So under Oklahoma law, if he had put it in the V or the A, it would have been rape, even if the victim was unconscious. Reading between the lines, apparently the force element applicable to this case for oral sodomy includes resistance from the victim (although the statute simply says "force, violence, or threats of force or violence"). On the one hand, the opinion was given no precedential value. On the other hand, Oklahoma has a wrinkly old penal code that needs some enhancement. We're talking about a penal code that defines sodomy as "THE detestable and abominable crime against nature, committed with mankind or with a beast." That is the entire description of the acts covered.