Fuck post #metoo

[muscmtl]

I just cruised this guy on Grindr and he replied that  I've raped him, harassed him that he's got my license plate. And then I remembered,   5 years ago, 5 fukn years ago.  I showed up at this guy place, after being invited as a dominant top, kissed him like an animal... And he freaked out !!!! So much I left, immediately, of course calling him tragic faggot, cuz he waS.

Now he's threatening to put my picture everywhere...

Deleted my Grindr account, because even though I did nothing wrong it is post #metoo  and this guy can have his day in the sun. well more like an hour out fo the pit of a garbage can.

anyone else worried that this new era is making every sex encounter legally dangerous. I sure am

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 21, 2022 by muscmtl

[evilqueerpig]

This guy sounds like he's a few sandwiches short of a picnic...you're well rid of him.

[BootmanLA]

It's kind of late now, but deleting your account was probably overkill and possibly unwise. If anything were ever to come of it, having access to your messages (if they go back that far in your history) would be a good defense point.

If I recall correctly, several years back, Canada rewrote its laws on sexual assault, removing the specific term "rape" from the law and instead broadening the definition of "sexual assault" to include all forms of non-consensual sex. (There was a case recently clarifying that sex without a condom, when one is requested, is sexual assault, for instance).

Unfortunately, that broadening of the law also means that unwanted kissing - if he can prove it was unwanted (and, presumably, that you knew it was unwanted) can be considered sexual assault. That's one reason why the old-fashioned negotiation for BDSM scenes - what's okay, what's not okay, what depends on context - was so valuable, and if more people practiced that (despite its lack of "sexiness" when you're already horny and wanting to fuck), ESPECIALLY with online hookups where there can be a nice little electronic trail of what the person agreed to, there would be fewer false charges of sexual assault (and not just in Canada).

[muscmtl]

1 hour ago, BootmanLA said:

It's kind of late now, but deleting your account was probably overkill and possibly unwise. If anything were ever to come of it, having access to your messages (if they go back that far in your history) would be a good defense point.

If I recall correctly, several years back, Canada rewrote its laws on sexual assault, removing the specific term "rape" from the law and instead broadening the definition of "sexual assault" to include all forms of non-consensual sex. (There was a case recently clarifying that sex without a condom, when one is requested, is sexual assault, for instance).

Unfortunately, that broadening of the law also means that unwanted kissing - if he can prove it was unwanted (and, presumably, that you knew it was unwanted) can be considered sexual assault. That's one reason why the old-fashioned negotiation for BDSM scenes - what's okay, what's not okay, what depends on context - was so valuable, and if more people practiced that (despite its lack of "sexiness" when you're already horny and wanting to fuck), ESPECIALLY with online hookups where there can be a nice little electronic trail of what the person agreed to, there would be fewer false charges of sexual assault (and not just in Canada).

Well. Thanks for the legal advice, and sending a couple of chills down my spine.

Deleting Grndr was a good thing since so much waste of time.

So guess you confirmed that every sexual encounter is now... Well I don't even know what to call it anymore

 

[BootmanLA]

6 hours ago, muscmtl said:

So guess you confirmed that every sexual encounter is now... Well I don't even know what to call it anymore

Well... not really. Women have, historically, been pressured into something sexual far more than men (and thus the new law is a boon to them, and given the predatory history of so many men over the decades, I'm not really bothered by that). Even if men sometimes feel pressured into doing something, sexually, that they end up wishing they hadn't, I don't think most are going to raise a ruckus.

But again, that's why I think communication is so critical, though it needn't be formulaic and sterile. Asking someone online "What's on/off the table? Oral, anal, kissing, some rough play?" not only gives you a better idea of what he does or doesn't want - and maybe weed out someone who plays at too low or too high a level for you - but it provides documentation of what he said, so at least consent can be inferred if you didn't cross any stated boundaries. In the recent condom case, the Canadian supreme court was divided, but ultimately held that because the woman had specifically and unequivocally said "no condom, no fuck" (not those words, but...), it was the responsibility of the guy to clarify, when he penetrated her the second round without a condom, that this was OK. He didn't, and admitted he didn't (his excuse was "she should have felt for whether there was one and said something"). 

