|
|
|
September 23, 2004
Penis control? Or vagina control?
Here's the latest news on penis control: a Model Statute has been drafted which would criminalize sex without condoms between consenting adults. (Via Glenn Reynolds.) The crime is described as follows: Reckless Sexual Conduct I am not advocating sex without condoms, but I think adults should be free to have whatever sexual relations they want, without the nanny state getting into details. Here's what I said in my comment to the post: Your proposal would imprison adults for consensual sex.Not much to add, except that I'm also wondering whether the law would encourage further confusion between victim and perpetrator. If two people have sex without using a condom, under the statute are not both parties equally culpable? How is the state to determine which party was aggrieved? If you think about it, who consents? Who is supposed to ask whom to use a condom? Is the penis-wielder by definition supposed to be the assailant? Nothing in the statute suggests that. But why in logic is not a man just as much a victim of a vagina as a woman the victim of a penis? Applying condom, er, common sense, are not condoms intended to protect the man just as much as the woman? (Or in case of homosexual sex, both parties?) Does this mean that whoever calls the police first gets to be the victim? I'm very confused now. It takes two to have sex, and to consent. If neither party can prove affirmative and express consent, shouldn't they both be prosecuted? I guess this means video surveillance cameras in every bedroom..... posted by Eric on 09.23.04 at 09:36 AM
Comments
That has been one of my favorite fantasies, my ideal woman putting a condom over my penis, disciplining my penis. Over the last year or so, though, I find that the penis, even stiffly disciplined, is absent from nearly all my fantasies. Nearly all my fantasies these days center entirely around Lesbianism. Dawn must discipline her own clitoris by struggling against wicked Wanda's temptations to adultery, she must struggle to be faithful to her holy Negro wife Norma. Steven Malcolm Anderson (Cato the Elder) the Lesbian-worshipping gun-loving selfish aesthete · September 25, 2004 06:38 PM |
|
December 2006
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
December 2006
November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
• Laughing at the failure of discourse?
• Holiday Blogging • The right to be irrational? • I'm cool with the passion fashion • Climate change meltdown at the polls? • If you're wrong, then so is God? • Have a nice day, asshole! • Scarlet "R"? • Consuming power while empowering consumption • Shrinking is growth!
Links
Site Credits
|
|
I have additional questions: For these purposes, do lambskins count as condoms? Also, not being a lawyer, I'm very interested in how one would go about proving that "these two had not on an occasion previous to the occasion of the crime engaged in sexual activity." Credible witnesses say they never saw them go home together? Or do we all have to take regular swabs from now on to keep in storage, lest there be no other way to prove lack of previous intimate contact with someone we're suing for sexual malfeasance?
On the other hand, it's nice to see penetration deemed something to be "accomplished." Sometimes hard work has its rewards!