One thing that has troubled me is the viewpoint that when a man's sexuality is forcibly compromised, he is considered gay, however the aggressor isn't.
If one man wrestled another man down into a compromising position or had his buddies help him, it seems to me that the agressor had a preference for that man in lieu of a woman.
It's much easier to find a woman willing to have sex than it is to fight with an unwilling man. Therefore, why isnt the agressor in the situation considered to be gay? He sure seems to want another man more than the victim does.
2006-07-29
10:18:48
·
14 answers
·
asked by
Joe K
6
in
Sociology