thebestofenergy wrote:I agree that rape happening onto women is more likely, and no one here said otherwise, but there are cases of women raping men.
Rape = the unlawful compelling of a person through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse.
Both women and men can do this, and it doesn't necessarily require the penetration of the victim; e.g. woman drugging a man (unwilling to have sex) and having sex with him - that's rape.
What do you mean? Women don't walk around showing genitalia either.
One does not need to show his/her genitalia in order to get raped.
More unlikely than a man raping a woman, yes, but still happening.
In order to be raped one has to be penetrated, so penetration is necessary for rape.
Women drugging men that is plausible but if a man is drugged enough to the point that he is unconscious, his heart rate would most likely be slowed down enough to the point that it would be hard to get an erection, ever heard of the expression "whiskey dick" or "coke dick" or "heroin dick" or "x dick" ? That expression means one can not get an erection because too much drug use has slowed down the heart rate and blood flow to vital organs. Now we could infer that vegan man may have less of a chance of getting a limp dick from illicit drug use if by chance a vegan man get's raped by a woman, yes you may have a harder time not getting hard ...
Most woman do not walk around with their genitalia out but here is the thing, a woman does not have to be sexually stimulated in order to be raped, a vagina can be an open hole to whom ever wants to take advantage of it if the woman is unaware of the attack.( a woman could be sleeping and get raped, a man can not get raped in his sleep unless he has an erection in his sleep)
A man can not be unaware of a rape attack by a woman unless he was like you said drugged
thebestofenergy wrote:
Most of the cases, like you said, will have clear signs. But take the example I gave before (woman drugging a man to rape him); what sort of physical sign are you looking for there?
Well a woman drugging a man there would certainly be the physical evidence of drugs in the victims system, now that evidence may not stand up in court because who is to say that he did not choose to take those drugs, or that he did not take drugs after the fact of the matter, the fact that some one has drugs in their system would be evidence in a sense, it would be circumstantial evidence.
&& If a woman is raping a man well I am sure her juices will be flying all over the place, I am sure that she will have also left hairs behind, make up, fibers ect who know what kinda of evidence she could leave behind.
Enough rape talk I am exhausted with it!
Another thing I hate that woman do,
"A man can never ever under any circumstances hit a woman even if the woman hits the man first!"
Anyone that has this mind state just pisses me the fuck off....
If you hit somebody be prepared to get hit back.
Women that think they can hit men just because they think they're protected by law and society because its sociably unacceptable for a man to hit a woman is just outrageous to me...
IMO
Some women feel that they deserve to be protected by their man, they want to feel that they can do whatever they want physically or mentally to a man and that the man just has to take all of the women's shit with out reacting souley based on the perceived fact that a women are not as strong as men.... ?
I hate those women.
