A reader named Sonja emailed me an article written by a man who does not think women can rape men. Michael Graham recounted a recent case in which a man pressed charges against a masseuse performed an unspecified sex act on him after he told her no:
A Dighton, Mass., man is pressing charges against a well-known local massage parlor, saying he was sexually assaulted.
The 30-year-old man told police on Saturday about an incident in April, when he went to the North Main Street Spa for a massage, according to a police report.
The massage proceeded in ways that have gotten its proprietor and masseuses arrested in the past for prostitution — and ended the same way. The man said he told “Yo Yo” that he had a girlfriend, the report said, but she completed the sex act.
Michael Graham responded with this:
NOW he’s pressing charges? Why not just get up before the “Happy” reached the “Ending” and walk out? Or how about just rolling over?
Sorry, but everybody knows the Natural Truth: A woman cannot rape a guy. (At least, not under these circumstances. Keep your sick Tarantino-esque fetishes to yourself)
The only way a woman can, ahem, “get the job done” is with a guy’s consent. What—you think the 90+ pound Asian lady held this guy down and “primed the pump” while he tried to fight her off?
First, as I noted above, we do not know what the sex act was. It could have been masturbation, oral sex, or vaginal sex. Second, whether the man could get up is beside the point. He told the woman no and she did it anyway. No state law says how long an act much occur for it to count as rape. There was a man sentenced to four years in prison for a 30-second rape. It does not matter how long it happened, only that it happened.
Third, the “Natural Truth” Graham mentions is precisely why a woman can rape a man. The penis responds to any stimulus whether the man wants it to or not. We do not know the circumstances of what happened, we do not know how easily this man is sexually aroused, and we do not know how long the sex act took. But for the sake of argument, let us assume the woman massaged her way down to the man’s penis, took it in her hand, and the man became erect. He told her “No” but she masturbated him anyway and he ejaculated within seconds. That can happen completely without his consent.
No one needs to hold a man or boy down for it to be rape. There does not need to be any force involved at all. And let us flip the situation. Would Graham argue that if a man masturbated a woman as she lay on the table to get a massage that her level of arousal equaled consent? Probably not, especially after what Todd Akin did last week.
The only place where Graham has a point is that the sex act might not legally count as rape. It might count as some form of sexual assault or indecent sex act. But that is a legal argument, not a moral one.
Graham went on to add:
What happened here is that this guy’s girlfriend found out what happened somehow—maybe he brought something biological home, whatever—and now he’s claiming “She forced me!”
Joking about the act does not change that the man did not want it. It is possible that his girlfriend found out about it because of a stain in his underwear and the man claimed he did not want it. However, it is unlikely that a man would lie about a sexual assault against him, let alone tell that lie to the police knowing full well that they probably will not believe him.
Is there a woman anywhere dumb enough to believe this? And why would the cops waste their time investigating this as a sexual assault?
Judging from the comments on the article, plenty of women are “dumb enough” to believe this. That should tell Graham something. As for the police “wasting their time”, it is their job to investigate crimes. Unless they have proof that no crime occurred or an unreliable witness, they ought to investigate it. That does not mean anything will come of it, but it is their job.