So I don't think it's as big a disaster as you think it might be. Even if someone files charges, they're not going to show up and arrest a person based on what the other person said unless there's physical evidence of an actual assault. They may question the other person intensively, of course, but I don't think cops are going to bring a case of sexual assault when the person set up the meeting online and all that happened was some rough kissing.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, BootmanLA said:

Women have, historically, been pressured into something sexual far more than men (and thus the new law is a boon to them, and given the predatory history of so many men over the decades, I'm not really bothered by that)

It's probably true, most men are stronger than most women and men are on average in positions of power more so able to abuse that power.
And I feel it's a good thing there's more attention drawn on sexual abuse / abusing of power through the #metoo movement.

There is also data that boys or men who are raped/sexual are less likely to come forward, esp. if the sexual offender wasn't a man. There's a mix there of feeling that society doesn't accept men as being victims and for the guy who's been assaulted that when he got a hard-on he (wrongfully) thinks he liked it while getting an erection can also be a sign of being nervous, a purely physical response to friction and touch, or resulting from other emotions than lust.
A (young) man often also responds differently compared to a girl or women experiences this kind of violence. Aggression, excessive drug-use and overcompensating in macho or tough behaviour is apparently quite common.

Anyhow a guy who's experienced this, often waits decades to tell someone this happens, sometimes as a last resort and even after one or more suicide attempts.

This is meant as a nuance, in the hope that more people of any gender feel free to come forward and talk about it; In no way I meant this to diminish the female experience either in the shocking numbers of women who report being sexually abused at one - or more - time in their life, or their still disadvantaged position in most of the world which re-enforces their chances to be victimised. 

 

13 hours ago, muscmtl said:

calling him tragic faggot, cuz he waS.

Now he's threatening to put my picture everywhere...

Both are dick moves if you ask me.
Sorry bro but it needs to be said.
- You acted like a dick, by calling him a tragic faggot for how he reacted when you did what you thought he liked. He apparently didn't know what he was into, or didn't like what you did or just fucking had a change of heart. And you didn't get to fuck.
There are more gentlemanly and graceful ways to respond when this happens dude.
- Neither do I appreciate someone threatening to retaliate; And if someone is convinced he got assaulted he (or she) still doesn't have the right to instigate a trial by (social) media. That's what the police are for.

And I agree that legally you're probably fine.

 

1 hour ago, BootmanLA said:

But again, that's why I think communication is so critical, though it needn't be formulaic and sterile. Asking someone online "What's on/off the table? Oral, anal, kissing, some rough play?" not only gives you a better idea of what he does or doesn't want - and maybe weed out someone who plays at too low or too high a level for you - but it provides documentation of what he said, so at least consent can be inferred if you didn't cross any stated boundaries. In the recent condom case, the Canadian supreme court was divided, but ultimately held that because the woman had specifically and unequivocally said "no condom, no fuck" (not those words, but...), it was the responsibility of the guy to clarify, when he penetrated her the second round without a condom, that this was OK. He didn't, and admitted he didn't (his excuse was "she should have felt for whether there was one and said something"). 

Agreed, communication before and even more importantly during sex is needed both for having a good time, and for not experiencing things you - or the other guy - didn't want. Even freaking out to stop what's happening (!) is an acceptable response in my opinion. And there's also body language, how someone's voice sounds etc. 

Only tried rougher action with one guy who really likes that - more than me but I like it gets him off - and I insisted on him having a code-word for when it gets too much for him. Still fun despite having safety-net and actually communicating with someone. 😉 

Bottoms and subs (or versas/switch people) here on BZ should perhaps realise that when they fantasise about rough sex, cnc (consensual-non-consensual) play and share these as a desire with their potential dates they might lessen their chances to get the guy/men convicted if they go too far.
 

[muscmtl]

1 hour ago, BareLover666 said:

It's probably true, most men are stronger than most women and men are on average in positions of power more so able to abuse that power.
And I feel it's a good thing there's more attention drawn on sexual abuse / abusing of power through the #metoo movement.

