This means that if a man is “sexually coerced” (persuaded or pressured into doing a sexual act) that deep down he must have really wanted it. The same situation would be looked at differently if it was a woman, instead of man, receiving these tactics. (Smith) Ronald found that men were sympathetic for women and harsher on men in a similar case of sexual assaults. They also gave less blame to women perpetrators than men. (Smith) Is this because men are expected to be an unrelenting force with a strong un-bending will? Would this mean that any man who is sexually coerced in societies’ eyes cannot be seen as a victim but as a willing …show more content…
Feeling as if admitting it would make them less of a man. Thankfully for my friend he was not too scared. Eventually he was able to talk to our school counselor about it and was able to work things out. Unlike the estimated 7% of men who do not. (Javaid)
Why, then do people still not understand that men may not always want to have sex? Knowing that an erection does not mean a man is sexually aroused should help show that men are not consenting silently. Women have also reported releasing vaginal fluids during sexual assault.(Judson) Having problems with intimacy and self-esteem are similar effects of sexual abuse to women also.(Tewskbury) When women are assaulted by other women or men they receive the same amount of empathy whether they were attracted to either.(Davies) Men should be given the same amount of treatment.
If the public was to become more aware of these facts, many men would not be scared to get the help they needed. It is hard to change myth accepted ideas but not impossible. If everyone did their part in questioning logic and doing research, society would be just a little more open minded and