So why does a man find the situation funny?

That's my question.

Why is it amusing when a man is held against his will and raped by a woman, when almost everyone would be outraged if a man held a woman and raped her?

How exactly does a woman "rape" a man? If it's equated with "coerced" then sure, but "forced" doesn't exactly work. The problem, if it is that, is that most men would love the attention, as we can't even get women to notice us, much less "rape" us.

From the first post:
"...the female shop owner... overpowered him"
and:
"...force feeding him Viagra to keep the lesson going."

Not to mention holding him for three days. Doesn't exactly sound like a consensual relationship to me.

As I said, some of us here would kill or die for an opportunity like that, and consider him lucky.

And while my sense of humor may be decidedly warped, yours seems to be on vacation.

:rotfl2: :yeah:

I will admit, I don't have much of a sense of humor when it comes to rape. I also find the double standard quite appalling.

She offered to let him go after two but he demand another day to make sure he learned his lesson... :O:

As well you shouldn't. But...

But it is also very real, hence movies like Three In The Attic. I will say that I'd feel the same way you do if I was abducted by a man for that purpose, but a woman? I should be so lucky.

The gentleman in question doesn't seem to have felt himself to be lucky, considering he went to the police to report the incident even though it exposed his own crime of breaking into the salon.

He did not consent to the sexual activities he was forced to participate in. That is, simply put, rape. If it had been a male shop owner subjecting a female robber to sexual acts without her consent, there would be an outcry against the owner. Or are people actually saying they consider rape to be an acceptable punishment for breaking into a store?

Hell, i'd hit it. In a heartbeat - like the fist of an angry god. Handcuff's, radiators, and viagra would not be neccessary. :haha:

(If i was single that is. :shifty: )

yeah shes definitely tappable. I'd do it for free. with out the slave **** as well

Razark, play with fire and mean harm to another being - and accept the risk to get your fingers burnt. The man tried to rob her. He was the attacker, she was the intended victim. That she was powerful enough to refuse her role and turn the situation against him, would not have played any role - if he would not have decided first to rob her.

There are worse things that could have happened to the guy. For example going into a Russian prison for one or two years and getting used by male inmates who do not need to consume Viagra at all to become entertained by him for slightly longer than just three days.

Get my point, yes? ;) The guy was a robber, and he planned to use his assumed superiority against an assumed weak girl. He got spanked, but will survive it. As far as I'm concerned, close the file, the two involved subjects are straight with each other, save the tax money and avoid court proceedings. Maybe this experience will motivate him never to try to rob a woman again. If so, he indeed would have learned a precious lesson.

BTW, there are countries in the Western world where the woman would have had the right to shoot him to death in self-defence. Or more generally said: where the shop owner, independent of his gender, would have had the right to shoot to death the attacker, independent of his gender.

Don't want to get harmed while attacking somebody else for no good purpose? Then don't attack somebody else. That's what it comes down to for me - after having been the target of intended street robbery myself three times and having driven them away every time, and having been attacked by a junkey with a knife and seriously injuring him and taking him out of action rather hard after he cut me.

A. I have a problem with vigilantism. Legal systems are established for a reason. Self defense is one thing, vigilantism is a completely separate story.
B. Yes, he tried to rob the salon. Rape is not an acceptable response to attempted robbery. Two wrongs do not make a right.
C. If the genders had been switched, this thread would be completely different. If a man kidnapped and raped a woman, repeatedly, for three days, there would be no question on the morality. The woman was the rapist in this situation, and the fact that he tried to rob her in no way excuses the rape.

Self defense, yes. If he attacks her, shoot him in self defense. Handcuffing him, drugging him, and raping him is not self defense. Beating him unconcious? Self defense. Non-consensual sex acts? Not self defense. There is no possible way she could say "I feared that he might hurt me while he was chained to the radiator, so I had to rape him to keep myself safe."

Are you claiming that you had the right to kidnap the robbers and rape them after you had already removed the threat?

from the article:
"When police arrived to question Zahjac, she said: 'What a bastard. Yes, we had sex a couple of times. But I bought him new jeans, gave him food and even gave him 1,000 roubles when he left."

1.000 roubles that is 36,1011 USD or 25,0311 Euros or 22,1242 GBP.

Getting raped, a new pair of jeans, food and a bit of money. She must have felt in love with him.