So your boss walks in...
In light of the assertion in the article cited below, that men can't stop intercourse once it is in progress even if the woman suddenly changes her mind, just suppose...
You are a guy and you are having sex with the cute new admin assistant (either gender) on the comfy chair meant for your VIP guests. Your boss walks in.
Do you
A. Leap off the admin assistant and cover up your nudity as fast as humanly possible?
B. Apologize to your boss (and the assistant) that you cannot stop what you are doing since you are beyond the point of no return and hope she/he/they understand?
C. Struggle, veins popping and sweat pouring from your brow, to withdraw from the admin assistant in spite of the incredible difficulty in doing so?
Or do you think the real issue is that once a man has gone past a point that seems like he "has it in the bag" he feels entitled and to hell with any woman who has the nerve to deny him after that point? And a whole bunch of men who made the laws agree with that logic?
So any woman who realizes beyond that "point of no return" that the guy is not wearing a condom as he promised, is HIV positive, is actually her long lost brother, hears him admit that he also screwed her sister, or any of a number of reasons she might change her mind, is just out of luck in states with antiquated laws written by antiquated men perpetuating the blue balls myth.
I thought so.
You are a guy and you are having sex with the cute new admin assistant (either gender) on the comfy chair meant for your VIP guests. Your boss walks in.
Do you
A. Leap off the admin assistant and cover up your nudity as fast as humanly possible?
B. Apologize to your boss (and the assistant) that you cannot stop what you are doing since you are beyond the point of no return and hope she/he/they understand?
C. Struggle, veins popping and sweat pouring from your brow, to withdraw from the admin assistant in spite of the incredible difficulty in doing so?
Or do you think the real issue is that once a man has gone past a point that seems like he "has it in the bag" he feels entitled and to hell with any woman who has the nerve to deny him after that point? And a whole bunch of men who made the laws agree with that logic?
So any woman who realizes beyond that "point of no return" that the guy is not wearing a condom as he promised, is HIV positive, is actually her long lost brother, hears him admit that he also screwed her sister, or any of a number of reasons she might change her mind, is just out of luck in states with antiquated laws written by antiquated men perpetuating the blue balls myth.
I thought so.