Oregon Passes Bill "Too Gross to Talk About"


74 Responses to “Oregon Passes Bill "Too Gross to Talk About"”

  1. Anonymous says:

    @#69: no, childbirth must be banned for the children’s sake. how painful and traumatic it must be. for god’s sake, will somebody think of the children?

  2. elsmiley says:

    Lucifer: only in California and Puerto Rico

  3. J France says:

    Prudesville, Backwardstate.

    Oh how I want to travel to that fine old country that is the USA. Mainly so I can immediately head north, and mock the shit out of it with Canadians.

  4. Anonymous says:

    I’m going to be very disappointed if this stops homeless men from throwing cups of urine at businessmen.

  5. Anonymous says:

    i finally feel safe living in portland.

  6. Anonymous says:

    Framing this as about bukkake is way overblown. The law just closes a gaping hole in Oregon’s sexual assault protections, which previously only recognized non-consenting penetration as unwanted sexual contact. Now, Oregon law recognizes, as anyone with an internet connection should, that “blood, urine, semen [and] feces” figure (for better or worse) into a coterie of fetishes that have seeped into sex-culture. Flinging any one of those things at a person to get your jollies obviously should be sexual assault.

    The change in the law mentions nothing about bukkake. It also takes into account both intent and consent, which means it’s OK if it’s an accident or everybody’s idea of fun. In other words, the law is nothing to get all hot and bothered about.

  7. SamSam says:

    So “propelling semen” will be illegal? How do they define “propelling?” Are facials now illegal? Is a handjob illegal if some semen spills on the other person?

  8. nutbastard says:

    really? this wasn’t somehow illegal BEFORE? I find that hard to believe.

    Do they really need to go into specifics? I dont see how ejaculating on someone in public against their will isn’t already a sex crime. for one, you’ve got indecent exposure (gotta whip it out first, obviously) second committing a lewd act (whacking off) and third, spitting on someone is considered some form of assault as far as i know.

  9. Random_Tangent says:

    Well, I don’t know about where y’all are from, but throwing poop is gross, but I don’t know anybody who gets gratification from poop slinging. At least anybody this high up the evolutionary latter, anyway.

    I guess Oreganoneans can sleep safer, now.

  10. echthroi says:

    Semen is a dangerous substance?

  11. Anonymous says:

    Shouldn’t CONSENT be taken into account?!

  12. Anonymous says:

    >>”Yes, semen is a potentially dangerous substance.”

    So is water. You can drown in it. I guess garden hoses are now illegal in Oregon. :\

  13. Tron says:

    Don’t know about you, but I saw this one cumming from a mile away.

  14. dagibbs says:

    Yes, semen is a potentially dangerous substance. AIDS.

  15. Chairboy says:

    #6: So is any substance from an infected person, but does anyone think a law specifying blood as a forbidden projectile is needed? No, it’s covered under any reasonable definition of assault. When people can already be jailed for spitting on someone, then new laws like the one proposed are simply silly.

    Also, as an Oregonian, I’m concerned at the effect this will have on our burgeoning bukkake industry.

  16. Mr_Voodoo says:

    Multiple Miggs will be so disappointed.

  17. nutbastard says:

    im sitting here picturing a fictional hostage situation wherein the hijacker (pun intended) has his dick pointed at innocent citizens, one hand keeping himself at hair-trigger pre-orgasm, the other hand holding a phone, talking to a negotiator, saying ‘come and get me coppers!’ and the cops say ‘cum and we will!’

  18. jimh says:

    When face shots are outlawed, only outlaws will…

  19. Takuan says:

    it will have to do with penalty attached. Under a new category, the punishment will be harsher some how. Or did they make it milder? Anyone know?

  20. Anonymous says:

    @28 & 44-

    “welcome to Oregon! you are now safe from flying semen!*”

    *unless it is consensual”

    ROFL! That shit needs to go on the state line sign,
    but #44, damn, you beat me to it.

  21. Umbriel says:

    I know I’ve seen news items about individual pervs being arrested for assaults of this kind, but the “gang initiation” thing is a meme that gets tacked on to all kinds of imaginary threats to make them seen more menacing and requiring of a new blank check for law enforcment.

  22. fnc says:

    “welcome to Oregon! you are now safe from flying semen!*”

    This will be good to put on those highway signs at the state line, and it must be incorporated into the state motto somehow as well.

    ANGUSM wins the thread.

  23. Anonymous says:

    They had to pass a law a few years ago in Connecticut specifying that ejaculating on someone without their consent counted as sexual assault. Basically some UConn students got a girl drunk and did that – one of them was the son of a high ranking UConn official.

  24. kaosmonkey says:

    But… that’s not bukkake. Don’t you need a quorum?

  25. cha0tic says:

    The great thing about this is that the Criminal definitely leaves DNA evidence.

  26. knodi says:

    I actually read one of the articles. Basically, it’s a common gang initiation to jack off into a container, and then go somewhere and fling it on a bystander.

