Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Crimewatch had a story on it last year where a male nurse was stabbed and robbed, he was then forced to give his attackers oral sex to completion.

Male on Male assault - why do they do it? Power? Sexual deviance?

Some statistics

http://after-words.org/malerape.htm

Humilation. Power Ego. The feeling of completely and utterly reducing a man to something LESS of a man.

It has nothing to do with sexual desire. It simply has to do with debasement and humilation.

Originally posted by Draco69
Humilation. Power Ego. The feeling of completely and utterly reducing a man to something LESS of a man.

It has nothing to do with sexual desire. It simply has to do with debasement and humilation.

Thats the line we are fed - but we could test that with the number of evil men that engage in homosexuality.

?????

If you mean that there are homosexual men that rape other men then that's worth acknowledgeable.

But the cases of male on male rape usually involve heterosexual men. Prison is evidence enough.

Also men who have raped have testimonied that is was much more thrilling to rape a man than a woman despite they were straight?

Why? It's more "fun" to humilate and debase a "big, powerful" man than a "defenseless, weak" woman.

And rape regardless of gender or sexual orientation has nothing to do with sexual desire. It simply has to do with self-gratification of one's ego.

Originally posted by Draco69
?????

If you mean that there are homosexual men that rape other men then that's worth acknowledgeable.

But the cases of male on male rape usually involve heterosexual men. Prison is evidence enough.

And rape regardless of gender or sexual orientation has nothing to do with sexual desire. It simply has to do with self-gratification of one's ego.

Some form of sexual gratification must go on in these supposed "heterosexuals" as they do orgasm.

As said before it has nothing to do with sexual desire. It more over has to do with completely dominating a person. Rapists don't get off on the person themselves. They get off because they reduced these persons to something less of person.

These are the same people who torture cats and such.

Originally posted by Draco69
As said before it has nothing to do with sexual desire. It more over has to do with completely dominating a person. Rapists don't get off on the person themselves. They get off because they reduced these persons to something less of person.

These are the same people who torture cats and such.

I have to agree...It's reducing others to feel empowered themselves. Many times these type of people come from abusive homes, but not all, and even if they do come from abusive homes, there are many who do not go that route...It's total power over someone else...They get a rush from it...Though some feel that it also stems from some genetics along with a bad history of violence growing up.

Originally posted by Draco69
As said before it has nothing to do with sexual desire. It more over has to do with completely dominating a person. Rapists don't get off on the person themselves. They get off because they reduced these persons to something less of person.



I've always had a slight problem with that generalisation.

I am sure it makes up the vast majority of the cases, but I've always doubted that it applies to every single instance.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
I've always had a slight problem with that generalisation.

I am sure it makes up the vast majority of the cases, but I've always doubted that it applies to every single instance.

That's true. It can apply for instance for an ex-boyfriend who rapes his ex-girlfriend in her sleep. Or young gay man who fondles a man during his sleep. All of which are rape.

I think it could be to empower themselves, but also to have pleasurement, because they are not sexually active, why else would they do this to others?

Originally posted by Draco69
That's true. It can apply for instance for an ex-boyfriend who rapes his ex-girlfriend in her sleep. Or young gay man who fondles a man during his sleep. All of which are rape.

Your prison example raises an interesting point, because while you have the obvious theme of aggression and hierarchichal position, there is also the absence of any kind of sexual contact (if the participants are heterosexual).

I wonder which is the greater influence, or perhaps that's an example where they are dual motivations.

I've also read that for many people that engage in these activities, it's because it's hard for them to "get off" for what ever reasons and so they have to go into these kinds of activities to get some kind or arousal..

Rapists are sexually active beyond rapes they commit. Unless they're like completely hopeless in the looks department....

Which would still contain empowerment due to low self-esteem.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
Your prison example raises an interesting point, because while you have the obvious theme of aggression and hierarchichal position, there is also the absence of any kind of sexual contact (if the participants are heterosexual).

I wonder which is the greater influence, or perhaps that's an example where they are dual motivations.

Almost always the former. It's all about grabbing as much power as possible in prison. The person who has the most submissives in prison is labeled the most powerful. Rape is also another way to sully a gang's or mob's name by raping a important member.

Men who do need to sate their sexual needs usually do so with their bunkmate.

not entirley true...not talking about the rapes they commited...

Originally posted by Saratn
not entirley true...not talking about the rapes they commited...

agreed Draco's generalisation ignore the sexual aspect of arousal. Which males need for penetration.

