If men can't be raped by cis women and they can't be

>>8704489
They can be raped by other cis men. The reason cis women "can't rape" anyone is because they have AFAB privilege. Only AMABs can be contextualized as dangerous in our culture.

>>8704505
The people that create the sexual threat cannot be a victim of it, hence why male-on-male rape isn't legally considered rape.

>>8704517
>The people that create the sexual threat cannot be a victim of it
Why not? One can be a victim of a threat that they cause, ever heard of "hoist by your own petard"? And do you really think it's reasonable to see gender as the only dividing line between people and regard male rapists and male rape victims as belonging to the exact same class?

>>8704489
> men can't be raped by cis women
I've literally never heard this. Where are you getting this?

>>8704613
if your dick is hard it's not rape, duh

>>8704613
>The revised UCR definition of rape is: Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.
>penetration
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/violent-crime/rape

>>8704684
>without the consent of the victim.

what man has ever said no to sex?
you're retarded.

>>8704747
smug emoji

>>8704489
Cara: 1
Feminists: 0

>>8704684
>cis women cannot perform penetration

>>8704980
How does a cis woman penetrate someone with a sex organ?

>>8705093
>or object

>>8705107
So women can't orally rape but men can

Not sexist at all.

>>8704489
>man on man rape isn't rape
Wat

>>8704980
They can force a man to penetrate her, or use a random object
And lets be honest, its not like you guys follow that definition whatsoever.

>>8705279
>They can force a man to penetrate her,
Not rape. >>8704684
t. FBI

>>8704684
The act of penetration. It's not exclusively written in law, whether the "penetrator" or "penetrated" is the victim. It's just the act of penetration proceeding, without the consent of one of the participants.

>>8705279
What do you mean by "you guys"?

>>8705287
The definition doesn't actually state that the victim must be the one being penetrated. It essentially just comes down to "penetration without consent of the victim."

>>8705567
>>8705672
>implying they actually count envelopment as rape just because you can read it that way when you want to evade being called out on your misandrist double standards
[citation needed]

>>8704489
>men can't be raped by cis women
They can though. If anyone has to force sex on someone, they are a rapist.

>>8705743
False.
t. FBI

>>8705753
You're wrong at least in Ohio and this is probably typical of other states:
ORC 2907.02 (A)
(1) - this is about drugging, statutory rape, and mentally impaired people being raped.
(2) No person shall engage in sexual conduct with another when the offender purposely compels the other person to submit by force or threat of force.

2907.01 (A) "Sexual conduct" means vaginal intercourse between a male and female; anal intercourse, fellatio, and cunnilingus between persons regardless of sex; and, without privilege to do so, the insertion, however slight, of any part of the body or any instrument, apparatus, or other object into the vaginal or anal opening of another. Penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete vaginal or anal intercourse.
Anyone can rape anyone. There are several lesser sexual assault offenses too.

>>8705857
>and this is probably typical of other states
[citation needed]

>>8705888
I'm not going to stay up all night doing legal research!

>>8705910
I didn't think it was true either.

>>8705926
Why would Ohio be unusual? I just used it because that's where I live and I'm more familiar with the law here. Ohio isn't known for being very edgy legally.

>>8705945
FYI the point of states is that it's not the same law everywhere.