There was a recent court case where a child was sexually abused and the the defendant said that because the child was not a virgin the “damage” would be less impacting on her than if she had been a virgin.
Another piece of BS served to you on a plate. What the hell does that mean is the question? Of course it is DAMAGING if someone RAPES you dosn’t fucking matter if you have prior experience or not. Not speaking from personal experience of sexual abuse it must be horribly traumatic for the victim. Whoever made that ruling needs to totally be fired….