Teen girls charged with molesting nursing home patients.
 

Seriously, this is a messed up story.

Brianna Broitzman

Click the link, the girls are surprisingly cute. But how messed up do they have to be to get off on such a thing? :confused: Rubbing old guys penises for fun? Rubbing bare butts on their faces? Hopefully these girls get punished to the full extent of the law, and have to register as sex offenders.

That link looked like someones awful facebook page. And yes if this is true that is pretty messed up. I hope they are punished, we all know what would happen to teenage boys if they did this to women in a nursing home.

It's true: FOXNews.com - 6 Teens Charged in Nursing Home Abuse - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News

It's never appropriate to do those kinds of things against someone's will, especially when it's someone as vulnerable as the residents of a nursing home. Pretty crazy and sick that they get off on that.

Sounds like a stupid gossip smear for someone who is running for student body president at a high school.

But, yeah, it's accurate. Here's a link to a Fox News article about it: FOXNews.com - 6 Teens Charged in Nursing Home Abuse - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News

Awww, SecretMethod beat me to it!

If these were guys and they were found guilty, I'll bet they would be required to register as sex offenders. That's a cloud that would follow someone forever, instead of some meaningless probation.

Oh yeah, definitely. This reminds me of a news story from a while back about kids popping other kids in the crotch while walking through the halls, and how either the judge or the prosecution wanted to give them sex offender status. While I don't agree with that assessment, I don't see how this isn't 100X worse.

I've never been so bored at work that I've thought, "Hmm...I think I'll stick my finger up an old man's rectum..." But seriously, this is one of those crimes I have a hard time understanding because I can't imagine what motivates one to commit it. Maybe it's a good thing I don't get it.....

And in a strange twist of odd coincidence, as I was typing this message, a commercial for a class-action law suit came on TV, asking if your loved ones have been mistreated in a nursing home....

They need to be carefully checked out by psychologists, repeatedly, for a long time as a condition of their probation, if that's all they receive as punishment.

Keep that thought and hold it in a special place. Bring it out and dust it off on occasions such as this. I've used it far to numerous times over the years, and I should imagine it to be of added value to you, in your chosen profession.

Yep, but do we know they won't be required to reg.?

How special is Brianna Broitzman that her name is the headline, and in the tags? Is she some local famous person? Daughter of the mayor?

What disturbs me most is how they regard other human beings as just meat to be played with, impersonal objects to use as toys. I also dont understand why a teen girl would find it amusing to put her finger up an old man's ass. The best part of the article was the pictures interspersed with the print.

I don't know for 100% sure, no. I was just going based on what the prosecuting attorney said would likely be the outcome. If all things were fair, then I think the should be required to be registered as sex offenders. Even though the situations are similar, imagine what the outcry would be if this had happened at a day-care. What these girls did is worse than other things that have gotten men registered as sex offenders (such as public urination).

"Did you stick your finger up that guy's butthole?"

"Yea, but I'm just a teenage girl, so its cool."

It's important that we teach younger people how important it is to respect their elders. They never would have done this if they had my parents and grandparents.

I agree there should be no gender bias here. It's not uncommon though. I think if these were male offenders we'd be reading about how the DA was filing felony charges and requesting 10-15 yr sentences. I can hear the speech on the courthouse steps now "We must protect the most vulnerable in our society form those individuals willing to victimize them with such serious deviant acts... I will make every effort these individuals serve the maximum sentence for each act." Instead they're being charged with "gross misdemeanors." Not sure exactly what that means, stuff like this varies state to state. I do agree it's gross.

All that said- I have no idea if they'll have to reg. as SO's. Really depends on the laws in the state of Minn. But I wouldn't doubt it if the DA's charing them with misdemeanors as a way to ensure these poor girls aren't marked as SO's for life. I also have little doubt if Brianna was Brain we'd be seeing the case handled very differently.

Smoking Gun's got the police report-

Teens Charged In Nursing Home Abuse - December 2, 2008

This is like a Benny Hill skit gone horribly wrong.

One more reason there needs to be better skilled, better paid, folks in the human service industry.

And yeah, they're cute, but they get less cute when you realize what rude little gilrs they are.

I think their punishment should be getting "I like sticking my fingers up an old mans ass" tattooed somewhere on their body. It will certainly make thier lives more interesting in all sorts of ways.

I think we need to take this with a real pinch of salt. It is very uncommon for sex crimes to be committed by women, to me - without knowing all the details - this sounds like high spritited youthful behaviour that got out of hand.

I dont mean to diminish things - but in all honesty if I was an old man I wouldnt describe having a 19 year old girl rub her bare buttocks in my face as "abuse" - and I highly doubt that the so called "victims" did either.

A comment above stated that the reaction would be different in teenage boys had treated elderly women in such a way. I must tell, this because this WOULD be a different thing entirely. Realistically, do any of us believe that an adult male can be sexually assaulted by a woman?

This has been covered extensively in another thread, so I'd hate to see this thread spin wildly off in another direction. I will, however, say that dismissing the reality of female-on-male abuse as non-existent disturbs me. I tend to have problems with many misandric beliefs and ideas, but this is one of the worst kind. I have trouble swallowing the idea that there are people who believe men are immune to the abuses of women, whether physical, sexual, or emotional.

That said, I think the sentencing of these girls should be handled keeping in mind the end effect they had on their victims...that is, the extent of their wrongdoings. Their sex has little to do with it, other than the fact that there are cases of them assaulting members of the opposite sex. Even so, assaulting members of the same sex is a crime to be dealt with accordingly.

Basically, I don't think they should get lighter sentences or punishment just because they're teenage girls.

In my opinion this is a disciplinary matter and they should have lost their jobs... from what was quoted in the original article I cant see a crime that was committed.

Did you read the part about the finger inserted into the rectum?

Let's not forget that they're in a home for a reason.

Did you read the part about the finger inserted into the rectum?

Yes, yes I do. I remember studying a case in college from North Dakota where a woman ended up kidnapping and hold hostage a guy for several weeks. They got drunk and she chained him up. She spent weeks assaulting him with everything from a broomstick to her strap-on. She often threw hot water on him when he didn't behave. He finally escaped when she got drunk again. He had burn marks and internal injuries

Females can be SO's. I believe the brake down is something like 90% to 10%. The press likes to report on the cute teacher who sleeps with her students. Sells papers better then the story of a guy getting in the ass with a broom stick. But even the guys that are getting laid by their teacher might be more damaged then most people would think.

Just input "female sex offender' into google and you get stories like-

http://www.fathermag.com/news/rape/spokane.shtml

What more do you need? :confused:

I'm assuming by "humping" they mean dry humping. BTW, since when is "humping" a legal or even adult term?

