• Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    One is done with a glorified Turkey baster to livestock. The other with your penis to a woman.

    Both are non-consensual penetrations of animal vaginas. The actors involved need not be the same species, as in bestiality, and the thing used to penetrate need not be a body part. How would you like it if the women loved ones in your life were vaginally penetrated with Turkey basters instead of penises? Makes no difference because the deed is the same: concent is violated and in a sexual (read: vaginal body parts = sexual body parts) manner.

    I’m not comparing women to livestock in the slightest, you’re putting words in my mouth. I’m saying that actions of rape DONE TO BOTH women and animals bear exact similarity. There is no difference between artificial insemination without consent of women as for animals, and there is no difference between vaginal intercourse without consent of animals as for women. Both of these instances constitute rape.

    And artificial insemination without consent to a women is absolutely rape. It consists of vaginal penetration without consent. That is literally the definition.

    • Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      You must either life under a different legal system or your farmers are shagging their cattle to inseminate them for it to be rape.