Male arousal can be keyed by pretty much anything. And power is quite arousing. My generalization is for the majority as said before. But there are cases where a rapist has had or feels attraction for the victim. But most male on male rapes are just plain violence.

Arousal can be sparked by anything. Hell you can get around just by thinking " I want to get aroused". Men are that horny.

Originally posted by Draco69
Male arousal can be keyed by pretty much anything. And power is quite arousing. My generalization is for the majority as said before. But there are cases where a rapist has had or feels attraction for the victim. But most male on male rapes are just plain violence.

Arousal can be sparked by anything. Hell you can get around just by thinking " I want to get aroused". Men are that horny.

I agree that power can be sexual, BDSM masochists get off on this, but....... and its a big but, I think the Shawshank redemption its only about violence is an over simplification. Sometimes I think it is homosexual men acting to get what they want in the same way heterosexual men do.. I think rapes for both sexes can be considered examples of violence and aggression - sometimes though a sexual aspect is present in both.

Many penetrative gay men even refer to themselves as "tops", highlighting an inequality in power exchange in gay relationships and showing the "top" considers himself the "man" in the realtionship.

Originally posted by Draco69
Humilation. Power Ego. The feeling of completely and utterly reducing a man to something LESS of a man.

It has nothing to do with sexual desire. It simply has to do with debasement and humilation.
i would bite the first guys pecker off at the base, then take out two or three of them before they killed me.

Let this thread sink to the bottom of the shit heap, where it belongs....

Originally posted by Whirlysplatt
I agree that power can be sexual, BDSM masochists get off on this, but....... and its a big but, I think the Shawshank redemption its only about violence is an over simplification. Sometimes I think it is homosexual men acting to get what they want in the same way heterosexual men do.. I think rapes for both sexes can be considered examples of violence and aggression - sometimes though a sexual aspect is present in both.

Granted there ARE homosexual men who are rapists...but the overwhelming statisitics suggest that most of the male-on-male rapes are commited by heterosexual men.


Originally posted by Whirlysplatt
Many penetrative gay men even refer to themselves as "tops", highlighting an inequality in power exchange in gay relationships and showing the "top" considers himself the "man" in the realtionship.

Power? It has nothing to with power. It just has to do with sexual position you prefer. Being a bottom doesn't mean you're the "woman" of the relationship.

No offense, but you really need to read up on the social histronics of homosexuality. There's alot of misconception here.

Originally posted by Draco69
Granted there ARE homosexual men who are rapists...but the overwhelming statisitics suggest that most of the male-on-male rapes are commited by heterosexual men.




Power? It has nothing to with power. It just has to do with sexual position you prefer. Being a bottom doesn't mean you're the "woman" of the relationship.

No offense, but you really need to read up on the social histronics of homosexuality. There's alot of misconception here.

right to a point, butt also wrong

top - n.
1. The dominant person in BDSM activity.
2. The one who penetrates during anal sex, especially between gay males.
Moving between the bodies, I take a seat and watch the center of the action -- two tops take turns with a bottom. The sex is silent, serious and very intense. It continues for what seems like an hour, finally culminating with the two tops each getting off inside the bottom.

its all about penetration (and ergo power) "the mans role" etc

and no I don't want to read up on it

Originally posted by Whirlysplatt


and no I don't want to read up on it

Sounds like you don't need to read up.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
Sounds like you don't need to read up.

very witty

Originally posted by Whirlysplatt
right to a point, butt also wrong

top - n.
1. The dominant person in BDSM activity.

No. That would be the master, dominater, etc. while the one who's passive would be the submissive, slave, etc.


Originally posted by Whirlysplatt
2. The one who penetrates during anal sex, especially between gay males.

THIS is the correct definition. It has nothing to do with power, role-playing, personality or any sort of status whatsoever. It simply has to do with the most desirable sexual positions. Being top doesn't necessarily mean that he's going to act akin to a macho Marlon Brando. I've met some of the nelliest, outrageuosly, stereotypical gay men who just happened to prefer to be top. This is what the key element. Preference. And believe it or not, in a loving, consensual relationship, gay men actually SWITCH positions during sex which throws your arguement out the window.


Originally posted by Whirlysplatt
Moving between the bodies, I take a seat and watch the center of the action -- two tops take turns with a bottom. The sex is silent, serious and very intense. It continues for what seems like an hour, finally culminating with the two tops each getting off inside the bottom.

I not exactly sure how I should comment on this....