Cases like that (with the broom stick) are one in a million I suspect... I cant dispute what youre saying because I have no knowledge of the case, but Id be very surprised if a man actually hadnt driven the kidnap and assault and the women in question was an accessory to it.

And the girl inserting a finger in the guys rectum isnt assault is he consented to it. There are no claims that the residents complained or sought to end this behaviour. It came to light when photo's were found, not because any residents complained.

Yes, some people in home's can be vulnerable, but many are also perfectly of sound mind and mentally sharp.

What we have to ask here is:

1 - has anyone been hurt or damaged?
2 - has any resident claimed that they were subjected to things they actually found unpleasant or were against their will?

The answer to me seems to be no in both cases - which is why I believe this is no more than an employment matter. The girls behaviour was certainly over the top - but I dont see that they have hurt anyone.

SF, are you serious? No crime?

Just because males for the most part express their sexuality differently than females doesn't mean they don't want or deserve respect. Maybe males are less discriminating about sex - and that's debatable - but that doesn't mean it's impossible to sexually abuse them. If one does these kinds of things to a man without his consent, especially when that person is older and confined to a nursing home, they are robbing that man of his dignity and agency. No matter how much that man enjoys sex, being treated like an object not worthy of respect is not something that is enjoyable.

From the Fox article:
This isn't an "employment matter." These are serious charges.

For the record, a "gross misdemeanor" is one step below a felony. Many of these sentences can be up to a year in jail. You see these kinds of things for repeat domestic abuse and such. Depending on the actual acts by these girls, these might be sufficient charges.

I'll be sure to sexually assault some Alzheimer's patients then.

/sarcasm

You know why I don't answer posts on the gaming thread? Because I don't know anything about gaming.

Just something to consider.

This is actually an area I worked in professionally for years. Ran sex offender treatment groups every Thursday night for years. You're seriously ill informed here.

To take these one by one

1 - "splooshing water in the guys face" - harmless and causing no injury. This sort of thing really doesnt seem much more than horseplay. Has the resident complained that he found this demeaning? To the best of my knowledge no. Some people find this kind of thing arrousing or entertaining.

2 - "touching his buttocks" - if a male touches a female in this area without permission it would be seen as a problem, but it simply is different. Men and women are not the same and anyone who doesnt see that to me is living in some kind of PC fantasy world. If I hung up a topless calendar at work I'd expect to be sacked. The girls in the admin dept have a calendar of topless hunks in speedo's in their office - if I complained about that who here would not think that I was foolish? There ARE different standards which govern the way men and women interact. I dont mean to be insensitive... but having a 19 year old girl grab your butt is not sexual assault. Pure and simple it is not.... whether youre thirty or ninety.

3 - "Insering a finger in the rectum" - this is the only thing mentioned which COULD be considered as assault. But the question again is was this done against the man's will. Even though a resident in a care home may be infirm, it is quite hard to see that a 19 year old girl could physically overpower a man to the degree that she could shove a finger up his rear if he did not want her to. How did this situation arise? Why was the man not wearing trousers at the time? If she bundled the guy over and shoved a finger up his arse as he told her to stop - yes we would consider this assault... but is this what happened? To any of us find that a realistic scenario?

4 - "antagonizing a resident" - ie having an argument with him. This is clearly not a criminal matter.

5 - "dry humping a resident" - again the key consideration is did the guy object? Can we really believe that even an elderly man could be completely overpowered by a teenage girl?

6 - "hand over the mouth..." - If the resident was generlly screaming for help - we have no report of any resident being harmed of threatened... so presumably once she was gone he would have complained. There is no report that says this either - so my assumption was that she may have been covering an involuntary shout, or a cry of excitement... something of this nature.

__

If I made any arguments above in relation to alleged insults by a male perpatrator on a female victim - my arguments would be considered obscene and deeply offensive. But I can only say again that there are different standards. I hold that it is virtually impossible for a woman to sexually assault an adult male. Cased of physical assault by a female against a male can happen - but are incredibly rare - maybe 1 in 1000 cases of violence might be a female on a male - and I think that number is very generous. Maybe it would be 1 in 10,000.

These girls did abuse their power I feel, and did overstep the mark, and their actions were not appropriate.

But if we say a crime is committed, we have to say their is a victim.

There are no reports or residents or residents families complaining. There are no reports of threats or violence against the residents, and yet they did not complain still. There are no reports of any injuries suffered by the residents. The charges brought against the girls are all minor (suggesting that the prosecutor does not believe serious wrong doing has occured) - the fact is that this is only a news story because it piques the interest of people, a load of sex crazed teens in a nursing home...

Get educated or stop posting.

http://www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca/SAC/p...alViolence.PDF

Male Sexual Abuse Victims of Female Perpetrators: Society's Betrayal of Boys

EBSCOhost Connection: Social Cognitions About Adult Male Victims of Female Sexual Assault. (your library should be able to give you full access to the article)

http://www.aifs.gov.au/acssa/pubs/wrap/acssa_wrap2.pdf

I'm not sure you have any idea what the term "legal consent" means, SF. People in a nursing home, especially an Alzheimer's nursing home, are probably very old, very frail and no longer remember who they are. Do you think if you brought over a contract to these people in which they signed away all their belongings to you it would be valid? Do you think if you had them sign a will you would get all their money?

No, you wouldn't, because people in that condition are legally incapable of giving consent, in the same way that a child is legally incapable of giving consent. You can ask a 7 year old all you want if they want you to stick your finger up their ass, and no matter what they say, you are still guilty of statutory rape. Exactly the same rules apply to someone who is insane or mentally incompetent. They could beg you to do it and love it being done, and it wouldn't matter.

From the story:

No one complained, because these people don't remember their own children. They are deranged, senile. Do you know what those words mean? Do you have any relatives with memory problems? You could literally bring my grandmother to tears and do horrible things to her and five minutes after you stopped, she wouldn't remember any of it, because she can't. And on the off chance your response to that is "well then no one was harmed because she can't remember anyway" I think you need to seriously think about what that says about your respect for an individual's personal dignity.

If the measure of a crime is the victim complaining, then no murder can ever be charged, no one raped using date rape drugs can press charges, and I can go to the coma ward of a hospital and rape and murder and mutilate with impunity and no one can do a damn thing to me. You said that there can't be a victim if the victim isn't complaining. That is the legal standard you just set, can you really mean that?

Strange, you might want to be fondled by teenage girls while lying on your death bed, but I'd warrant that many if not most would not want to be.

What they did was illegal, morally wrong, and should be punished strongly, regardless of their gender.

