It’s a trap!

I play some games on my phone, and as part of the free option, there are ads. Lots of ads. Probably too many ads. I say that because the ads become overwhelming and distracting when it comes to actually playing the game, and I wind up getting annoyed and frustrated at the ads.

Like the one for ‘Honey Trap.’

According to its Google Play page, “Have you ever dreamt of conquering the world and having fun with countless HOT beauties? Honey Trap is definitely your choice! The year's hottest mobile RPG “Honey Trap” has been officially released! Players will be able to experience the turbulent times when battlefields filled the land and flames of war are wide-spread. Come! Assemble your heroes and set out to conquer the world! The beautiful belles are awaiting your arrival!”

When I saw the ads, I had no idea that there was anything in the game other than sex. The ad that I saw, and the one that’s up on YouTube does nothing to say that there is anything other than sex in it.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjRMh-I72Ic

The focus of the game is to attract and get “belles.” The ad doesn’t even give them that much respect. It instead shows them as cards that you can flip over and “get.”

Can I "get" a what the fuck?

I mean, seriously, how sad is it that we are creating games where it appears the main purpose is to have sex with random (mostly Asian) women that have no lives and personalities of their own. I do understand the point of porn, and I understand that this is basically just an RPG of porn, but still. What are we teaching men and boys if we give them games like this?

People wonder why men and boys have no respect for women. Well, if they grow up playing games like this, I can’t be surprised. You’re basically teaching them to win women for their daring deeds.

Let me tell you a secret: women are not prizes to be won. They are actual human beings with their own ideas, thoughts, and feelings. They aren’t there for your amusement and your pleasure. They are there for their own, and if the two happen to intersect, success for all! But to imagine or pretend that women don’t exist except for how men perceive them to exist is a problem.

Again, I understand porn. I enjoy porn. This isn’t porn. This is purely objectification. There can be no arguments made that the women in this game are being empowered. They are being used. And they are teaching men that’s all they’re good for.

Thank you, Self Daily, for knowing what matters to a woman

‘Twas the day before Christmas

And email was coming

Including one from Self Daily

To set my mind thrumming.

Okay, I give up on trying to make this like ‘Twas the Night Before Christmas because, well, too much effort. And if I wanted to put effort into anything, it would be doing my arms workout so I could be “Star Wars-Worthy.”

Yup.

That’s what I just said.

I need to get a new arm workout from Daisy Ridley of Star Wars so that I, too, can be “Star Wars-Worthy.”

Now, I’ll give Self this much credit: at least the article wasn’t how to get your make-up “Star Wars-Worthy.” And it wasn’t how to lose enough weight to be “Star Wars-Worthy.”

But why do women have to be “Star Wars-Worthy” at all?

I didn’t see anything about how men how to be buff to go see “Mission Impossible.” Why should women need to add an additional arm workout to any exercise routine in order to be in good enough shape for Star Wars?

And, yes, I get it. They don’t really mean that you need to work out in order to go see the movie. But their tagline of “The force is with your arms, back, and shoulders…” really makes me wonder why they expect that women should need to add a workout to look as good as a woman in a movie.

I suppose the real issue, when you drill all the way down to it, is that they aren’t looking for ways to get healthier. They’re looking purely at the physical appearance. A woman’s self, Self seems to be saying, is based on if she’s looking as good as someone in Star Wars. It’s based on if she’s “Star Wars-Worthy.”

Me? I’m definitely not “Star Wars-Worthy.” And I’m okay with that. (Although I am definitely curious about “12 Problems Sex Therapists Hear All The Time…”

Dementia and a Cup of Tea

Rockstar Dinosaur Pirate Princess posted, back in March, about how consent can be like a cup of tea.  

If someone can’t say they want a cup of tea, it’s bad if you make them that tea and pour it down their throat.  Even if, once upon a time, they used to really like tea.  Love tea, in fact.  Because…maybe their tastes have changed.  Maybe they aren’t into tea anymore.  Maybe they’re not well enough to enjoy the tea.

But now I want to stop talking about tea because it makes it sound too polite.

Let’s talk about a real situation.

“In late March of last year, Donna Lou Rayhons moved to a nursing home in Garner. The clashes over her care built until a meeting in May during which Henry Rayhons was informed of his wife's inability to consent. According to court documents, Henry Rayhons entered his wife's room about a week later, pulled the curtains around her bed and a roommate heard noises that suggested sexual activity. As Rayhons left, he dropped undergarments in a laundry basket.”

 

The woman, who had dementia, who had no ability to provide consent because of her mental state, who cannot state whether or not she did consent (because she has since died)…her husband had sex with her, after the nursing staff had already told him that she could not consent due to the severity of her dementia.

Let’s go over that again – she *could not* consent due to dementia, a mental condition – but because he was married to her, he decided it was okay to have sex with her body.   

Yes, I said it that way on purpose.  He did not have sex with his wife.  She was gone mentally.  All that remained was her physical body.  And he somehow figured that it was okay to go ahead and have sex with her body, regardless of her mental state. 

Now for some more scary stuff from the original article on the case:

First, the law in place is Iowa is pretty damn frightening.  According to Iowa law, “an act [is] sexual abuse in the third degree if the two parties are not living together as husband and wife and if one person "is suffering from a mental defect or incapacity which precludes giving consent."”  

Yup.  So if they are living together as husband and wife, even if she cannot give consent, it’s okay.  The location matters.  If he had her at home, under his own care, he could rape her as often as he wanted to, and no one could step in to stop him.  Because, hey, if you’re married, you’ve automatically consented to sex at any time, right?  Ummm.  No.  Wrong.

Second, his family is all behind him having sex with her.  "Donna's location did not change Dad's love for Donna nor her love for him. It did not change their marriage relationship. And so he continued to have contact with his spouse in the nursing home; who among us would not," read the statement, which went on to call the charges "illogical and unnatural."

If he’d had sex with an unconscious woman, would anyone defend him?

If he’d had sex with a woman who wasn’t his wife and who didn’t consent to the sex, would anyone defend him?  

If he’d had sex with a child who was, by definition, incapable of consent, would anyone defend him?

So why is his family defending him now? 

Their argument that her location didn’t change their love or their relationship does not fly with me.  People get divorced all the time – that changes love, right?  And even if they don’t get divorced, people can still choose to not have sex with their spouse, regardless of how much they love them, simply because of medical issues or something as simple as not being in the mood.

Let’s cut through the crap.

Having sex with a non-consenting partner – regardless of marital status or reason for lack of consent – is rape.