Originally posted by Whirlysplatt
its all about penetration (and ergo power) "the mans role" etc

No. It isn't. It simply has to do with the desired preference of a sexual position. What feels best for them. That's what sex is about.

Originally posted by Whirlysplatt
and no I don't want to read up on it

You should. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about...

Originally posted by Draco69
No. That would be the master, dominater, etc. while the one who's passive would be the submissive, slave, etc.




THIS is the correct definition. It has nothing to do with power, role-playing, personality or any sort of status whatsoever. It simply has to do with the most desirable sexual positions. Being top doesn't necessarily mean that he's going to act akin to a macho Marlon Brando. I've met some of the nelliest, outrageuosly, stereotypical gay men who just happened to prefer to be top. This is what the key element. Preference. And believe it or not, in a loving, consensual relationship, gay men actually SWITCH positions during sex which throws your arguement out the window.




I not exactly sure how I should comment on this....




No. It isn't. It simply has to do with the desired preference of a sexual position. What feels best for them. That's what sex is about.



You should. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about...

hate to tell you this because your obviously very young but the phrase top means more than you think

http://www.sex-lexis.com/Sex-Dictionary/top

Greeks on Penetration a view commonly held in Psychology today

I picked the greeks for a reason

taken from seekwellness.com

When it was first published, Keuls's suggestion seemed to belong to the fringes of ancient studies; recently reissued, her book now nestles comfortably in the mainstream, a graphic indication of the direction the current has taken over the past ten years. Her title, The Reign of the Phallus, might stand as a summary of new thinking on ancient gender. Blended with Beauvoir's Other, Freud and Foucaut, the phallus has come to be seen as the key to a whole society, lying at the centre of a nexus of sex and power. 'Sex was phallic action,' claims Halperin, 'it revolved around who had the phallus, was defined by what was done with the phallus, and was polarised by the distribution of phallic pleasure.' Sex was a chronic, traumatic, political event.
Far from bringing people together sex kept them apart, dividing those penetrating from those penetrated, while at the same time erasing distinctions on either side of the phallic equation. Penetration, moreover, meant power. Those who had the phallus and used it were the dominant citizen males. Those who had been born without one or who had lost theirs somewhere along the way were the disenfranchised Other: women, slaves, foreigners and men who enjoyed getting shafted. Sex made everyone either active or passive, a plus or a minus; it was a zero-sum game.
It has been claimed that phallicism was not merely characteristic of sex in the ancient world (as it has been thought characteristic of sex today) but actually constituted a sexuality. In fact, there was no such thing as sexuality in antiquity, only 'a more generalised ethos of penetration and domination'. Phallicism thus presented historians with a real-life example to support Foucault's theory of radical discontinuity in the history of desire. The 'problem' of Greek homosexuality was a problem no more. So long as they were on the positive end of the penetrating penis, the Greeks did not care about the gender of the person on the other.

Which is completely and utterly irrelevant. Greek homosexuality was practiced out of cultural ties to the Roman/Greek gods and paganistic rituals. It had nothing to with the element of homosexuality as we view it today.

We aren't Greeks....

Originally posted by Draco69
Which is completely and utterly irrelevant. Greek homosexuality was practiced out of cultural ties to the Roman/Greek gods and paganistic rituals. It had nothing to with the element of homosexuality as we view it today.

We aren't Greeks....

Exactly

Originally posted by Draco69
Which is completely and utterly irrelevant. Greek homosexuality was practiced out of cultural ties to the Roman/Greek gods and paganistic rituals. It had nothing to with the element of homosexuality as we view it today.

We aren't Greeks....

except for Greeks...........

Penetration = Power its called the male equation its present in hetero relationships as well. Hence the terms taken, to take, took, had, screwed, popped the cherry etc. etc. ad nauseum

Originally posted by Whirlysplatt
except for Greeks...........

Ancient Greeks....

Originally posted by Whirlysplatt
Penetration = Power its called the male equation its present in hetero relationships as well. Hence the terms taken, to take, took, had, screwed, popped the cherry etc. etc. ad nauseum

Um. NO. You still don't get. It's about what feels nice. Having your penis rubbed against skin or your prostate rubbed against a penis. It's all about preference. You have this misconception that having a preference for a sexual position determines personality and role in the relationship.

And again. Gays switch during sex.

Originally posted by Draco69
Ancient Greeks....



Um. NO. You still don't get. It's about what feels nice. Having your penis rubbed against skin or your prostate rubbed against a penis. It's all about preference. You have this misconception that having a preference for a sexual position determines personality and role in the relationship.