There is also data that boys or men who are raped/sexual are less likely to come forward, esp. if the sexual offender wasn't a man. There's a mix there of feeling that society doesn't accept men as being victims and for the guy who's been assaulted that when he got a hard-on he (wrongfully) thinks he liked it while getting an erection can also be a sign of being nervous, a purely physical response to friction and touch, or resulting from other emotions than lust.
A (young) man often also responds differently compared to a girl or women experiences this kind of violence. Aggression, excessive drug-use and overcompensating in macho or tough behaviour is apparently quite common.

Anyhow a guy who's experienced this, often waits decades to tell someone this happens, sometimes as a last resort and even after one or more suicide attempts.

This is meant as a nuance, in the hope that more people of any gender feel free to come forward and talk about it; In no way I meant this to diminish the female experience either in the shocking numbers of women who report being sexually abused at one - or more - time in their life, or their still disadvantaged position in most of the world which re-enforces their chances to be victimised. 

 

Both are dick moves if you ask me.
Sorry bro but it needs to be said.
- You acted like a dick, by calling him a tragic faggot for how he reacted when you did what you thought he liked. He apparently didn't know what he was into, or didn't like what you did or just fucking had a change of heart. And you didn't get to fuck.
There are more gentlemanly and graceful ways to respond when this happens dude.
- Neither do I appreciate someone threatening to retaliate; And if someone is convinced he got assaulted he (or she) still doesn't have the right to instigate a trial by (social) media. That's what the police are for.

And I agree that legally you're probably fine.

 

Agreed, communication before and even more importantly during sex is needed both for having a good time, and for not experiencing things you - or the other guy - didn't want. Even freaking out to stop what's happening (!) is an acceptable response in my opinion. And there's also body language, how someone's voice sounds etc. 

Only tried rougher action with one guy who really likes that - more than me but I like it gets him off - and I insisted on him having a code-word for when it gets too much for him. Still fun despite having safety-net and actually communicating with someone. 😉 

Bottoms and subs (or versas/switch people) here on BZ should perhaps realise that when they fantasise about rough sex, cnc (consensual-non-consensual) play and share these as a desire with their potential dates they might lessen their chances to get the guy/men convicted if they go too far.
 

Noooooooo 

A shit fuk douche who cruised me, gives me his  address because i m a  dom bb top, and looses it when i start to animal kiss deserve to be told.. this asshole was 40 yrs old, not a 13 yr old virgin

So according to you, if this tragic waste shows up WILINGLY AND ON HIS OWN at a cumunion leather orgy everyone will have to stop and "say my poor darling!!!!!" Hell no! You are sooooo wrong to defend him, and clearly part of the problem 

If you're scared of blood , don't go into nursing

if you're scared of height  don't become a high-rise window cleaner

 if you scared of hard kissing don't go online looking for a dom bareback top

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest]

50 minutes ago, muscmtl said:

So according to you, if this tragic waste shows up WILINGLY AND ON HIS OWN at a cumunion leather orgy everyone will have to stop and "say my poor darling!!!!!"

 

I said nor implied any such thing.

Do you need to borrow my reading glasses dude?

 

[NEDenver]

2 hours ago, muscmtl said:

Noooooooo 

A shit fuk douche who cruised me, gives me his  address because i m a  dom bb top, and looses it when i start to animal kiss deserve to be told.. this asshole was 40 yrs old, not a 13 yr old virgin

So according to you, if this tragic waste shows up WILINGLY AND ON HIS OWN at a cumunion leather orgy everyone will have to stop and "say my poor darling!!!!!" Hell no! You are sooooo wrong to defend him, and clearly part of the problem 

If you're scared of blood , don't go into nursing

if you're scared of height  don't become a high-rise window cleaner

 if you scared of hard kissing don't go online looking for a dom bareback top

 

But even if he shows up to the leather orgy, he does get to decide who fucks him and who he fucks.  Still, a 5-years-after threat of "you assaulted me because the foreplay was aggressive" is over the top.  Seriously, maybe I should put "I like hard aggressive kissing and foreplay" in my profiles just to scare off whiners.

 

[Guest]

It hasn't happened to me but I can't help but wonder how many guys have been wrongfully accused of sexual misconduct by other guys(or women).

