I'm not at all endorsing war rape, but I think the emphasis on "war-rape" when speaking of the "horrors of war" is insulting when examining the actual horrors of war which occur against men.
When men are captured by enemies in war, they're often subject to brutal torture. Torture, mutiliation, being burned alive, all common for the captured men of whom unfortunately met defeat. I've read cases where men have had their cheeks ripped off with hooks, their penises were split in two down the middle, their skin was shredded with a cheese grater, they had their teeth ripped out and then toothpicks shoved up the gaping wound.
What do women have to put up with? A little penis in vagina? A few uncomfortable minutes? I'm not going to echo some extremecels who argue that foids enjoy rape, or that it's a totally harmless action. I'm asking the reader to compare what the women of defeated factions go through versus how the men suffer. You'll see who's the real victim of war is, contrary to Hillary Clinton's claim.
When men are captured by enemies in war, they're often subject to brutal torture. Torture, mutiliation, being burned alive, all common for the captured men of whom unfortunately met defeat. I've read cases where men have had their cheeks ripped off with hooks, their penises were split in two down the middle, their skin was shredded with a cheese grater, they had their teeth ripped out and then toothpicks shoved up the gaping wound.
What do women have to put up with? A little penis in vagina? A few uncomfortable minutes? I'm not going to echo some extremecels who argue that foids enjoy rape, or that it's a totally harmless action. I'm asking the reader to compare what the women of defeated factions go through versus how the men suffer. You'll see who's the real victim of war is, contrary to Hillary Clinton's claim.
