Tuesday, October 29, 2013

On VAG (2)...

I urge that you read the FIRST post first (how redundant). :)



In a group orgy of about 3 men and 2 women, 1 (Man) was eyeing 2 (Woman).

And in any group orgy of about 5, there is always an odd-member-out - that's 5 (Man).

3 (Man) & 4 (Woman) started getting it on.

2 (Woman) went down on 1 (Man).

1 (Man) was about to cum when 2 (Woman) went in for a kiss and 5 (Man) went in behind 2 (Woman) and started humping her from behind.

2 (Woman) had no desire for 5 (Man) and in fact have denied him access to him the whole orgy time (up until that time).

Preferences - that was a clear rule in the orgy. No one forces himself to anyone - whether to give or to receive.

But like the same situations before: andiyan na, lalabasan na naman siya at nagpaubuya ka na lang kahit hindi mo gusto.



1 (Man) & 2 (Woman) are office mates.

2 (Woman) obviously like 1 (Man).

On a drunken birthday night, 1 (Man) and 2 (Woman) found themselves lying next to each other.

2 (Woman) searched for 1's (Man's) member, 1 (Man) willingly obliged.

They had one intense f*ck-session.

Only 1 (Man) came.

"Ang dumi mo p*tang ina mo - ginamit mo pa ako." 1 suddenly said after dressing up. "Puta ka din e - papatulan kahit sino." 1 (Man) continued.

2 (Woman) enjoyed every bit of the moment and she feels like what 1 (Man) just said it to emancipate himself from the act that just happened as he had a girlfriend.



1 (Man) & 2 (Woman) are married.

They would have been married for five years this year.

1 (Man) has always been promiscuous - having affairs every now and then.

2 (Woman) tolerated it - she made herself to think that she was not enough and that it was "normal" to have affairs in any relationships.

2 (Woman) was always conscious that she looks good for 1 (Man), that she took care of 1 (Man) , that 1 (Man) should always have the upper hand in everything.

And when times came that 1 (Man) wanted to live with someone else, 2 (Woman) would not object and would wait until 1 (Man) decides to come back to her.


Question: Which of the three cases would fall under Violence Against Women (VAW)? Did you have different answers on the first post? If yes, why'd you think so?


Note: I know this feels like a survey (its really not) but I would love  to have a little validation (or opposition) of what I have answered myself  and just to see our reflections on our conception of abuses.

Shout out to JM, Geosef, Gillboard and FiftyShadesOfQueer for your comments on the first post.


  1. Still 2. Personal opinion. Di ko tanda kung ano nakalagay sa batas e.

  2. For me, case #3. Hindi ako feminist ah, pero I think hindi dapat ganoon ang dynamics ng isang married couple. Nasasagasaan na yung rights nung wife dahil sa mga ginawa nung husband.

  3. if the circumstance is the same, pero iba na gender... i don't think kailangan magbago ng sagot.

  4. Well. Dunno if it's violence, but Case No. 3 is a clear violation of the norms and laws of marriage. That's what I think anyway. Not a lawyer or anything.

  5. Yey! Thanks you guys for the replies!