The right to mis-define oneself

[bennyboy]

Look.  If I say beating someone and murdering them are both acts of physical violence, would you start crying that they are not comparable?  No.  They are both acts of physical violence.  And exposing someone to an unwanted sexual experience without their foreknowledge or consent is still sexual assault.

Except that that analogy fails.  It's more as if you're equivocating name-calling and a physical beating. I'm not "crying" about anything; I'm pointing out that your equivocation is horseshit. You may not wish to admit it, but the fact is that one act is forcible, and most often results in injuries, sometimes grievous, and sometimes fatal; the other is ameliorated by a simple "What's this?! No thanks!"

And according to the Department of Justice, foreknowledge is not a condition of sexual assault:

Sexual assault is any type of sexual contact or behavior that occurs without the explicit consent of the recipient. Falling under the definition of sexual assault are sexual activities as forced sexual intercourse, forcible sodomy, child molestation, incest, fondling, and attempted rape.

Trying to shoehorn foreknowledge into the definition in order to buttress your case is not warranted, clearly.  Your comparison is inapt, and you'd do better to simply acknowledge that fact.

lol @ the DoJ as our source of moral correctness.

Okay, let's stop playing semantics, because I don't need to draw an equivalence to rape anyway.  I posed a simple question: do you or do you not think that a last-minute reveal is likely to cause trauma in many men?  Let's forget about the rape "analogy," and look at this in terms of assault.  Yes or no: do you believe a significant % of men will be traumatized by this experience?