Curse You, Activist Massachusetts Judges!

Kris has this post about a love affair gone bad that ended up in the courts.

Well, technically, there isn’t anything there indicating that love was involved. Here’s the, uhm, money graffs:

The plaintiff and the defendant were in a long-term committed relationship. Early in the morning of September 24, 1994, they were engaged in consensual sexual intercourse. The plaintiff was lying on his back while the defendant was on top of him. The defendant's body was secured in this position by the interlocking of her legs and the plaintiff's legs. At some point, the defendant unilaterally decided to unlock her legs and place her feet on either side of the plaintiff's abdomen for the purpose of increasing her stimulation. When the defendant changed her position, she did not think about the possibility of injury to the plaintiff. Shortly after taking this new position, the defendant landed awkwardly on the plaintiff, thereby causing him to suffer a penile fracture.

Penile fracture, though sounding extremely unpleasant, is fun to say. Penile fracture! Penile fracture!

Although this was generally a position the couple had used before without incident, the defendant did vary slightly the position previously used, without prior specific discussion and without the explicit prior consent of the plaintiff. It is this variation that the plaintiff claims caused his injury. While the couple had practiced what the defendant described as "light bondage" during their intimate relations, there was no evidence of "light bondage" on this occasion. The plaintiff's injuries were serious and required emergency surgery. He has endured a painful and lengthy recovery. He has suffered from sexual dysfunction that neither medication nor counseling have been able to treat effectively.

You know, maybe if he wouldn’t sue a woman (apparently an extremely limber woman), who inadvertently injured him during sex (and, presumably, he could have said “Take it easy Olga Korbut – that hurts”) thus rendering him an unfit sexual partner for both paid and unpaid prospective partners ("No way, penile fracture boy"), he wouldn’t be suffering from what I am assuming is severe depression over the extreme unlikelihood that he will ever enjoy sexual congress (as opposed to sexual Congress, which none of us want to consider) again.