Guilty of rape by deception

[GoodGame]

The moral? Different strokes for different folks.

I won't be moving to Israel anytime soon.

 

[El_Machinae]

I'm not going to participate in this thread much, because I'm not going to be able to properly address people's complaints. I really think that people should realise what I'm saying, though, is factual. There's a strong likelihood that the principles around the laws of sexual consent operate the same in your area as in the areas that I describe.

Sex requires consent. You cannot gain consent through deceit; now, there's buyer-beware, but there's also lying. As well, people cannot consent if they're incapacitated. This is the way the law works. Finally, though, the person needs to make a complaint; but it also is practical advice, don't have sex with someone who will later complain about it. This will tie into Bill's question, below.

There're a lot of objections to these principles, but they're very hard to phrase in such a way other than "but! I want to be able to lie to get sex!" or "the person shouldn't have been so slutty!". No, that's not the way it works. And the law isn't going to change in your favour: the law will continue to be clarified in the way that I've already expressed. Arguing with what I've said won't change that.

Hey cool does this mean one can accuse a 16 year old girl for rape because she lied about her age and one wouldn't have consented with knowledge that she was under the age of consent???

Yes, she's guilty of sexual assault. Easily. (I don't like the word 'rape' here, because, to me, 'rape' connotes violence). The problem I've seen (i.e., heard about first hand, this is something I'm familiar with) is that the 'victim' usually is too meek, too embarrassed, and too frazzled from the legal system in order to push for his rights. His defense attorney doesn't care (it's not his job), and the Crown Attorney (or whatever) don't have the balls to press charges.

This victim typically only speaks up in his defense about the girl lying after there's been a complaint against him for sleeping with someone underage. By that point, he's on the defensive and usually wants the whole issue to go away quickly and quietly.

I'll say again, legally the Crown has a very strong case. Practically, no one seems to push for it, because of psychological reasons. I'd partially blame the culture of shame around sexual assault.

 

[Mise]

If you don't like the term "rape", then why is "rape" used by the law? I can't see anyone in this thread agreeing that what happened in the OP could possibly be described as "rape". Don't you think that lawmakers and/or judges are equivocating on the term "lack of consent", here? At the very least, don't you think that if "sex requires consent", the opposite of consent is not "rape"?

 

[GoodGame]

I'm not going to participate in this thread much, because I'm not going to be able to properly address people's complaints. I really think that people should realise what I'm saying, though, is factual. There's a strong likelihood that the principles around the laws of sexual consent operate the same in your area as in the areas that I describe.

Sex requires consent. You cannot gain consent through deceit; now, there's buyer-beware, but there's also lying.

I have to completely disagree with both of your comments.

Consent in a sexually liberal society is very different than in one where sex is a tool of marriage and people are married as tools of their parents/religion.

In a liberal society, consent is simply a semantic for volition. For such a society, normal sexuality is generally informal. There are no official forms for declaring consent, and trade law does not apply. "Deception" is a strawman argument in such a case. The mere fact that this is the first time that I, an aged adult, ever heard of the argument of rape by deception while I've heard about all the other forms of rape since before I was an adult, is testament to the fact that I grew up in a liberal society (and the truth of my statement).

In a society where sexuality is highly regulated by social moral/religion, etc.. trade law, etc.. applies.

Between those two cases, I completely disagree with your statement that sexual laws and morals are likely to be the same for any geographic region. Clearly they aren't. I'd challenge you to demonstrate rape by deception exists in any metropolitan legal code in the USA.

 

[Mise]

I have to completely disagree with both of your comments.

Consent in a sexually liberal society is very different than in one where sex is a tool of marriage and people are married as tools of their parents/religion.

In a liberal society, consent is simply a semantic for volition. For such a society, normal sexuality is generally informal. There are no official forms for declaring consent, and trade law does not apply. "Deception" is a strawman argument in such a case. The mere fact that this is the first time that I, an aged adult, ever heard of the argument of rape by deception while I've heard about all the other forms of rape since before I was an adult, is testament to the fact that I grew up in a liberal society (and the truth of my statement).

In a society where sexuality is highly regulated by social moral/religion, etc.. trade law, etc.. applies.

Between those two cases, I completely disagree with your statement that sexual laws and morals are likely to be the same for any geographic region. Clearly they aren't. I'd challenge you to demonstrate rape by deception exists in any metropolitan legal code in the USA.

In the context of what noncon said earlier, it makes sense:

Correct, but that stipulation does not really cover such provisions as this. It's more aimed at more deceptive and underhanded tactics, not ******** racism.
It's aimed more at people who, for example, pretend to be gynaecologists to molest women etc.


I remember in the UK, a guy was charged with it, as he crept into a married woman's room when the husband was away while sshe was sleeping and the lights were out, climbed into bed, and she proceeded to have sex with him thinking it was her husband, and he was charged with it.

But again, you'd be equivocating on the term "lack of consent" to apply this to the false advertising-type of deception as described in the OP.

 

[civver_764]

[can of worms]

I bet if the case was reversed(Jew lied to an Arab about being Arabic) the results would have been much different.