Almost all of these crimes were committed against patience who suffered from dementia and/or Alzhiemer's disease. They weren't in a position to complain to anyone, nor is it likely their complaints would be understood or given merit. If you've ever been around a close family member or friend and watched them suffer the agonizing breakdown that occurs mentally when one suffers from Alzhiemer's you might not be so quick to call this treatment victimless.

Would you say the same thing if they weren't pretty?

That's not necessary, Smeth. Let's not get heated over nothing.

Better question, would he say the same thing if it were teenage BOYS assaulting the same patients?

Strange has a slightly skewed view of justice and the feminine gender.

Proving an "injury" is only a necessary element in a civil case. In criminal law, one only has to prove that the statutory elements were committed. If the residents did not consent (or were unable to consent) to said contact, then a sex crime was committed. The law does not impute consent based on gender or age. Even if it is reasonably certain that the patients WOULD have consented to the contact, if they were unable to do so, then it is still a crime.

What those girls did was wrong, and in my uneducated opinion, illegal.
I hope that they are punished to the full extent of law. They obviously thought being young
and cute trumps old and ill.
Wrong, just plain wrong. Too often in our society our values are skewed in that manner.
Hence SF expression of his point of view. Sadly, he's not alone.

The parts bolded by me make it seem like you have never actually been to a convalescent facility. A good majority of the residents of these facilities can do little or nothing for themselves. This includes dressing, bathing, and using the restroom. That's the reason why I equated this to child molestation, because many residents are the equivalent of infants. And because of several issues including incontinence, many of these people's sole piece of "clothing" is a hospital gown.

Now to the "nobody complained" argument. These people are in an altered state of consciousness. They have a hard time discerning what is reality.

Let me ask you a question. Do you believe that it is ok and legal to do anything to an unconscious person as long as they tell you to stop, and as long as they don't tell anyone afterward?

Also, if you read the police report, the girls state hat most of the things they did were to make the residents "mad". If these were pleasant and/or consensual activities, why would the residents be angry about them?

Perhaps you noticed I said that female sexual assault of an *adult male* was virtually unknown. There are a small number of sexual assaults committed by women against children. These women are in my judgment suffering from gender confusion - ie they are biologically women but emtionally are male. (the opposite case would become a cross dresser or even have a sex change)

Simply violence and cruelty are not part of the female character. There are very few violent crimes committed by women, and sexual assault is one of the most violent crimes of all.
-----Added 4/12/2008 at 03 : 03 : 19-----
I have no idea what the girls in this case look like, I dont know if they are pretty or not. My judgment is based on their gender and age, and the gender of the alleged "victims"... nothing to do with whether they are attractive or not.

Do you have any evidence for your claims? Peer reviewed, sociological evidence?

Women have every capacity to be just as violent and just as cruel as men. I will grant that there is less prevalence, or at least reported prevalence (and I can guarantee that people with your attitude are exactly why it's underreported), but that is a far cry from impossible.

Do you have any response to the fact that these girls have reported that they did it to make the elderly people in their care upset? Do you have any response to the fact that these people were suffering from dementia and therefore cannot give consent and are essentially invalids who can't use the bathroom by themselves, let alone fend someone off who wants to torment them? Or do you just have gender stereotypes?

A key piece of evidence is revealed by the article quoted

If the man, even if he was unwell or suffering from mental illness, was being hurt, humiliated or found this activity offensive - he surely would not have become arroused?

The fact that he did is clear evidence that he was not resisting and not being victimised in a conventional sense.

No, I am not going quote sociological studies to say that violence and cruelty are alien to the female personality - it is common sense that this is so. The experience of life which all of us have shows us these things to be true every day.

It is not reported that the people in their care were upset - only that at times they cried out. They did not complain, their families did not complain, and still they do not complain. Are we to believe that of this nursing every one of them sufferes from conditions that effect the memory?

In my view they were not tormented. In my view, whatever age the man is, being groped (which is basically what we are talking about here) by a 19 year old girl is not a "torment"

I don't even know what to do with that. You realize that arousal is not entirely governed by your mental state, right? There are instinctive, hardwired responses to certain stimuli that just happen. I'm sure with about 5 minutes of work you could find plenty of accounts of girls getting wet during a rape, no matter how much they were saying no or resisting. I'm sure with another 5 minutes, you could find tons of stories about guys getting erections at awkward times when they weren't the slightest bit turned on.

That aside, you still don't seem to understand that someone who has Alzheimers can never consent to sexual contact. It is a legal impossibility. Having sexual contact with someone who cannot consent is sexual assault or rape. It's that simple. These girls are getting off with slaps on the wrist because of the attitude you're expressing, when they're no better than guys who would do the same thing.

It is truly a perverse relic in this day of supposed gender equality that people still honestly believe that just because a woman does it it's somehow ok, because hey, the guy got some sexual contact from a peaceful, loving girl that he could've easily stopped at any time with his huge muscles.

dang, that's just sick/evil...

As a man, you should know well enough that an erection alone doesn't equal arousal. An involuntary mechanical reaction from the mentally handicapped doesn't come close to consent for reasons too obvious to outline.

I'd like to meet the ladies where you live.

I'm not trying to be rude here but I can't help but to wonder as to whether you've considered the logical conclusion of your argument. Do the mentally handicapped not have any rights all?

I'd like to hope that you're just trying to keep this interesting.

Funny, cause the most significant link I provided - you know, the one that provided you with the name of a study in The Journal of Sex Research - is all about adult males! Perhaps you were too unconcerned with actually knowing what you're talking about to use your library card to read it? I'd suggest you do so.


And here's a book about it. You can even read a significant chunk of it through Google Books, this way you don't actually have to do anything, like go to a library, to know what you're talking about! That said, I'm sure you'll be interested in getting the whole book from your library. I can't imagine you'd want to profess to know what it's like to be a male sexual assault victim without having any idea what you're talking about. No, that wouldn't be like you.

Oh, and here's more! Again, I'm sure you'll read it...you're not the kind of person to just assume what is and isn't "common sense" with absolutely no research to back you up. You're smarter than that!

You'll notice that the research does show that 25% of men have a positive reaction to sexual assault from a woman. Don't get ahead of yourself though, because the research also shows that men have difficulty accepting that they were sexually assaulted by a female in the first place, regardless of whether or not they liked it. It is unclear whether the men who are indifferent to or even enjoyed their sexual assault feel that way because they have been socialized into the myth that men should enjoy any and all sex they can get, or if they actually enjoyed it. Remember: it used to be a widely held belief that women were at fault if they were raped, and many female victims truly believed this because it was ingrained so deeply into their psyche. In fact, we've got a long way to go regarding social attitudes toward female rape victims as well.

It's funny, I can't find a single journal article arguing that men truly enjoy sexual assault or that women are inherently non-violent. I wonder why that is. I mean, you must have read something reputable about it - you wouldn't just make shit up now, would you?!