    It WAS just plain assault, but now it’s sexual assault. The goal was just to alter the penalty.

  27. elsmiley says:

    So if I spew forth on my girlfriends eyeglasses in private, is that bukkake? Is it just involuntary bukkake, or bukakke in general? Kaosmonkey–does it require multiple sperm donors to qualify as bukkake? Does this law contain a definition of terms?

  28. Hal says:

    There were stories in the UK tabs a while ago about “seagulling” – flinging cum at unsuspecting passers-by.

  29. kaosmonkey says:

    Oh no! Don’t ask me!

  30. Keith says:

    Hal: I hadn’t heard about seagulling until I saw Russel Brand a few weeks ago. Kinda… icky.

    But making it illegal? I suppose there’s good motive involved but, seriously, isn’t there some other law already on the books that this would fall under?

  31. SamF says:

    Well, I guess I’ve got no reason to go to Oregon anymore.

  32. Anonymous says:


  33. Rick. says:

    Multiple Miggs’ Law doesn’t have quite the same ring as Megan’s Law.

  34. Anonymous says:

    ok guise.. “if you have any poo fling it now.”

  35. quintiliusvarus says:

    Alas – Godzilla Bukkake night will never make it to Portland… Brother Warren will be amused.

  36. Anonymous says:

    I thought that was “sharking.”

  37. siliconsunset says:

    This only strikes me as odd because Oregon is so liberal. Portland has a sex shop and a pipe store every few miles. Live sex acts are legal on stage. You can put money into one of those booths and watch people have sex or, in fact, climb in the booth yourself. I’m not sure if you pay to go in the booth, or if you’re being paid by the people watching, but the idea seems to be that everyone is pretty open about that stuff. There are freaking janitor maintained glory holes in a lot of the adult stores, for Christ’s sake!

    I live in Virginia. Everything sexual (unless missionary with your opposite sex partner, in the dark, under the covers, after saying your prayers) is illegal. Oral sex? Sodomy. WTF? You could assume that jizzing on someone, no matter the venue, would be illegal here, but Oregon was founded on the “jizz on who you please*” mentality.

    *within reason. Willing partners preffered.

  38. The Life Of Bryan says:

    Target? Really? Sure, they’re much nicer stores than Wally World, but they ain’t *that* much nicer.

  39. Phikus says:

    Nutbastard@2: Did you miss this part? “But the language of the bill appears to cover the consensual…”

    More intrusion into the bedroom, it sounds like, between consenting adults.

    P.S: I think you need to change your name.

  40. tomrigid says:

    Oregon isn’t so culturally liberal. You can’t buy liquor in a drive-through or a convenience store. The state constitution outlaws gay marriage. No prostitution and very little gambling. There’s a long history of tension between the western libertarians and the teetotaling social reformers.

    The lewd-spoojing hippies are relatively new to the conversation, but give it time. In a few years one might see a woman with terminal cancer commit pole-dancing bukkakecide while paying customers smoke joints and swear in public.

  41. prentiz says:

    Umm – from the link in the article, the statute reads: “[it will be an offence to] For the purpose of arousing or gratifying the sexual desire of the person or another person, intentionally propels any dangerous substance at a victim who does not consent thereto”.

    So, it only bans non-consensual fluid flinging. Which seems fair enough to me frankly.

  42. Anonymous says:

    It should be noted that this law does not outlaw consensual propelling of “dangerous bodily substances” and therefore would not criminalize porn or bedroom activities you may engage in.

  43. steve says:

    Back when I lived in Portland one of my housemates had a Japanese boyfriend. To make a long story short, she got some semen in her eye, and the eye got horribly inflamed.

  44. Anonymous says:

    Lawrence v. Texas would probably make this unenforceable for consentual acts.
    Also, under this law, it seems that pouring a hot, non-bodily fluid onto someone is a sex crime. Not that it should be legal, but a sex crime?

  45. bibulb says:

    I think the term you’re looking for is a minyan.
    (And before anyone asks, I would count bukkake as a mitzvah.) (disclaimer : IANAR.)

  46. Jazzhigh says:

    Wait…If this law says “For the purpose of arousing or gratifying the sexual desire of the person or another person”, doesn’t that mean that doing it as a gang initiation would NOT be illegal? That is assuming that joining the gang isn’t a sexual desire.

  47. RedShirt77 says:

    How have we come to this? And where do we go from here?

  48. maitrix says:

    It’s all fun and games until someone loses an eye. And then it’s sport.

  49. Anonymous says:

    If bukkake is outlawed… the terrorists will have won.

  50. Anonymous says:

    But what about Godzilla Bukkake?


  51. doktor tchock says:

    this coming from a state that’s cool with live sex shows…


  52. Fletcherism says:

    well, i guess i will cancel my plans to visit Target in Portland.

    in all seriousness, i remember when this happened – the local newsies would not talk about what happened on TV so everyone had to go online to figure out what the “disgusting act” was which was perpetrated.

