Have you ever been sexually assaulted?

[Pardalis]

It's been claimed in this thread that women can be aroused during rape. Rape is usually an act of violence, not one of sex.

Is it true that women can be aroused while giving birth?

 

[Morrigan]

No. I have never given birth, and spoken with few women who have and never asked them, and never did any research but frankly that notion is ridiculous! I refuse to believe it's possible until you bombard me with evidence otherwise, which I will of course ignore because it's impossible to be aroused when you are giving birth! It is known.

 

[Professor Yaffle]

Is it true that women can be aroused while giving birth?

Well, women have generally greater sexual arousal levels while pregnant. And wikipedia says:

Some women may experience orgasm during childbirth.[4][5] There are similarities between the process of orgasm and childbirth; both involve involuntary contractions of some of the same muscles. Orgasm releases endorphins which can mediate the pain of labour, as well as the hormone oxytocin, which is known to play an important role in labour as well as mother-child attachment.

And you can get the views of a "sexpert" here:
http://health.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/10/30/sexpert-q-a-climaxing-during-childbirth/

 

[noch1Narr]

I once sat on the ground and an ant made its way onto my private area---would that could as sexual assault? Attempted
reverse bestiality? BTW, I didn't check to see if that ant was female or male.....are there such critters as gay ants? And would my forcible, swift removal of afore-mentioned ant count as sex-based violence on my part?
Tormented by uncertainty ever since...! M.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

It's the difference between physiological and psychological sexual arousal. The latter is determined by the interpretation of the reasons for the former.

 

[gumboot]

No. I have never given birth, and spoken with few women who have and never asked them, and never did any research but frankly that notion is ridiculous! I refuse to believe it's possible until you bombard me with evidence otherwise, which I will of course ignore because it's impossible to be aroused when you are giving birth! It is known.

And all the evidence is fake, remember.

 

[gumboot]

Also from that review:​

Did they collect a case series of something that never happens, or are you willing to accept that you were wrong?

They faked it, obviously.

 

[gumboot]

This entire conversation is so bizarre and surreal I'm actually starting to be amused by it. How terrible in a thread titled "Have you ever been sexually assaulted?".

 

[Safe-Keeper]

Anyway, for the last time, physical arousal does not mean consent.

Amazing how many times this has to be whammed into people for them to get it. Same with good old sex without consent is rape.

If you **** a guy while he's asleep, you rape him. And the other way around. If he gets a boner while you do it, it's still rape. The mental damage done by the rape does not lessen if you get a boner while it happens, it'll probably even get stronger because you feel confused or whatever.

 

[GreNME]

Switch the genders and you basically have the kind of mentality that keeps three of four sexual assault victims from reporting the crimes.

You refer to women victims of sexual assault. There is no evidence we need apply this to men.

Actually, I refer to all victims of sexual assault, but that's not the point I was making. What I was doing was underlining your double-standard.

You're simply wrong here, and (as has been pointed out) you're displaying an abysmal understanding of the physiology. Erections-- as has already been pointed out using numerous sources, which you have yet to acknowledge-- can be induced as a reflex in (most) men.

In teens during puberty. Is there a source this continues throughout adulthood?

Do you have people who have posted in this thread already on ignore? More than one person has linked to sources which clearly points this out. Even ignoring your constant disregard for those males (including myself) who can assure you anecdotally that this is true, medical sources have been pointed out. I shall quote directly from this study in the World Journal of Urology:

Smooth muscle relaxation of penile arteries, the corpus cavernosum, and the corpus spongiosum, leading to penile erection, results from parasympathetic neural pathway activation and, likely, simultaneous inhibition of sympathetic outflow. Proerectile parasympathetic outflow is reflexively activated by sensory information of peripheral origin, conveyed by the dorsal penile nerve, and reflexive erections are supported by an intraspinal circuitry. Supraspinal influences modulate the reflex. Information integrated at or originating from supraspinal structures may also elicit penile erection.