Of course, the most important thing here is that this nursing home situation is nothing like the sexual assault of healthy, adult males! As has been stated - over and over again - these are people who in many cases can't even go to the bathroom without assistance, or who couldn't even remember what happened to them 5 minutes later! This sexual assault is very much like that of a child, with the exception of having effects on development.

This is some fucked up shit right here dudes.

I <3 smeth.

Seriously strange: as a poster alluded to above, I know you've got some interesting issues associated with feminine criminal behavior and the punishment thereof - I assume this is related to the same issues? Although somewhat ridiculous, I find your positions moderately fascinating...where else does this extend? Are females inherently submissive, and if so does this play into acceptable roles in society and politics? Is every violent or aggressive (perhaps militarily speaking?) female confused in her gender associations?

And yes, to add to the choir - chicks have some issues. I'd bet this started off small, and rapidly grew as a peer pressure, push-it-to-the-limit sort of thing. Kids will do some pretty bizarre things to fit in and achieve status inside their cliques. I definitely think they should be punished, registered as SOs, and put into heavy counseling. I'm not as positive about the sex offender registry - but that's a general thing as the consequences can be so severe for the rest of someone's life.

Well here you go, here's what the two girls over 18 look like-

http://i.cdn.turner.com/trutv/thesmo...081inside1.jpg

Not that that make any difference in this case.

I'd just like to point out that since 1997, claims of sexual harassment by males has nearly tripled according to the EEOC. Third Party harassment such as this is justifiable and quite common these days. So anyone who claims that female assault or harassment on an adult male is unheard of or uncommon simply doesn't know the facts.

Don't make me pull out a Host style thread with tons of links. I just did a thesis for my wife on this whole subject. I'm armed to the teeth.

Anyway, the whole point here is that these girls were CARETAKERS. last I checked, taking care of the elderly did not involve rectal exams, lap dances or spitting in the face.

On the whole sex offender registry thing.. I think it's a bit much, however, anal penetration of an unwanted nature, and to a vulnerable person is pretty close to forms of rape.

but no.. no crime has been committed. :rolleyes:

edit: just found this lovely gem of a comment

Hrmm.. you know, it's funny how you want to say that they aren't upset because they didn't complain. You do realize that most rapes go unaccounted for because the person is embarrassed, or they enjoyed it for a split second right? That doesn't mean that a crime hasn't been committed. It simply means that the victim is embarrassed and afraid of ridicule by people of ideas such as yours.

you may enjoy a woman groping you for no reason and you may enjoy it on your death bed, however, it doesn't make it right for someone to take clear and abusive advantage of another person.

and just so you know, you made a comment about topless calendars vs. calendars of men in speedos.. technically you could easily file a harassment case on the matter.. it's called Hostile Work Environment Sexual Harassment. So no, I wouldn't think you were foolish to do so.

It's been a while since I worked with sex offenders or in law enforcement but one of the last trainings I attended dealt, in part, with the changing gender roles in society and how females were engaging in more and more violent crimes. The male/female roles in western society have been in a constant state of change for years.

I can remember my dad being upset when my mom wore pants one day... outside of the house *gasp!* And when she wanted to get a job? "Well what the hell are the neighbors going to think?" This was in the late 60's, really not that long ago. I came across a book one day in the library at Western Oregon State about being a good wife. It was written in the 50's, mid 50's I think. It gave details on how to plan your day around your husband. Everything from getting up to cook his breakfast to how to keep a clean house without disturbing "his" day. Even had a section regarding making sure you have time to both put on your make-up and have his favorite cocktail waiting for him when he gets home. That was 50 years ago, my how times have changed.

Back to the training- One of the theories put forth by the trainer in that final course I took was as these roles become closer to one another the good comes with the bad. Females are not only enjoying more freedoms, some are engaging in more aggressive behavior. Behavior that has been more typical of their male counterpoints. She (said trainer) had graphs and charts complete with arrows and highlights, mostly from the US Dept. of Justice and the FBI, showing that the rate of violent crimes being committed by females was(is?) snowballing. Everything from robbery to murder to gang violence and yes, even rape was increasing at a dramatic rate.

One of the many things that stuck in my head was child molesters and sex offenders are more often then not victims of abuse themselves. And who gets victimized most often? Females, by far.

skogafoss has a copy of that book. it is weird to read.
-----Added 4/12/2008 at 02 : 45 : 16-----
well, your own UK papers are making a case for an increase in female youth crimes

strange famous, you're assuming as well that all the victims were male. some were poked in the breast. I would assume that breast is used here instead of chest because the victim was female.

Regardless of gender, all of these victims were entrusted to care. There should not have been a question of consent implied or required. Just because you rub a guy's dick and it gets hard, doesn't mean that he is liking it. It means that you are rubbing it.

And yes, gowns, pajamas, robes etc are often the only clothing worn in these facilities.

I find that if you are truly playing the devil's advocate here, then you are taking on Sean Avery proportions...

What, is this taken directly from the 19th century or is it earlier?

I'm not sure who you're making out to be second-class citizens, males, females, or the infirm. They can't all be second-class. I'm not easily confused, but you've accomplished as much in me.

I'm glad others have spoken from my perspective in my stead.

While I haven't seen any sexual harassment charges filed, the patients could easily bring about a sexual harassment suit towards the hospital.

Here's just a few notes to help clairfy why the girls were charged legally

* The victim as well as the harasser may be a woman or a man. The victim does not have to be of the opposite sex.
* The harasser can be the victim's supervisor, an agent of the employer, a supervisor in another area, a co-worker, or a non-employee.
* The victim does not have to be the person harassed but could be anyone affected by the offensive conduct.
* Unlawful sexual harassment may occur without economic injury to or discharge of the victim.
* The harasser's conduct must be unwelcome.


Sexual Harassment types

One-of-the-Gang Often motivated by bravado or competition, or because the harasser(s) think it is funny (AAUW 2006), One-of-the-gang harassment occurs when groups of men or women embarrass others with lewd comments, physical evaluations, or other unwanted sexual attention. Harassers may act individually in order to belong or impress the others, or groups may gang up on a particular target

Bully In this case, sexual harassment is used to punish the victim for some transgression, such as rejection of the harasser's interest or advances, or making the harasser feel insecure about himself or herself or his or her abilities. The bully uses sexual harassment to put the victim in his or her "proper place.


just by these facts alone it's easy to see why these girls were charged.

There is no reason to take the stance you are taking SF, unless you just see it from your view point only and that you wouldn't mind it happening to you. Just because females are stereotypically the "gentler" species does not exempt them from bad behavior.

