“Outraged by an incident in a University of Connecticut dormitory, the state Senate voted unanimously Tuesday to change the definition of sexual assault to include cases without direct physical contact. Lawmakers were responding to the case of three UConn students accused of ejaculating onto a female student’s face as she slept in a dormitory in September. The three men, who no longer attend the university, were charged with disorderly conduct and public indecency, but could not be charged with sexual assault under state law… The problem is that the existing legal definition of sexual assault requires ‘contact’ between the victim and the perpetrator… The incident began in Skvirsky’s dorm room in Watson Hall, where he and the female student arrived after meeting at a party at the off-campus Carriage House Apartments. She fell asleep on a futon before Brohinsky — Skvirsky’s roommate — returned home with Piscottano, according to a police affidavit. The three men, according to the affidavit, watched a pornographic video on a computer and took turns ejaculating on the student’s face and body. When the woman woke up, she thought she had drooled on herself, the affivadit says. The next day, the affidavit says, Skvirsky sent the woman an instant message that stated that they ‘were really drunk’ and had ejaculated on her.” — Hartford Courant (US)

But did it improve her skin tone? wags will ask.

Meanwhile you have to wonder about a few different points here. In the first place, what kind of latent homo thing is it for three guys to be jerking off together just to play a joke on their “friend?” It sounds like this poor girl was a victim to their repressed desires for man love. By ejaculating on her, they could engage in erotic games — masturbating in front of each other, watching each other, performing for each other — while maintaining the fiction that they were doing something to her.

In the second place, it’s pretty amazing that this girl mistook three spurts of ejaculate — some of which must have landed in her hair, on her forehead, etc — for drool. That’s a lot of drool! In some weird places! And didn’t she notice that it had that special, vaguely salty smell, and that unique crumbly texture of old dried cum? Maybe she didn’t have a lot of experience with ejaculate, or maybe she simply couldn’t conceive that that’s what it was. After all, this is not the sort of prank you expect friends to pull on you.

In the third place, what sort of dope informs his victim that she’s been sexually assaulted? She had no clue. These guys could have gotten away with their prank if only they hadn’t been possessed of an urge — was it remorse? or bragging? — to, ahem, throw it back in the victim’s face.

In the fourth place, prior to this new legislation, why wasn’t it legally “contact” to convey sperm from one body to another? It implies that the law implicitly defined contact as the touching of two organs — skin. Which makes a certain amount of sense, but all the same it doesn’t seem unreasonable to suppose that “contact” can occur in more expansive ways. If somebody sneaks up and cuts off a lock of your hair with a pair of scissors, that’s a form of contact, isn’t it? If somebody spits at you, that’s a form of contact, no? If somebody gives you a facial, isn’t that a form of contact?

VideoBox

It's like the iTunes Music Store for Porn. Download unlimited high-quality video for only $9.95/month.