top of page


Public·29 members

Sexual Daddy Position!

The Spanking is a position similar to doggy style, but with a little bit of an acrobatic twist. Since the partner on the bottom is being held up by the top partner, this position feels super submissive. The bottom partner has to give the top partner complete control (and focus instead on staying balanced), and that sense of dependency is so hot.

Sexual daddy position!

Also similar to doggy style, the Power Grab is a position in which the partner penetrating from behind has all control. The submissive partner stays on their knees while their arms are held back by the dominant partner. Bonus points for a little hair pulling and dirty talk, wink wink.

In the homonormative sense, a dad (or daddy) is a gay man who applies a state of mind that encompasses care, consideration, mentorship and leadership to a gay junior male. A dad is usually a cis-gendered male, but this may not always be the case. The dad has the welfare of a younger man at heart, and his natural impulse is benevolent guardianship.

In cases of child victims who seek medical attention within 72 hours after rape, medical professionals can diagnose and treat the acute injuries of the genital organs. At the same time, evidences can be promptly collected using a sexual assault evidence collection kit. However, when child victims do not report the rape immediately and seek help from a medical institution at a later stage, medical professionals often exclude the physical examination of the external genitalia unless specific symptoms are reported by the child, or an examination is requested by the guardian. Not being exposed to similar cases, medical professionals are not familiar with external genital injuries in the later stage, and the importance of physical examination of the external genitalia is largely overlooked. According to studies from other countries, the hymenal scars of rape victims are monitored for several months or years. In addition, severe forms of hymenal scars persisted [3]. Another study has also compared hymenal injuries between white and blacks rape victims, and the severity of hymenal injury varies depending on the level of skin pigmentation [4,5]. On the other hand, almost no research on hymenal scars in child rape victims has been conducted in Korea.

(A) The hymen was annular, and partial V-shaped notches (80%) were observed at the 6 o'clock (a) and 9 o'clock (b) positions. (B) Via a cotton swab examination, a partial V-shaped notch (80%) was observed in the 6 o'clock position.

(A) The hymen was annular, and multiple transections were observed at the 3 o'clock (a), 6 o'clock (b), and 10 o'clock (c) positions. (B) Via a cotton swab examination, transection that extends to the base of the hymen was observed in the 6 o'clock position.

Typically, acute injuries of the external genitalia observed in child rape victims include lacerations, bruise, abrasion, redness, and edema of the posterior fourchette, labia majora, labia minora, hymen, or vulva [9]. The hymen of a child is easily torn by the insertion of an adult penis, as the pre-pubertal physical structure of the hymen is relatively smaller than that of adults [10]. In a study conducted by Heppenstall-Heger et al. [3], the genital scars of pre-adolescent sexual abused victims were monitored for 10 years. Of 24 child victims who were raped, transection was observed in 12 victims. The transection of the hymen did not naturally heal unless they were surgically reconstructed. Slaughter et al. [11] conducted a study on scar patterns in the genital organs of sexually assaulted female victims. Hymenal laceration occurred more frequently in adolescents than in adults, and the difference was statistically significant. Hymenal injury is more frequent in adolescents than in adults because of the lack of sexual and childbirth experience. Therefore, when a child is raped, hymenal injury is more likely to occur, or the severity of the injury is more serious in adolescents than in adults. Severe hymenal scars, such as deep notches of over 50% or transections, may remain permanently even after several years [6,12]. Most child rape cases have a delayed disclosure of sexual abuse [6]. Therefore, by the time medical professionals examine child victims, the injuries are most likely healed to a certain degree.