If the roles were reversed and a male had done these things to women, the uproar would have been tremendous.. why should we cater to some notion of a double standard? Women deserve better than that, even if it means they get in trouble.. because equal means equal on all levels.. not just the non-criminal levels.

Personally, I am on the fence on this one. I can see what they did can and should be considered wrong and very punishable.

However, when I put myself in the "victim's" shoes, I think differently. If I consider myself an old man that can no longer take care of myself and placed in a home full of people just like me, I would be depressed. To add to that, I am essentially waiting for death and don't completely have my wits with me. Even more depressing.

Then a group of attractive to very attractive teenage girls want to rub my penis and put there butts in my face. I have to admit that I would not be complaining at all. Hell, I would thank them and ask them to continue. I would not care if they put a finger in my butt or spit in my mouth. When compared with the reality surrounding me in that home, I would think the "care" given by the girls was a gift from god.

Again, this is just what I think of when I put myself in the place of one of these victims.

I don't think anyone can actually say what they will really think or how they would act when they are old or in a situation like these patients, until it actually happens.

What FF is an important point, and should not be under-estimated. Empathy is an important factor in all of our moral judgments. I have to say that if I place myself in the place of the men in this home, I feel the same as FF does - I would not be complaining. That may sound flippant, but its genuinely my empathetic interpretation. Everyone might not agree, but I believe that many people, and in fact the majority of people, would.

I dont know how anyone can accuse me of sexism. I am an ardent feminist and supporter of women's rights.

I have never said that men cannot be the victim or rape or sexual assault. I understand that homosexual sexual assaults can take place, and I certainly understand that many men may feel a stigma in reporting these crimes - which society must address, and make clear that being a victim is not a thing to be ashamed of.

I am only stating that there are hardly any real cases of a female sexually assaulting an adult male - not that men cannot be victims of sexual assault at all.

__

I think people throw around moral judgments in a very black and white way. Is it really what we want for these young girls to have their lives ruined because of these juvenile and childish actions? If you want to take a legalistic view - yes, some of the actions could be seen as assault. But I call upon everyone to place themselves in this situation and think honestly. As an old man, gravely ill, with declining powers - would you REALLY feel you were a victim if an attractive 19 year old vigoursly rubbed your crotch or stuck her ass in your face?

You can say "the law written down forbids this action which can be interprated in this way" - but if we speak of real common sense justice - can you put your hand on your heart and say in the situation of one of these men you would consider yourself a victim?

It appears their aim was to demean them, not perform sex acts on them. Honestly? I'd take proper care over sexual assault, please.

I completely disagree Baraka - I cannot see any malice in any of these actions. They were thoughtless, childish, over the top certainly - but I see no intention to harm or demean, only peer pressure and a group of over excited young girls

so someone can actually walk up to you and probe your rectum and you'd agree that there is no malice?

I mean you're basis this on a article, you read on the internet.

You can somehow tell the individuals intentions via someone else's writing, while logging on via webserver all the way from the UK?????

that's fricken' amazing!!! You could supplant Uri Geller!

What branch of feminism did you say you subscribe to? :no:

So you're saying it's okay for me to stick my ass into an old man's face for a little fun...if I were only joking?

Strange Famous: If you don't see any malice, you must not be reading any of the articles...which talk about how they did these things in order to upset the patients.

As for calling yourself a feminist...well, I don't know a single self-identified feminist female who would agree with you. Perhaps you don't realize this, but a large part of past discrimination against women had to do with a warped, idealized view of them which denied them their individuality. Much of the reason behind women's sexual repression comes from the belief that they are more "pure" than men, not out of some intent to deny them pleasure. The "feminists" I know - real women who are active and, dare I say, rather feisty about women's rights - would slap you silly for many of the things you've said about women here.

No, Im not saying that it would be ok for you to do that, as - to the best of my knowledge - you are not female.

Feminism doesnt mean that men and women should be treated exactly equally - by any interpretation.

I have already said that if the people in the nursing home were female and the nurses male - these would be outrageous crimes, which should be punished heavily.

This is why I am talking about legalistic moralism against common sense.

If a women grabs a man's butt or a man grabs a woman's butt - common sense and basic human understanding tell us that these are different things and one is an offensive and one isnt. We all know this in our hearts to be true. The moral legalistic approach will say it is the same thing - and I feel it is this approach which is being used in this case.

I would feel like a victim if I were a married old man who had stayed faithful to my wife for 70 years and some tramp decided to grab my dick and stick her finger in my ass without me being able to say or do anything about it. From a purely physical level, I'm sure my nerves would receive signals of pleasure, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't feel ashamed and violated. I would say I was a victim of someone else's desire to use my body in the way they wanted to, regardless of how I felt about it.

The whole problem with that way of thinking is that it ignores the most important aspect of our entire way of life: agency. Your conclusion and that of FF completely ignores the fact that we fundamentally think as a society (at least in nearly all cases) that people have the unalienable right to decide what happens to them and to their body. The fact that they enjoyed it AFTER makes no difference if they did not consent to it BEFORE.

Furthermore, the girls have admitted to doing this to antagonize the patients. They weren't lovers or even stripper or hookers.

And finally, all of your nonsense about the lack of female on male sexual harassment has been torn to tiny, weeping pieces by SM's sources in post 47. Read them and stop embarrassing yourself.

Actually, you are missing the entire import from the article then. These girls were demeaning their victims as they would pose and take pictures, congregate later to retell their stories and have a great laugh about it.

I agree, thoughtless, childish, and over the top. But also demeaning and without regard for the dignity of those who were placed in the care of these people.

The red herring that you raise about the statistical improbability of women abusing men doesn't hold any merit in this case and does not stand up to scrutiny.

You, sir, do not understand "feminism." But don't worry--it's one of the most misconstrued and misunderstood concepts coming out of the 20th century.

Feminists (especially the academics amongst them) would strongly argue against your double-standardism.

If any of the three women in my office grabbed my butt, I would be offended. Period. Without question. I don't desire any physical contact with them other than that required to carry out our jobs and incidental, unavoidable contact from working in close vicinity. That is in no way different than if I grabbed their butt, because I'm pretty sure they feel the same way.

Sexism is making blanket judgments about either sex without looking at the way specific individuals are acting. You are making outrageous assumptions about these girls based solely on things "you know in your heart to be true" and you are making outrageous assumptions about the reactions of the males because "that's how we'd feel if we really stepped into their shoes." You have said that women are gentle by nature and incapable of violence and that if they are violent, they are only violent because they have gender identity disorder. All of that is the very definition of sexism, whatever you want to label yourself.

So in post #18 when you said-

What exactly were you saying or asking? I mean I'm confused which is it- men can't be sexually assaulted by women or they can be but it's rare?

