This Note argues that an erection under these circumstances does not indicate consent to engage in sexual activity. Part II of this Note explores the reality of male sexual assault and offers various medical, psychological, sociological, and cultural reasons to explain why a male victim may maintain an erection while being sexually assaulted and/or raped. Part II also explores the complex relationship between physical arousal and sexual desire. Part III provides a legal background to both the law's treatment of male sexual assault generally and in specific instances where the male victim maintained an erection during his assault. This part concludes that the courts have been largely unavailing to male victims of sexual assault. Finally, part IV argues that treating an erection as a signifier for consent serves only to isolate male victims and perpetuates a stereotypical and violent form of masculinity that ultimately undermines sexual violence against all persons.
Note, Male Sexual Assault: Issues of Arousal and Consent, 51 Clev. St. L. Rev. 93 (2004)