[muscmtl]

2 hours ago, BareLover666 said:

I said nor implied any such thing.

Do you need to borrow my reading glasses dude?

 

As a hot dom hunky muscle top, writing/ reading skills are obsolete, in fact don't want to destroy my bottoms' dom-top-fantasies by showing off fabu grammar skills

[Guest]

@muscmtl I think I understand your anger and frustration. Now for the facts.

1. He invited you to his place with the understanding that you are a dom(inant) bareback top. 

2. After the initial greeting and validations, i.e. your photos were a true likeness of you, and there was a reasonable mutual acceptance of each other, you proceeded to kiss him. I assume that neither of you were high at that time. 

3. Your forceful kissing, and presumably, verbal and non-verbal communication, made him realise that you were not the partner he was looking for. 

The question is now: When he presumably told you that he doesn't like where the action is going, what did you do? Did you get up and leave (including most likely calling him a faggot and other names?). If yes, then he probably does not have a case. Or not one to stand because you stopped the moment that he said you are making him uncomfortable. The most you can be asked for is an apology. 

However, if you did not stop when he asked you to stop, and you continued to either kiss or touch him against his will, then the situation becomes a little more complicated and nuanced. For example, even if you didn't stop, was this part of a prior understanding that rough play was OK as long as a safe word was chosen and mutually agreed? 

I assume that no dick was out during this initial foreplay and that you left before anything more than kissing was involved. Again, here are nuances: were you too naked? who disrobed whom? Did he have a hard-on? etc....

To make a long story short, if he just didn't like to play with you and you left as soon as he made it clear that he is uncomfortable with you, you're in the clear. It means that your intention was simply to have fun through role-play and the moment he told you that he is not comfortable you honoured that request. Even if that included a harsh name-calling. Again, here, the most anyone can ask for is an apology. And that's that.

Now, please understand that we are all basing our comments on our understanding of the facts as you presented them, so we all have a different POV. 

At any rate, IMHO he doesn't have a case here because of many reasons, such as: a) a gay man of 40 year old being on Grindr and probably Scruff and other apps, would be expected to be mildly informed of gay sexual activities, their meaning, and what are the expectations when two men meet; b) he would need to prove significant damage, psychological or physical, resulting directly from this particular encounter. (For example, "I've never been able to have a hard-on after this incident" is difficult to prove, contrary to what tabloid press may want you to believe); c) if he got your license plate number, one can argue that you are actually the victim here since he took your license plate with an ulterior motive, which any judge or attorney would ask what was the reason for that action. d) if he continued to be on Grindr and other apps - if it gets to that point, you may ask to have his profile records released ( a bot more difficult, but if it gets to that you can get a warrant for the back-ups). 

Also, ask within community what is his standing. There's nothing more that we gays love than a juicy gossip. That's a source of good info if it comes to that. 

Deleting your Grindr profile does nothing for you, except, as already stated above, making those message exchanges unavailable to you easily for the time being.

Also, remember, if you are in QC, he would need to prove a lot more to initiate a case than just a #metoo comment. If he brings the case up on ON you may have to do a bit of homework. Either way, assuming that the facts are as accurate as you described them, he will have to produce a lot of evidence. And by going public, he can do a lot of damage to himself too. 

I acknowledge that in my comments above I may be biased towards exonerating you of any wrongdoing. This is simply because I do not have enough facts to base a more balanced opinion. However, I do know that there's a lot of miscommunication these days between partners in sex. What one may think is acceptable, may very well be totally not acceptable for the other. At the end of the day, anyone will judge the situation based on its merits alone, the intention and the consequences of the action. As someone was referring earlier to SCC ruling about the condom use, removing or not putting on a condom when asked for, is a known fact that the action has deeper and more life-changing implications than being told that you should only kiss on the left hand side because they look better that way 🙂 So, while that ruling has significant consequences it should not be used as an argument by everyone who five years ago decided that you were not what they were looking for. Rape and sexual assault accusations are serious and posting something like that in the public domain (hashtag or not), has serious consequences for both parties involved.