Sir, your positions not only have no basis in fact they seemingly change at will.

Again, you are seriously ill informed on this subject. You've made one false assertion after another and when confronted with actual facts you've simply dug your heels in harder. It's as if you've dug a hole for yourself and in an attempt to get out you asked for a larger shovel.

I do not deny women individuality anymore than I deny men indivisuality... I merely state what most people here also believe, that men and women are different, and have different characters. There are some biological women who are masculine and some biological men who are feminine, certainly... but the basic characteristics of masculine and feminine have some differences.

I no way to I state that women are in any way inferior, nor do I believe that all women are "pure" of sexless. Certainly it is the case that women prefer one partner and men tend to prefer many parters, ie - that women are more faithful than men... this is known to everyone - but it doesnt mean that women enjoy or appreciate sex less.

I put it to you that you in fact are using negative stereotypes of women - claiming that any feminist will be aggressive and "slap silly" people who disagree with them (ie - you are stating that a feminist in fact has the masculine characteristic of physical aggression)

In fact, feminists and women who defend their rights and call for an end of sexism are perflectly feminine, and the myth of the "butch feminist" I feel you are trying to put across is utterly false.

I have been alive 30 years, and I have seen plenty of people get into fights over all sorts of silly things - and Ive never seen a women "slap someone silly" over a political argument yet.

He meant slap silly in the figurative sense of disagreeing vehemently, being offended and bringing up many counter-arguments to your points. He didn't meant they'd come and slap you in the face. And that's not even close to the mark any of us are making in this thread. Care to respond to any of the real issues?

damn dude.. you must get some sweet ganja.

wtf? How is a sexual assault any different based on the perps gender??

fuck me .. you get closer and closer to the edge with every post on this subject.

You are the one who in a different thread talked about how it is cowardly to hit a man while he is knocked down. Yet here, these patients are incapable of many common functions.. yet it is ok for these girls to assault and humiliate them.. because.. they are girls, and girls doing things aren't offensive? If a girl farts.. it's going to stink, just like a mans.


nonsense. complete and utter nonsense to the nth degree.

No, I said someone would slap you silly - and you're smart enough to know I was speaking figuratively - because what you're saying is so absurdly asinine, not just because she's a feminist and would disagree with you.

Don't kid yourself, when you say things like "violence and cruelty are not part of the female character," you are painting with extremely broad strokes that do deny the individuality of women.

EDIT: But Frosstbyte has the right idea. Let's get back to the real issues that you've yet to address.

Isn't your wife supposed to do her own goddamned thesis?

:lol:

This is like reading Thomas Mallory. I can't even wrap my head around your position strange. The things you are claiming are universal truths, and which I know in my heart to be true, I resounding reject in a universal sense. I don't think I can continue this line of conversation.

In a passing sense, I am interested in seeing how this thing plays out. I think if nothing else, this is just a severe case of a serious problem in nursing homes in general. I've heard horror stories from friends who's family members are in facilities for advanced/terminal care. Stealing food being a major issue...I thought it was pretty despicable when someone stole a friend of mine's grandfather's home-cooked cake. Like I said, I wonder how much of this will fall back on the facility in which this occurred? I would be seriously pissed if my parent/grandparent were treated in this fashion. I would wonder if the civil suits are far behind?

Men are perpetually willing sexual objects that all women have rights to at will.

That's the one claim I'm having the most trouble swallowing. (Please correct me if I have it wrong.) It basically means men are second-class citizens and perhaps don't even have autonomy.

For example, if the women with whom I interact consistently touch me in sexual ways, there is nothing I can do about it. If my SO found out about this and wanted to divorce me, I would be at fault because I was a willing participant, automatically, partly (or wholly) due to the fact that I prefer multiple partners by default based on my sex.

Do I have it right?

what can I say I'm good at papers and such..and I want her to hurry up and finish..

plus the promise of head every day for 2 weeks doesn't hurt :lol:

but anyway..

I'd say the civil suits are not far behind. The facility can be held liable on a slew of charges including the sexual harassment that I posted earlier.

Here in Raleigh there is a case similar to this except the caretakers left a man alone for something like 22 hours and didn't monitor him and he died shortly after someone actually did move him. It's all on tape.. civil suits will be forthcoming in that case as well.

---

-+-{Important TFP Staff Message}-+- This thread has evolved into more of an male vs female equality issue. I'd like to see those hashed in a different thread. Reserve this thread for the talk of the actual case.

You obviously didn't read the police report that was linked earlier then. The girls flat out said that many of the things they did (hands over the mouth, poking in the breasts, poking in the genitals, spitting in their mouths) were simply to make the patients angry, and then they would laugh at them because they were powerless to defend themselves.

If purposefully making someone who cannot defend themselves angry by touching their genitals or spitting in their mouths isn't malicious or demeaning, I don't know what is.

All right, ardent feminist popping her head in.

Sexual assault is sexual assault, period--regardless of the gender/sex of the perpetrator, regardless of the gender/sex of the victim. Assault is assault, and it's pretty clear that assault was perpetrated here.

As a feminist, I believe we should all be equally treated and have equal opportunities. Therefore, I believe that these girls should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. We would do the same to teenage boys who did these things, and we should insist on consistency despite sex/gender here. Despite what you may believe, StrangeFamous, women ARE capable of committing violent crimes and doing horrible things, and the law should treat them just as it would a male who committed the same crime.

I feel horrible for those poor, helpless people who were treated that way. My oma died of Alzheimers. I've been in a care facility like the one described. There was no way my oma could have given consent to anything by the time she was there. She had the mentality of an infant.

Well said snowy.

Alas I fear we're beating a dead horse. Either that or SF is having a bit of fun with us. I'm starting to think the latter.

based on prior discussions with SF, I wouldn't say it's the latter. That isn't an insult.. just merely a point to say that he often has a pre-conceived notion and doesn't persuade from that view no matter what evidence is presented.

Well, if he's not having a good laugh then, well, then I just don't know what to say.

Either way I'm done with this horse it's still dead, beating it more won't change anything.

No, Im not saying that.

I dont deny that it is a logical possibility that a woman could commit some form of sexual assault on a man (with a sex toy or something if the man was tied up or injured) - but what I am saying and what I think you know I am saying is that in the real world, cases of this happening are so rare that it is almost a non existent event.

If all the women in your office constantly smacked you on the arse - yes that would be a problem - but it doesnt happen, and in nearly every case of sexual harrassment in the work place the victm is a woman being mistreated by an aggressive male who is abusing a position of authority. Sexual harrassment is a shameful thing, and I think we devalue the experience of real women who are victims of this by talking about fantasy scenario's were all the women in your office spank you or whatever it is youre going on about.

