erection and someone force themselves on them.
Oh milkster, yor ability to intentionally misread my comment is as sad as it is expected.
Nowhere did i say a man is at fault for being forced to penetrate because he is hard. I only said he had to be hard to be forced to penetrate, which SIGNIFICANTLY narrows the rape-able wndow of opportunity.
this argument is non-sense
Feminists are the biggest advocates for men that I know. If you're not in feminist spaces, you will not observe this obviously.
Clearly you are evidence of this when you say that gay males are misogynist.
Even ignoring the physical differences in ability between men and women as far as resistance goes, you know that it is more difficult to make an unwilling dick hard than it is to do the zero preparation required to penetrate an unwilling woman, which is my point, so just stop.
I don't have a dick, but I don't think it is all that hard to get one hard as archi is implying. Even under duress. But I am definitely going to have to take the guys' word on that.
I thought your point was that meant the rates weren't going to be the same.
When there is a will there is a way I would imagine in all cases of rape. Unless you think there are a huge portion of women who are unable to get a man's dick hard under duress, I am not sure how that is relevant to the rate at which men get raped compared to women.
[edit] Just want to say I DO think more women are raped by men than men raped by women, I just don't see this as being a factor for that.
Do you think the fact that the vast, vast majority of men could physically overpower the vast, vast majority of women would play a factor?
So men are more capable to stpp their attackers and prevent their rape from happening then? You've never had a no reason bomer in your life? Never jacked off because you were bored, or hungry or procrastinating or any other emotion besides horny? Erections aren't always conscious decisions.