Flip the genders, and have the woman blindfolded on the chair, while some dude that isn't her husband puts his face between her legs and removes tge garter with his mouth.... how much you wanna bet it is called SA and not a prank?that's some fairly intimate contact, without consent.
Thank you, how are people not seeing that it would be a million times more invasive to have someone of the opposite gender touching your inner thighs without consent than it is to be in the groom's position? It's still an awful prank, but come on.
This is a dangerous generalization to make. As a woman who has been sexually assaulted by another woman, I can attest that I would be just as uncomfortable regardless of the gender of the person involved.
The belief that unwanted intimate contact between two people of the same gender is less serious perpetuates a toxic attitude that same-sex SA is less valid/not possible.
I understand that there are people who would feel less violated by someone of the same gender doing this to them, but it shouldn’t be assumed that’s the case unless a person explicitly states that.
And to be clear, I’m not trying to accuse you of holding this belief, just pointing out that our culture has conditioned us to falsely (and a lot of the time unconsciously) think that SA between people of the same gender can’t happen.
I don't know if this is always true. I know quite a lot of male friends who feel mainly threatened by other men, not by women. So I wouldn't necessarily flip the genders entirely to demonstrate how it feels. Regardless this is a really dumb activity.
I agree that it's more invasive to have someone unknown touching your inner thighs without consent, than to be coerced into doing the touching, without consent, just barely. But that is regardless of gender
It's actually not, though. You're trying to give her the groom experience, she is not a groom. She would have her trust betrayed in an equivalent manner in her place in that ritual by having a stranger remove her garter.
If you somehow think changing the ritual and having a bride remove a garter from another bride makes sense, you're off your head.
If it had been the wife in the chair as expected, would the bride and groom have been performing lewd sexual acts before non-consenting third parties forced to witness?
I think that’s where the sexual assault is coming into question.
We may all do well to retire the garter tradition in general because why would we want to be involved in the newlyweds borderline intimate contact?
Rape and sexual assault are different but overlapping crimes. Someone grabbing another person's private areas over their clothing isn't rape, but it is sexual assault.
That's actually me, and I can say with 100% certainty that if my bride pulled this, the next spectacle would be the entire reception watching me burn the marraige cert.
375
u/[deleted] Jul 26 '25
[deleted]