[/can of worms]

 

[El_Machinae]

Mise: I didn't write Israeli law. I just don't like using the term, when there're better words that don't connote violence.

 

[nonconformist]

But most rapes don't invovle violence?

 

[El_Machinae]

It might just be a language issue, peculiar to me.

I'd challenge you to demonstrate rape by deception exists in any metropolitan legal code in the USA.

Sure. Took me all of one minute.

California Penal Code 261, section 4C. 262 3 C, as well.
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/cacode/PEN/3/1/9/1/s261

(C)Was not aware, knowing, perceiving, or cognizant of the essential characteristics of the act due to the perpetrator's fraud in fact.

I wish you guys would believe me. You cannot lie to get consent.


Explained in:
http://www.shouselaw.com/rape.html

unconscious about the nature of the act (either because he/she is asleep, unconscious, or fraudulently induced into having sexual intercourse and the accused knows or reasonably should know that this is the case).

 

[nonconformist]

That's based mostly on the concept of fraudulently passing yourself off as the person's husband./

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Like in that film with Richard Gere and Jodie Foster? I can't remember if he was her husband after all. Jodie isn't into that kind of thing anyway.

 

[emzie]

While El_M is right, the law isn't about cases like the OP.

 

[warpus]

You cannot lie to get consent.

Seems to me like this is something applicable to various things, but never enforced in the case of usual sexual consent.

And it shouldn't.. otherwise you're looking at prosecuting millions of people every day for this.

 

[EnglishEdward]

So in Israel if she asks you if you are good at it and you say yes,
she can have you put in prison if she doesn't have enough orgasms.

 

[Formaldehyde]

I wonder if she wore make-up. That might have been rape by deception.

wow, that sounds like racism

Why, yes. It does. And which is why I'm not surprised in the least that he was found guilty and given an 18 month sentence in such a backward country where such things are deemed to be so important.

Sex requires consent. It's true. It's really true. You might as well understand, and even accept, such an idea.

So that means that everybody who has ever misrepresented themselves to have consensual sex is guilty of a crime? Hmmm. I don't think so. If that were true, there would be a lot more people in prison for doing just that. Women would be lining up at police stations to get even for one-night stands. Every man who has ever taken off his wedding ring to get laid would be at risk.

Consensual sex merely means that the woman gave her permission, not that every statement ever made to her must be the unvarnished truth.

 

[Ayn Rand]

Seems to me like this is something applicable to various things, but never enforced in the case of usual sexual consent.

And it shouldn't.. otherwise you're looking at prosecuting millions of people every day for this.

This is true. What is to stop a man saying the following?;

- I wouldn't have had sex with her if I knew she wasn't on birth control. I was raped.

- I wouldn't have had sex with her if I knew she had a boyfriend. I was raped.

- I wouldn't have had sex with her if I knew she had a sexual disease. I was raped.

- I wouldn't have had sex with her if she hadn't used make-up and a push-up bra. I was raped.

- I wouldn't have had sex with her if I knew she was going to cheat later. I was raped.

And on and on. It is just an impossible position to put the law into.

This seems like it's a case of "the untermensch are touching our Aryan women" - the whole pretext appears to be a convenient cover for racial prejudice.

 

[MobBoss]

So when does witholding information to have sex actually a crime?

What if you lie about an STD and it gets transferred?

What if you lie about an STD and it doesnt get transferred? But you still lied about it to get laid?

What if your a transvestite and trick someone of the same sex to have sex with you? Is that criminal?

I think there are some instances where lying to get laid should be criminal, however, I am not so sure lying about your nationality or race is one of them.

 

[Communisto]

I think there are some instances where lying to get laid should be criminal, however, I am not so sure lying about your nationality or race is one of them.

I hope not, I dont want to have to retire my British accent. Works like a charm.

 

[LucyDuke]

Did you know?: There are all sorts of laws in America that make it its own crime to not inform a sex partner that you've tested HIV+.

Hi everyone!

This is not ridiculous, or, not as ridiculous as you'd think. In most of the countries that have decent sexual assault laws, misrepresenting yourself can be considered sexual assault if the victim complains.

Sex requires consent. It really does. I know that you guys know about "make sure she says yes", because it's gotta be decently advertised. And the law is not kidding when it says that sex requires consent. Consent implies fair knowledge of what's going on.

The girl thought she was sleeping with a Jew. She'd consented to sleep with a Jew. She'd not consented to sleeping with a non-Jew. Ergo, a non-Jew violated her consent.

Now, this case seems to be outrageous, but it is built upon principles that the sexual-assault-community recognises quite easily. This is the same law that prevents people from refusing to pay a hooker after services. This is the same law that prevents people from waiting until a girl is too drunk to know better. This is the same law the prevents people from lying about whether they're infertile.

Sex requires consent. It's true. It's really true. You might as well understand, and even accept, such an idea.

That was not legitimately consensual sex. But

Makes a mockery of actual rape victims.

 

[Silurian]

Has anyone found any report where it actually says he said he was Jewish rather than used a nickname that was short for Daniel