In the meantime, what you may want to do is talk to a lawyer, (pro-bono ones at community centres are a good place to start) and get their initial advice. Bon courage, mon frère !

 

 

 

[Close2MyBro]

Welcome to the wacky world of #metoo. You can't even look at someone without being accused of 'leering at them in a sexual way'. You can't even flirt with someone because you'll be accused of invading their space or creating some other microaggression towards them or get accused of making 'unwanted' advances. They way this has been handled creates the net psychological effect of sexual suppression.  Everyone is now afraid to do or say anything that used to be part of the dating and sexual norms.

When did people get so psychologically weak? It used to be that if a gay whistled at a girl and she wasn't interested, she would tell him to f-off and that would be the end of it. But now, whistle at a girl and the whole reaction is as if she had been raped, she becomes traumatized for life and you end up being charged with harassment. This is NOT progress.

[11bi11guy]

8 hours ago, muscmtl said:

 if you scared of hard kissing don't go online looking for a dom bareback top

I’m a total bottom with guys. I don’t like to kiss, but I do like and have enjoyed sex with dominant bareback tops. What part of “dom bareback top” means hard kissing will be involved?

Nothing about “dom bareback top” seems like it necessarily involves any kissing, let alone hard kissing. “Tops” put their cocks in my ass. “Bareback tops” put their cocks in my ass without a condom, and shoot their loads in my hole. Do you think by saying you’re “dom,” that means you get to kiss guys without discussing it beforehand, and to do so without any reaction or protest from the “submissive bareback bottom”? Even if he’s not into hard kissing, or not into kissing at all?

None of us were there, so we don’t know if his reaction was way over the top. We also don’t know other details of the interaction, such as how big each of you are, which might affect how threatened he felt. I agree with you that #metoo culture has gone way too far, and based on what you’ve told us, there’s certainly no need for any accusations of rape or criminal sexual assault on his part. We shouldn’t require sex to be sterile and transactional for all parties to feel safe.

But when a submissive person communicates his or her limits—regardless of how or how well they are communicated—any dominant person worth respect would show enough care and maturity to accept those limits, to pull it back with grace and dignity, and to either offer to communicate better about hard and soft limits (it still interested), or end the encounter politely (if no longer interested). Even if he was way over the top in his reaction, sounds like you acted like a child in response. Take the high road next time. Self-identified “dominants” who don’t handle rejection well are an enormous red fucking flag with a capital “F,” hiding insecurity behind over-the-top machismo, and definitely not worthy of respect as true dominants.

[BootmanLA]

9 hours ago, Close2MyBro said:

Welcome to the wacky world of #metoo. You can't even look at someone without being accused of 'leering at them in a sexual way'. You can't even flirt with someone because you'll be accused of invading their space or creating some other microaggression towards them or get accused of making 'unwanted' advances. They way this has been handled creates the net psychological effect of sexual suppression.  Everyone is now afraid to do or say anything that used to be part of the dating and sexual norms.

When did people get so psychologically weak? It used to be that if a gay whistled at a girl and she wasn't interested, she would tell him to f-off and that would be the end of it. But now, whistle at a girl and the whole reaction is as if she had been raped, she becomes traumatized for life and you end up being charged with harassment. This is NOT progress.

Your memory is again faulty.

"It used to be" that if a guy whistled at a girl and she wasn't interested, she was called a stuck-up cunt and other people demanded to know what she was wearing because, of course, anything less than a nun's habit or an abaya was tantamount to advertising that she "wanted it". THAT is how it "used to be."

Women who told a man to "fuck off" were often then deemed "that kind of girl" and could be lucky to escape without being physically assaulted.

Maybe, just maybe - bear with me now, expand your mind, think about this - MAYBE the fucking pigs should assume that calling attention to a woman's physical appearance and attractiveness in public with a wolf whistle is a shitty thing to do, instead of defending these guys because oh, poor little babies, they're getting sued by the mean nasty lady who got tired of their shit?

Fuck this business of assuming that a man's public, macho, compensating-for-something sexual innuendos and overtures are just natural behavior we have to accept. As I point out, shitting on the ground wherever you happen to be is "natural behavior" but last I checked, we had evolved past that.