I hope I dont need to have a discussion about the bird's and the bee's with you - but sexual intercourse in the normal sense CANNOT occur if the male is not willing, for quite clear biological reasons.

A woman cannot force a man to have sex if he doesnt want to. That is a fact that cannot be disputed by any clear clear thinking person. I read one of the articles posted in this thread - and it claimed he first way in which men could be victims of sexual assault by women was if they got drunk with a woman and slept with her and in the morning didnt find her attractive. To be honest I find this prety outrageous to compare real sexual assault to a guy making a drunken mistake.

No man can be forced to have sex if he doesnt want to do it. If he regrets it later, this isnt assault, this is regret. To have sex the man must actvely and physically consent.

_

With regrads to this case - I have never denied that the actions of these girls were thoughtless, over the top, and a mistake. All I am saying is our response should be proportionate and realistic. They should lose their jobs, and in my opinion thats all

If despite ample evidence to the contrary you're completely unwilling to consider the fact that these girls are no better than your average date-rapist or child molester, I guess that's up to you. I have nothing else to say here except that I'm shocked and appalled that people still have views like this about the two genders.

And it is abundantly clear that that is all you read. Especially considering one of the studies talks about how men can become sexually aroused despite being unwilling. It is a biological response, plain and simple. One reason why humanity has advanced as far as we have is an understanding that we build upon the knowledge of others. The fact you can be told - and shown - by literally every single other person in this thread save one that what you are saying is absolutely wrong, and yet continue to hold onto your view that well gee, women are just so pretty and wonderful and smell so nice, they just don't do things like this and golly if they did I'd sure be a lucky guy, aww shucks!...well it's just sickening. It's unfortunate that apparently you're contact with women is so rare that you'd welcome disrespectful sexual assault while you are mentally incompetent and incapable of even understanding what's going on...but perhaps if you had a more equitable view towards women that wouldn't be the case. God knows if I thought about women the way you do - and was open about it - I probably wouldn't have any of the female friends I have. Idealizing someone is never a good thing, and despite thoughts to the contrary it is actually disrespectful to that person, not more respectful. I hope, for your sake, that you never have to deal with a family member that has Alzheimer's, because you would be shocked, in retrospect, at the sheer stupidity that is coming out of your keyboard right now.

Touché. Just remember that any notion of fantasy was yours to begin with.

I'd like to see this concern of devaluing transferred to the men and women in the OP article too. But I think that too would be a fantasy, by the look of it. I pity your negative views of both men and women.

Thanks to smeth, frosst, tully, and others for your attempts to temper this thread with reason, but I think I'm done here--at least with this aspect of it.

what jumps out so far as i am concerned in this case is that these girls seemed to treat the patients they abused as toys first and as human beings maybe to the extent that the abstract idea of these folk being humiliated made them more interesting as toys.

i can't imagine such a sequence of events getting started without a wholesale breakdown of empathy. so to my mind, the ethical problem these girls performed is central--this is obviously abuse legally--it is obviously an abuse of power----but the ethical dimension is kinda chilling. it's like something went dead inside these people.

when i think about this situation--to the extent that it is present for anyone through the accounts linked in this thread---i do base my evaluation on an empathetic reaction, but it goes toward the folk with alzheimers. it's such a horrific disorder which already undermines any sense of agency by scrambling the way memory organizes itself...and in the facility that is set up to care for them, they are treated like toys.

i don't see a defense of this being possible.

you sir, are sadly misinformed.

I'm clear thinking. I've seen enough data on this subject in the past month that I wanted to pull my hair out. Literally.

In this case, there is mention that a man had a finger shoved up his ass. Correct? Would that not constitute anal penetration i.e. anal sex? The patient was unwilling for this to happen.. ergo, a man had sex without being willing.

SMeth has already alluded to the other aspects of unwilling male sex so I don't need to rehash that again as you are simply thick headed and have no clear intent on seeing the case or the facts for what they really are. I cannot fathom why someone would simply stick to their guns when their argument has been blasted so full of holes that there really is no ground left to stand on.



I'm not even going to bother posting link after link, stat after stat, because there have been multitudes posted so far and you seem to ignore them. Maybe it's because secretly you hope that you get groped by a female co-worker.

Well I was done with this thread but... Just when I thought I was out they pull me back in...

These laws vary state to state. I'm not aware of any federal sex crime laws, as far as I know they're all handled at the state level. Any of you professional legal type people out there feel free to correct me.

In Oregon the act of inserting a finger into another person without their consent would be unlawful sexual penetration. In this case since the victim was unable to give consent due to mental defect, mental incapacitation or physical helplessness. This would be a class A felony and what's known as a measure 11 case. Measure 11 is a law passed by popular vote and it assigns minimum sentences for certain crimes. Here's how it reads for Oregon-


Oregon Sex Crime Information | Rape, Sodomy, Sexual Abuse Felonies

So, in Oregon, based on the girls statements in the police report the major crime here would be Unlawful Sexual Penetration I, which is treated the same as Rape I or Sodomy I for the purposes of sentencing.

Under measure 11 Unlawful Sexual Penetration in the first degree carries a min. sentence of 8 years, 4 months. Measure 11 also mandates juveniles over 15 charged with these crimes to be tried as adults.

Oregon Ballot Measure 11 (1994) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And that's just that one act (crime.) Reading through the police report I can assure you there are a bunch of other charges these girls could be charged with, I wouldn't be surprise to see a DA charge 10 to even 30 counts against some of these girls. DA's like to charge every possible count they can, ever see someone who accused of killing one person be charged with 3 or 4 counts of murder? It not that unusual.

OK, now I think I'm done here.

It is my view that the views mostly expressed in this thread are not based upon clear thinking, but instead gender bias.

I have been asked many questions and have done my best to answer them.

I ask one question - do those who have posted claims that these actions are rape or serious crimes really have the courage of your convictions.

If you step outside of this being a debate, do you really want to see these girls spend significant time in prison and potentially have their lives destroyed - because of these actions? Actions which I intrepret as AT WORST being unpleasant pranks, and realistically in most cases being over excited horseplay.

Let us have a true understanding of what has happened.

There are NO reports of injuries suffered
There is ONE instance of a CLAIM made that someone had a finger slipped up their bum. The rest of the claims amount to little more than horsing around. (ie - patting the guy on the butt, laying in bed next to him, splooshing water at him, etc)
The men have not been physically harmed, and the sum of the complaint is that these old men, who are gravely ill and have probably had very little sexual activity in a great time have been exposed to sexualised horseplay by a bunch of pretty teenage girls.
I dont say this in a flippant way, but as I stand now, if you would tell me that at 90 when I was on my last legs and vulnerable, a 19 year old nurse would dry hump me - I would NOT complain. If I knew a male relative of mine was exposed to this, I would NOT complain on his behalf. Whether you want to admit it or not, most people in the world feel the same way.
-----Added 5/12/2008 at 02 : 36 : 51-----
Whether you find a study that says this thing is neither here nor there, because every man in this world knows that arrousal is not a purelt biological and automatic response.

