From Marty Klein
Despite eyewitness accounts that the woman asked to be “rained on,” the State says it must be rape because no sane, sober woman would actually consent to such a perversion.
Jones’ attorney requested I testify as an expert witness about the many ideas and practices regarding ejaculation and semen (and faces) that have developed over the centuries. The Chief Judge of the District Court approved the expenses for me to fly out.
But the State prosecutor pulled a legal technicality and challenged my expertise, and so the trial judge held a phone hearing. She was told I’d written five books about sexuality, trained almost 100,000 doctors and psychologists in sexuality, and done sex therapy and marriage counseling for about 30,000 hours.
And she turned me down. I hadn’t written any books on “facials.” I hadn’t taken any courses on “facials.” I hadn’t done any research studies of “facials.” It’s all true. Of course, no one has.
Hey look! The state has said you don’t have control of your own consent! The assertion has been made that no one in control of herself could possibly wish to have semen on her face, therefore the act itself must be rape. What on earth gives ANYONE the right to make that assertion. What if this had been a BDSM scene, or something involving other bodily fluids? I know nothing about this case, and I don’t take charges of rape lightly, but the justification being given here by the State is asinine. They are taking away people’s ability to decide what acts, sexual and otherwise, they want to engage in.
Oh, and the post goes on to say that the judge said even if he had written the book on facials, his testimony would still be pointless because, well, everyone knows all about sex already, so there’s nothing a sexologist could possibly add.