    “welcome to Oregon! you are now safe from flying semen!*”

    *unless it is consensual

  53. Jazzhigh says:

    @46 STEVE You yadda yadda yadda’d the good part.
    (Yeah it’s a Seinfeld reference…but bukkake is so 80s)

  54. Patrick Austin says:

    Oh man, this is a MAJOR economic development opportunity for my home state.


  55. Takuan says:

    hmmm… does “semen” have to be from a given species? Citizenship? Any loopholes there? Further, what if the donor say had a vasectomy or other medical condition precluding the presence of live gametes? Is the resultant seminal fluid in those cases considered legally to be “semen”? Will there be cultural exemptions for those from societies with a rich tradition and history of semen-flinging, hurling or otherwise projecting practices and rituals? Are there any specific religious exemptions? (eg: The First Unreformed Sons of Onan?)

  56. Anonymous says:

    Whats next? No really its all about power and control. That is the true reasoning behind such laws. They are not out to protect anyone they are only out to enslave and if possible increase their revenue.

    So really whats next? Banding childbirth because it hurts women?

    Don’t think it won’t happen.

  57. Phikus says:

    So, basically, you should have your intended target for any Jackson Pollack-like activity sign a release form (if you’ll forgive the pun) before you begin, just so they don’t claim afterword that they did not give consent. Or I suppose you could have your lawyer present (if you want to make sure you get fucked in the process.) At least you won’t get labeled a sexual predator.

    Now, what happens when the woman is unexpectedly projectile?

  58. Tensegrity says:

    So I guess making naughty sex acts more officially naughty makes them LESS appealing?

    Sure, let me know how that works out for you.

  59. Anonymous says:

    there goes all the funding for the nasa semen propulsion laboratory.


  60. SednaBoo says:

    I’m hardly an expert, but i think you need more than one… uh… shooter… for it to qualify as bukkake.

  61. angusm says:

    “So what did you have to do to join your gang?”
    “I took a ten-minute beating from six other guys in the gang, using pool cues. I couldn’t walk for a week afterwards.”
    “Harsh. How about you?”
    “I picked the biggest guy I could see on the street, and beat him unconscious. Then I robbed a liquor store, and shot a cop.”
    “Wow. And you?”
    “I jerked off and then went to Target and threw the cum at some chick.”
    “Ha ha – no, seriously, what did you have to do?”
    “Man, I’m telling you, I threw jizz at a woman in a supermarket.”
    “But she was like some kind of martial arts ninja chick, right? Or a detective, carrying a big-ass piece in a shoulder-rig?”
    “No, she was just a housewife.”
    “But her boyfriend was with her, yes? A huge construction-worker guy, who could have beaten nine colors of shit out of you?”
    “No, she was on her own. But she did have her four-year old daughter with her.”
    “So let me get this straight: your way of showing how tough you are was to throw semen at some hundred-pound woman and then run away?”
    “You got it.”
    “Dude … I really think you’d better not tell anyone else in here about this.”

  62. Phikus says:

    Good to see the important issues are being addressed by our lawmakers in these troubled times.

  63. Anonymous says:

    If it’s a hoop that you need to jump through as part of a gang initiation, is it flung out of sexual desire? There’s a pretty good argument that it’s not.

  64. jonathan29 says:

    “… from my cold, dead hands.”

  65. Takuan says:

    all joking aside, I’d like to witness this one day so I could personally disarm the offender.

  66. elk says:

    Why isn’t that just called assault, same as if you were to spit a big loogie on someone?

  67. Lucifer says:

    can I still poke my anus with a bic lighter?

  68. Xopher says:

    “Bukkake as Gang Initiation” does not make ME think of someone flinging cold jizz at a stranger.

    It makes me think the initiate would need a shower afterwards.

    Perhaps I’m just familiar with a different kind of gang.

  69. mercurytransit says:

    I used to enjoy bukkake but the rules were a bit difficult. I mean, five shakes up to three times to make one of 13 possible scoring combintations. Phew! Ooohhh waiitttt.. no I mean Yatzee:

  70. Anonymous says:

    The 9 monkey escapees must have prodded the legislature into immediate action. Hopefully foil pouched raincoats advising “do not re-use” will be optional at the Oregon Zoo entrance along with the new higher fee.

  71. mellowknees says:

    I live in Oregon, and I love living here, but it seems like our legislature is bored or something. Today they passed a law making it illegal to smoke in a car with people under 16 in the car. I’m not sure why second hand smoke isn’t dangerous once you turn 17, or how our police force, which is getting cut due to massive state budget problems, is going to identify people 16 and under in a moving vehicle…but there ya go.


  72. SuperDoop says:

    #40 comments and not a single “he missed the Target” joke?

    All the lowbrow commenters must be out shopping for knick-knacks and picture frames.

  73. Anonymous says:

    I’m surprised this was missed:

    The bill passed the House vote. It has not been signed into law.

Leave a Reply