I can tell you for a fact that I know that a pretty girl and an unattractive girl doing the same thing results in different responses in terms of arrousal. I know that if I watched a pornographic video with a pretty girl I would get an erection, and if I watched a pornographic video with two dudes I would not. I know that is a girl I wanted gave me a lapdance I would get an erection, and if a 16 stone, 5 foot tall, bald headed 50 year old women gave me a lapdance, I wouldnt. I know for a fact that if a girl put her hand on my lap it would arrouse me, and if a man did it wouldnt.

The problem with quoting this study and that study and then claiming because some academic writes something its a fact is that ignores reality and common sense. Our experience and own lives tell us these basic truths in relation to this matter.

I don't think I'm going to bother posting after this, because it is clear that you're either not reading or not comprehending anything that is being written here. I hope it's the former, but I fear it's the latter.

You are, quite literally, the only person (well, except that one other post in this thread) who has not seen a huge problem with this situation. Some choice comments from a different site I also frequent, just for further example...And, since everyone at that other site appears to have their head on straight, I tried to shake up the discussion a bit and told them about this "other guy" I was discussing the issue with. I told them this...Among other things, they described these views as "sickening."

And as someone whose 90 year old grandfather has Alzheimer's, and whose family may no longer be able to afford paying for in-home care because of the global economic downturn and may instead have to put him into a nursing home within the year, I can tell you with absolute certainty that, yes, I do "want to see these girls spend significant time in prison and potentially have their lives destroyed."

Even reading your description of their actions shows a complete lack of comprehension regarding what has happened. You're warped view of women has apparently made it impossible for you to comprehend that these acts were not "horseplay," but violent acts with the intent of angering, not playing around. The girls themselves have confessed as much!! You've got to have your head pretty deep in the sand (or pretty far up something else) to read about this and think it was "horseplay."

Both of my grandfathers were sick and vulnerable before they died... it doesnt change my intrepretation of the way the world is.

Anyone who thinks 5 years in jail is a "slap on the wrist" is not in touch with reality

I see the other quote you have brought up is a statement that if the person was related to one of the patients he would commit murder against the teenage girls responsible. Even when said in a state of high emotion these sentiments are deeply disturbing and frightening.

Again with the reading comprehension. I think 5 years in jail is a reasonable sentence, especially considering they would be felony charges which they can be required to disclose in job applications. Except, since I bothered to read and comprehend the articles I also know that they are likely not to get any jail sentence.
-----Added 5/12/2008 at 03 : 32 : 10-----
Strange Famous, here's another link for you to ignore which talks about how the sexual response of males is involuntary: The National Center for Victims of Crime - Library/Document Viewer

You've got it backwards. It's gender bias that allows you to assert in contrast to all of the evidence presented, that these girls acted without any serious intent to harm.

You've attached your own anecdotal truths to the situation and erased away the fact that women in this case and guilty of sexually assaulting and harassing the (defenseless) invalids to whom they were entrusted.

There's no such thing as "sexualized horseplay" with the mentally handicapped. The victims aren't even lucid enough to completely grasp what's being done to them.

You do realize that if you were to have the great misfortune of being in the shoes of these victims, you probably wouldn't be of the mental capacity to complain let alone enjoy it.

:rolleyes:

SF, do you think that performing sexual acts on a male child is immoral? If so, is it ok if they give their "consent", and no physical harm has been done?

What if you were blindfolded and someone began sucking your penis. Are you saying that it is 100% impossible that you may become aroused?

Also, do you know what "morning wood" is?

:crazy:

He's done my head in ...

There is no comparison between old men and children - it is a completely different question. We are not speaking about children her, but mature men. Children have not developed yet into fully moral subjects. Adults are. These men may be elderly and very sick and vulnerable, but to call them children is very disrespectful. Even if their mental and physical powers have waned they are still men and still entitled to be dignifyed as such.

"morning wood" is of course caused by dreams of an erotic nature. If you dream of dying you dont wake up with an erection, if you dream of a hot girl you may well do so. This simply is further information supporting my point - not denying it.

if I was blindfolded, it would depend on my interpretation. if I thought it was man I wouldnt be arroused because Im not a homosexual, if I thought it was a woman I would be if I wanted to be with that woman in that moment.

Somehow I missed this edit. Setting aside the general anti-intellectualism you've displayed (there's no "common sense" reason not to believe the Earth is the center of the universe after all)... do you not realize that a good 50% or so of the people behind this research are...males? I guess they must have been castrated at a young age or something though, because to hear you say it anyone with a penis would know that your view is true.

Funny how only 1 of about 45 people so far who have been expressed to your views has even given them any open consideration. It's kinda like the person who constantly complains about the people they try to date. At a certain point you have to have the clarity of mind to realize it's not them, it's you.
-----Added 5/12/2008 at 04 : 02 : 41-----
You clearly have completely avoided exposure to a large portion of the aging populace. Either that, are you're the most unobservant person on this entire planet. At this point in the thread, I'm honestly not sure which.

When you don't remember what happened 5 minutes ago, spend an hour in the bathroom with the shower running...but don't remember to take a shower, and can't go to the bathroom properly without the assistance of someone else...

Honestly, I don't even know where to begin with this. The ignorance is just astounding.
-----Added 5/12/2008 at 04 : 04 : 22-----
Of course it is!

Oh, except it's not.

Actually the article you quote explicitly supports my statement.

If a man can get "morning wood" in his dreams but cannot get an erection when awake they know that the problems he has when awake are emotional - which in fact is a statement that the act of getting an erection is controlled by emotion (ie - excitement and willingless and desire to have intercourse)

Uh, no, it means the act of NOT getting the erection, in that case, is emotional. There's a big difference between not getting an erection when you WANT to get one, due to emotional causes, and GETTING an erection when you DON'T want to get one. The point is that erections are rather complex and can be caused (or not caused) by a variety of things. "Morning wood" is an example of the physiological side of things, and sexual anxiety is an example of the psychological.

The female sexual response is far more emotionally based than that of the male, yet many women do get "wet" when they are being raped - which is one source of embarrassment and psychological anxiety. What you are arguing is the equivalent of saying they enjoyed it and therefore there was no victim. These are biological responses, and they are not necessarily connected to our emotions. That emotions can get in the way of them has nothing to do with that fact.