Emphasis mine. The modulation that the paragraph talks about is the sustaining of an erection without direct stimulation, as well as the eventual loss of erection after climax or after a period of non-stimulation.

I wasn't the first person to point this study out, and yet you continue to either ignore it or miss it entirely while making your assertions, which in turn underscore both your lack of understanding of the physiology involved and your continued attempt to promote a flawed premise that is not unlike the "they must have wanted it" blame-the-victim line of reasoning. This may not be your intent, and I'm prepared to give you the benefit of the doubt that you wouldn't be so blatantly outrageous in your assertions, but nevertheless this is precisely the type of argument your continued lack of acknowledgement of this simply physiological fact keeps implying, intentional or not.

So are we to believe a man who is physically aroused by a woman who proceeds to have sex with him has been forced? And are we to believe this is the equivalent of a woman who is forcibly raped? Should we believe she was really sexually aroused by an act of violence which forcible rape is known to be?

EXCUSE ME! Do you have evidence any woman had a climax during a forcible rape? Bull $#!+! Show us a source supporting this myth.

I understand your emotional response, but believe me when I tell you that yes, there have been instances where women have been stimulated sexually during the course of a rape. This is, in fact, a problem dealt with in counseling for men and women victims of rape who have experienced this and are suffering guilt for their body's reaction to what was a horrible emotional and mental (and often otherwise physical) experience. This is not just an anecdotal phenomenon, as it's been studied academically as well as having been part of clinical counseling for victims^{[link see number 13]}.

Talk about outrageously incorrect conclusions. You have repeated the myth that a woman can be sexually aroused during a forcible rape. Forcible rape has been clearly shown to be an act of violence, not an act of sex. You have no evidence to support your mythical belief.

Twisting words or phrases around does your arguments no justice and indeed makes your attitude seem that much more based on emotional bias and assumption than on fact. No one is saying that the person being raped is sexually aroused, we are pointing out the fact that both men and women who have been raped have experienced physical stimulation during the act of being raped. No one here is implying that these victims enjoyed it at all, and in fact the reality of the situation is that this extreme dissonant response to a horrifying experience is one of the factors that counselors for rape victims must be prepared for. It may seem incomprehensible or counter-intuitive to you, but by that same token just because it's something you don't know or understand does not remove it from reality. Whether you want to believe the rape counseling site or the article from the Journal of Clinical Forensic Medicine is completely up to you. However, your accusations of it being a myth are completely unfounded when weighed against the academic proof showing otherwise.

Nonsense! The evidence is clear. Just look at gender, murder and injury rates of victims and assailants.

I don't know if that's a lame attempt at sarcasm or you simply have not thought your arguments through, so I'll simply reiterate the more important sentence that you ignored in that short paragraph: There are several factors that go into comparisons, and whether the individual is male or female is only one part of those factors. Hence this whole line of debate reeks of unnecessarily divisive argument that ignores the more prevalent factors that lead to dangerous or antisocial aggression in people.

A lot of you keep complaining about my position here. I remind you again, I have merely asked for evidence and no one has found any. You are all attacking me for being skeptical but the reasons you state for the attacks are straw men.

Please don't play the martyr. What people are criticizing of you is not skepticism, but is instead persistent (and insistent) incredulity in the face of numerous points of evidence. I don't know if you simply have certain individuals on ignore or you're just ignoring their posts and links out of hand, but several people have tried to correct your mistaken assertions and you continue to unabashedly make those same assertions without providing any evidential data of your own to back it up. Your accusations of straw men are misleading (or disingenuous) because you've already backpedaled on the scope of the types of sexual assault the thread is supposedly covering and because you're continually disregarding links even including academic studies that are showing more than one of your assertions to be outright false. Your refusal to acknowledge these instances where your original assertions have been shown to be mistaken are severely limiting your credibility at this point, despite the fact that acknowledging them would do no damage to the fact that women are indeed raped more often than men, and that men are more often the perpetrators of rape. It's a pity that you're allowing emotional bias on your side affect the conversation so negatively.

