“Woman, how would you be seen from the sky?” (20), Stephen Dobyns implies through this aerial metaphor a surprising sexual encounter, illustrating the theme of his poem “Roughhousing.” Indirectly, Dobyns uses multiple references to awaken the graphic nature of violent sex. With emphasis on “Rough,” the speaker provides visually frightening descriptions to eliminate the perception of deception. Thus, through the combination of contradictory diction, sexually severe innuendo, and suggestive metaphors, Stephen Dobyns reveals perverse distractions to intensify and discredit the speaker's attempt to conceal pseudo-sexual reciprocity. Dobyns' execution of contradictory diction exposes a disguise hidden by the association of insinuating and sardonic context sexuality. By introducing himself as a “weasel” (1), he not only seems to refer to his superiority, but also describes his poor qualities. The speaker uses double entendre when he applies this word to describe himself as devious and wild. However, this inconsistency appears to be an attempt to hide any obvious hesitation or nervousness about revealing the truth. After his contradictory self-referentialities, he continues to demonstrate his superiority by describing himself as a “bird eater” and a “mouse eater” (3). The speaker then seems to contradict himself once again by describing his hands as “[mouse] pink” (7), because shortly before he had defined himself as a mouse eater, and now, he himself, has mouse-like characteristics. Therefore, the upper tone appears not only unstable, but also suggests fabrication. One can therefore assume the existence of a facade when Dobyns says “my tamed paws have taken off their gloves” (6). Not only in reference to his thinness... middle of the paper... many metaphors were long-winded, with a lack of punctuation, enjambement, while the approaching ending seemed choppy and almost abrupt. Although at first glance, the sexual act seems mutually lustful, the development of contradictory dictions, sexually austere allusions and suggestive metaphors allow us to decipher even further sexual means involved. Revealing a pseudo-lascivious nature, initially when the woman is referred to as “pale” (4) and “a plantation” (2), the woman is perceived as pure and cultured. However, after the sexual encounter, the woman is described as a “pastur[e]” – wild and suited to animal benefit (24). By comparing himself to a “snake” (5), the speaker alludes to and directly associates with the capacity for corruption. Therefore, one might assume that the speaker's inhumane penetration of violent sex defiles an initially unblemished woman.