And again. Gays switch during sex.

nope I understand about prostate "milking", I understand many switch, I also understand the act of penetration is a violent act, males are aggressive testostrone determines this, the mans role is aggressive sexually normally, although subs, sissy boys and bit.ches exist.

http://salmon.psy.plym.ac.uk/year1/psy128psychosexual_differentiation/sexdiff.htm

Originally posted by Whirlysplatt
nope I understand about prostate "milking", I understand many switch, I also understand the act of penetration is a violent act, males are aggressive testostrone determines this, the mans role is aggressive sexually normally, although subs, sissy boys and bit.ches exist.

http://salmon.psy.plym.ac.uk/year1/psy128psychosexual_differentiation/sexdiff.htm

Violent? Please. Gay men spend quite a bit of time preparing the anal cavity for penetration using lube, fingers, etc. That's why lube exists.

The main problem with your theory is that it subscribes that a homosexual relationship must be taken in parallel to a heterosexual relationship.

But guess what? It's not. Both are men. Both have as much testostrone as the next guy. Which confuses albeit alot of people like you for instance.

To generalize, a gay relationship between males is like a very intense friendship between two guys. Except just add in sex and romance.

As for the prostate milking....that's a term for women using it on men.....

You clearly don't understand what you are talking about and what's worst is that you're citing questionable, to say the least, sources that primarily focus on bizarre sexual activities.

BSDM/maschositic sex doesn't equal homosexual sex. That's what the problem with your view.

Originally posted by Draco69
Violent? Please. Gay men spend quite a bit of time preparing the anal cavity for penetration using lube, fingers, etc. That's why lube exists.

The main problem with your theory is that it subscribes that a homosexual relationship must be taken in parallel to a heterosexual relationship.

But guess what? It's not. Both are men. Both have as much testostrone as the next guy. Which confuses albeit alot of people like you for instance.

To generalize, a gay relationship between males is like a very intense friendship between two guys. Except just add in sex and romance.

As for the prostate milking....that's a term for women using it on men.....

You clearly don't understand what you are talking about and what's worst is that you're citing questionable, to say the least, sources that primarily focus on bizarre sexual activities.

BSDM/maschositic sex doesn't equal homosexual sex. That's what the problem with your view.

all sex is a violent act to a point and no prostate milking is a generic term, you like you BDSM obviously Draco whatever floats your boat

The last source was a minor english University

Originally posted by Whirlysplatt
all sex is a violent act to a point

Sure. If you like that sort of thing....

Originally posted by Whirlysplatt
and no prostate milking is a generic term,

No. It refers to sexual activity where a woman literally "milks" the prostate while giving a handjob. The term "milk" should be a red flag...


Originally posted by Whirlysplatt
you like you BDSM obviously Draco whatever floats your boat

No. I'm just knowledgeable about the subject. The day I get laid is the day Bush completes a coherent sentence

Originally posted by Whirlysplatt
The last source was a minor english University

That's nice. Where are going with this...?

If you don't have anything worthwhile to post....

Originally posted by Draco69
Violent? Please. Gay men spend quite a bit of time preparing the anal cavity for penetration using lube, fingers, etc. That's why lube exists.


LOL that was the scariest thing I read all day seriously

Originally posted by Draco69
Sure. If you like that sort of thing....



No. It refers to sexual activity where a woman literally "milks" the prostate while giving a handjob. The term "milk" should be a red flag...




No. I'm just knowledgeable about the subject. The day I get laid is the day Bush completes a coherent sentence



That's nice. Where are going with this...?

If you don't have anything worthwhile to post....

Milking means ejaculation through prostate stimulation, it is not strictly confined to BDSM, but I concede it is more common there. Like with use of "top" your understanding is narrow

Hope you get laid soon good luck with that

read a bit of psychology on penetration

off to the Pub have a nice night with your research material mate and remember "keep it up"

Okay. Me confused. Guess I won.

Originally posted by Draco69
Okay. Me confused. Guess I won.

thats right your confused and no you didn't

beer awaits

goodnight

Uh. No. Please your arguements were completely and utterly nullified using logic and reason instead of stereotyping and misunderstanding.

Which is why you need to drink away your sorrows....

Originally posted by Draco69
Uh. No. Please your arguements were completely and utterly nullified using logic and reason instead of stereotyping and misunderstanding.

Which is why you need to drink away your sorrows....

no I need a drink because my girlfriend wants to and I'm going to get laid

again your understanding is narrow

best of luck with that though mate