 

[Lonewulf]

Good post, GreNME. Glad you're part of this discussion.






Even if you are a filthy meat eater.

(Oh wait, so am I. Carry on.)

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Male, never been raped.

I'm fully on the side of "yes, a man can indeed be raped" camp here. Mainly because I kow that it is indeed possible to be erect while not thinking about sex.

 

[PhantomWolf]

Quite frankly I find skeptigirl attitude in this thread to be totally disgusting. It is exactly her sort of attitude that prevents men from reporting assults of both a sexual and/or physical nature. The fact is that if the males here were displaying the same attitude towards male-female rape that she does to female-male rape she'd be the first screaming about it.

Male Rape Myths Busted

 

[Safe-Keeper]

There recently was a case in Norway where a man went to sleep on the couch and woke up when his wife-to-be sucked his penis. He reported much of, or all of, the same mental problems afterward as a girl would if she was taken advantage of in her sleep.

Skepticgirl, I've grown to respect you fairly highly as a forum poster. I know you can do better than this.

 

[Zelenius]

I apologize for any remarks I made about male on male rape or female on male rape that may have been insensitive. I even suggested earlier that maybe another term should be used for female on male rape instead of "rape", erroneously believing that political correctness insists on making female on male rape equivalent to male on female rape. I even suggested female on male rape might be "funny". Reflexively, it may still be "funny" when I fist hear of something like this, but this is not meant to trivialize the suffering of men who are victims of women rapists. Realizing that female on male rape is a terrible thing is not meant to trivialize the suffering of female rape victims. Believing female on male rape is a crime and a horrible thing does not make one an anti-feminist, a misogynist or some kind of male-supremacist. There still is a double standard unfortunately, and hopefully we can overcome it.

After more reading it seems I underestimated just how often men are the victims of rape, usually by other men but in some cases by women. I've never been sexually assaulted, nor has anyone close to me, so maybe that explains my bias.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

But you yourself are just sitting there, apparently immune to this need for proof and evidence, merely stating an uninformed, inexperienced (due to gender) opinion.

Anyways,
Alex.

I started with an open mind, but when the only evidence that turned up was a blog entry about a news event that looks to have been non-existent and an old well known typhoid AIDS Mary urban myth, I began to question the claims. I also pointed out the incredulity that forced erections are likely.

That has been turned into the straw man claiming I was referring to unwanted erections, not the same thing, and that I am biased, also a false claim. I was inclined to believe if any evidence had been forthcoming. And I certainly don't have an issue that only women are vulnerable to sexual assaults.

I am being attacked essentially for holding to the skeptical position which apparently is not the PC position in this thread. How dare I suggest inequality here.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

There recently was a case in Norway where a man went to sleep on the couch and woke up when his wife-to-be sucked his penis. He reported much of, or all of, the same mental problems afterward as a girl would if she was taken advantage of in her sleep.

Skepticgirl, I've grown to respect you fairly highly as a forum poster. I know you can do better than this.

That story has been cited. Not sure the "wife to be" part was in there but the lawsuit where he was awarded money was. But I said I was not talking about "intoxicated" or "asleep" scenarios. Though I think the sleeping thing is a stretch, I'll leave it at that.

So again, straw man debating here. I said I was excluding this scenario. It may be a fantasy of some men to be tied up on a bed and raped (not to be confused with actual unwanted forcible rape). But it would seem there is no evidence this ever occurs. All I've said is show me the evidence.

 

[luchog]

Actually, I refer to all victims of sexual assault, but that's not the point I was making. What I was doing was underlining your double-standard.

And as noted below, she's still refusing to acknowledge the overwhelming evidence against her.

Well done on presenting the evidence BTW. I was sexually molested as a child by both a male and female together (a neighbor several years older, and his sister), and I have a friend who was outright raped by a larger and stronger older woman, I have avoided responding to skeptigirl, because I know I cannot respond civilly in the face of her dismissive bigotry. Particularly since she displays astonishing ignorance for someone who has claimed to be a medical professional.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Quite frankly I find skeptigirl attitude in this thread to be totally disgusting. It is exactly her sort of attitude that prevents men from reporting assults of both a sexual and/or physical nature. The fact is that if the males here were displaying the same attitude towards male-female rape that she does to female-male rape she'd be the first screaming about it.