In the majority of rape cases, most scars remained in the areas of the posterior vagina between 3 and 9 o'clock positions [13]. In the 2 cases reported here, the injuries were caused by rape. In case 1, scars were observed in the areas at 6 and 9 o'clock positions; in case 2, scars were observed at 3, 6, and 10 o'clock positions, which is consistent with the previous research report. The degree of the injury was an 80% hymenal notch in case 1 and a transection extending to the hymenal base in case 2. The first rape took place when both victims were aged less than 13 years, with no history of sexual abuse or consensual intercourse, and the offenders were male adults. A study reported that the average penis circumference of Korean men during erection was 11.31.2 cm [14]. Therefore, the hymen could be seriously injured due to the relative difference in the size of the penetrating physical structure during rape. When children are raped, the scars in the hymen are deeper, and notches of over 50% or transections remain as permanent scars [12]. The victims of cases 1 and 2 had serious hymenal scars that resulted from penile insertion during rape. The hymenal scars may have been visible for several years after rape due to the severity of the injury. This can serve as physical evidence, which supports the reliability of the child victim's statement.

Title I of the ADA protects individuals from employment discrimination on the basis of disability, limits when and how an employer may make medical inquiries or require medical examinations of employees and applicants for employment, and requires that an employer provide reasonable accommodation for an employee or applicant with a disability.[10] While pregnancy itself is not a disability, pregnant workers and job applicants are not excluded from the protections of the ADA. Changes to the definition of the term "disability" resulting from enactment of the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (ADAAA) make it much easier for pregnant workers with pregnancy-related impairments to demonstrate that they have disabilities for which they may be entitled to a reasonable accommodation under the ADA.[11] Reasonable accommodations available to pregnant workers with impairments that constitute disabilities might include allowing a pregnant worker to take more frequent breaks, to keep a water bottle at a work station, or to use a stool; altering how job functions are performed; or providing a temporary assignment to a light duty position.

Anne, a high-level executive who has a two-year-old son, told her manager she was trying to get pregnant. The manager reacted with displeasure, stating that the pregnancy might interfere with her job responsibilities. Two weeks later, Anne was demoted to a lower paid position with no supervisory responsibilities. In response to Anne's EEOC charge, the employer asserts it demoted Anne because of her inability to delegate tasks effectively. Anne's performance evaluations were consistently outstanding, with no mention of such a concern. The timing of the demotion, the manager's reaction to Anne's disclosure, and the documentary evidence refuting the employer's explanation make clear that the employer has engaged in unlawful discrimination.

Examples of pregnancy-based harassment include unwelcome and offensive jokes or name-calling, physical assaults or threats, intimidation, ridicule, insults, offensive objects or pictures, and interference with work performance motivated by pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions such as breastfeeding. Such motivation is often evidenced by the content of the remarks but, even if pregnancy is not explicitly referenced, Title VII is implicated if there is other evidence that pregnancy motivated the conduct. Of course, as with harassment on any other basis, the conduct is unlawful only if the employee perceives it to be hostile or abusive and if it is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the terms and conditions of employment from the perspective of a reasonable person in the employee's position.[78]

Title VII is violated if a facially neutral policy has a disproportionate adverse effect on women affected by pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions and the employer cannot show that the policy is job related for the position in question and consistent with business necessity.[88] Proving disparate impact ordinarily requires a statistical showing that a specific employment practice has a discriminatory effect on workers in the protected group. However, statistical evidence might not be required if it could be shown that all or substantially all pregnant women would be negatively affected by the challenged policy.[89]

Carol applied for a warehouse job. At the interview, the hiring official told her the job requirements and asked if she would be able to meet them. One of the requirements was the ability to lift up to 50 pounds. Carol said that she could not meet the lifting requirement because she was pregnant but otherwise would be able to meet the job requirements. She was not hired. The employer asserts that it did not select Carol because she could not meet the lifting requirement and produces evidence that it treats all applicants the same with regard to this hiring criterion. If the evidence shows that the lifting requirement disproportionately excludes pregnant applicants, the employer would have to prove that the requirement is job related for the position in question and consistent with business necessity.[95]

An employee requests light duty because of her pregnancy. The employee's supervisor is aware that the employee is pregnant and knows that there are light duty positions available that the pregnant employee could perform. Nevertheless, the supervisor denies the request, telling the employee that having a pregnant worker in the workplace is just too much of a liability for the company. It is not necessary in this instance that the pregnant worker produce evidence of a non-pregnant worker similar in his or her ability or inability to work who was given a light duty position.


Welcome to the group! You can connect with other members, ge...
bottom of page