Male Rape Myths Busted

What attitude? Show me the evidence! That is the only 'attitude' I have posted. The rest is a fabrication of my position on this subject.

So looking at your 'evidence'.

None of those myths apply except 2:

Myth: Adult men cannot be sexually assaulted by women.

Also don't think that if a woman rapes you that you have to penetrate her, there are such things as vibrators that she can use on you as well.

But I am not talking about any male rape. I never questioned at all the potential for sexual assault in any number of ways. And statutory rape was not the issue here either.

That leaves this one:

Myth: Getting an erection or ejaculation during sexual assault means you "really wanted it" or consented to it.

Reality: This is one of the things that can cause male rape survivors a lot of confusion and guilt when they do not know how things work. For a start I can honestly say that getting an erection shows nothing other than your body responds how it is suppose to do. It is a totally normal thing to happen and has nothing to do with desire. Have you never been on a bus, or sat in an office meeting, and it has gone hard all by it's self for no reason?

Basically, unless you have some medical condition that stops you then you will get an erection when it is manipulated. It is a result of stimulation, and it does not matter if you do not want it to happen or not. There is little you can do to stop it most of the time.

Sadly, some males become confused and think an erection equals arousal equals them wanting it. In reality all it means is that part of the body has nerve endings that respond to touch and that touch can be wanted or not wanted, pleasant or non pleasant. With lubricant you will have even less choice as to how it responds to touch. It is the same as the body will respond to someone tickling you and you will probably laugh, but if it is done at a time or by a person you do not want to tickle you it will still respond.

This has been brought up ad nauseum in gumboot's poll. But the connection from this kind of erection to a woman forcing a man to have one then successfully raping him has not been demonstrated to actually happen.

This author is speculating as are the people in this thread that because X happens under Y circumstances X also happens under Z circumstances. I never said X doesn't happen under Y circumstances. I said show me evidence it actually does happen under Z circumstances. Since when is an article like this evidence?


The article continues

If you were penetrated, the pressure in the prostate gland (see diagram below) also will cause an erection. Anyone who has ever had a DRE (short for Digital Rectal Exam) of the prostate at their doctors will know that getting an erection often happens during the examination.

So is the claim here that skilled female rapists are going to shove something up the guy's bum then jump on top? This part would appear to be talking about anal penetration only.

 

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

There recently was a case in Norway where a man went to sleep on the couch and woke up when his wife-to-be sucked his penis. He reported much of, or all of, the same mental problems afterward as a girl would if she was taken advantage of in her sleep.

Skepticgirl, I've grown to respect you fairly highly as a forum poster. I know you can do better than this.

Actually, she wasn't his girlfriend. I think the story was that he was an acquaintance of her boyfriend's.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/apr/28/2

I read in some of the comments on it that the woman's bf actually took pictures of her doing it.

Maybe it was a prank at the guy's expense gone wrong? It sounds like they might have just wanted to embarrass him with a few "candid photos" while he was passed out.

Women are sometimes accomplices to sexual assaults, as well. There was a link some pages ago about a woman charged with rape because she was part of a gang that gang-raped another woman and was found just as guilty as her buddies.

You even see this in prison rapes- Lynndie England and those 4 other fine young ladies implicated in the scandal are as much sex criminals to me as the male soldiers who sexually abused the prisoners. I believe the commander at that prison who all but ordered it was actually a female soldier, too.

It's a alleged "interrogation tactic" in Guantanamo Bay to have female soldiers invade the personal space of and straddle Muslim prisoners. It was first chosen as a way to deal with alleged terrorists to willfully violate cultural and religious standards in the Muslim worlds but it comes down to universal sexual harrassment.