Rape by deception? Lies, immorality and why sin has created this problem

[Guest]

I did mention that it snowed in Houston recently.

[Just_A_Guy]

14 hours ago, NightSG said:

Women need to learn the important difference between "I'll always love you" and "I'll always tolerate your c__p."

Yeah, and men need to stop lying to get sex.  

[Grunt]

27 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Yeah, and men need to stop lying to get sex.  

That's a symptom, not a disease.  Men need to get married before having sex.

[Vort]

39 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Yeah, and men need to stop lying to get sex.  

Do women need to stop lying to get sex, JAG? Is makeup a form of rape by deception? Perfume?Taking a shower instead of letting your "real" body odor come through? How about pretending to be a virtuous girl instead of a slut? At what point is it "rape"?

Even to make such an allegation as "rape by deception" is absurd in the extreme, unless one means a man pretending to be a woman's husband or boyfriend when he is not, solely to gain sexual access to her (or a woman doing the same to a man). Saying to a woman, "I'm a really nice, committed, single guy, so please have sex with me" may be deceptive, but it is not rape in any possible sense of the word. To use it as such degrades the meaning of "rape" to "sex with another human being". I reject this feminist ideal.

[Rob Osborn]

This problem, like all other sexually immoral induced problems, stems from the lack of hard defined morality in practice. Sex used to be a form of love and expression and for creating life by married husband and wife. If only married couples had sex this problem would disappear entirely. With the acceptance of premarital sex as a common practice in society, even going so far to acknowledge that it is a form of legitimate entertainment between two or more consenting single people it has opened up the floodgates for sin in all of its ugly deceptions. The derailment here is step by step. Lying has become a part of accepted life. Thats the first problem. The second problem is accepted rampant immorality. We see this in everything from adult strip clubs to pornography to legal whore houses. Because those two exist its thus inevitable that people are going to lie to get sex or have sex. Rape isnt the issue here if the two really are in consent. We have perverted a sacred and holy practice completely. There is no stop to this nonsense once it starts. Instead of having sex by fraud laws why dont we go back to a more biblical approach where it was unlawful to have sex outside of marriage? And, why cant we make laws that erradicate all forms of pornography, strip clubs, etc? Why are we so afraid to make laws that support marriage, morality and ethics that in its place we not only allow it but embrace it? The other half of the issue is the problem of lying. It used to be that all liars were shunned from society. Laws even made it criminal to lie. In the end we know the eternal consequence of not only the whoremongers but also all liars. They will go into the lake of fire and brimstone. Shouldnt that be our concern? Shouldnt our laws be in place to safeguard the path that leads one away from this state of eternal misery?

[Anddenex]

On 12/7/2017 at 3:36 PM, estradling75 said:

From a church perspective the only way that deception might be a valid defense is if you thought you were having sex with your spouse... and some how that wasn't the case.

 

 

You must have watched that episode from Grimm

[Anddenex]

1 hour ago, Rob Osborn said:

Rape isnt the issue here if the two really are in consent.

And you have a poster seeking to split hairs between "assent" and "consent," ("You are confusing the definition of "assent" with "consent.") which only convolutes this whole scenario.

Assent: "to agree to or approve of something (such as an idea or suggestion) especially after thoughtful consideration : concur (e.g. assent to a proposal)

Consent: to give assent or approval : agree; consent to being tested (e.g. Her father consented to the marriage.)

I am not even sure how people "honestly" make this argument.
 

[Just_A_Guy]

2 hours ago, Vort said:

Do women need to stop lying to get sex, JAG? Is makeup a form of rape by deception? Perfume?Taking a shower instead of letting your "real" body odor come through? How about pretending to be a virtuous girl instead of a slut? At what point is it "rape"?

Even to make such an allegation as "rape by deception" is absurd in the extreme, unless one means a man pretending to be a woman's husband or boyfriend when he is not, solely to gain sexual access to her (or a woman doing the same to a man). Saying to a woman, "I'm a really nice, committed, single guy, so please have sex with me" may be deceptive, but it is not rape in any possible sense of the word. To use it as such degrades the meaning of "rape" to "sex with another human being". I reject this feminist ideal.

Yes, to all of your questions.

The point I was driving at was that one broad over-generalization about an entire gender, would seem to deserve another.

As to the common-law issue of rape by deception—IIRC (and please understand it’s been a decade since I studied this)  it was mostly reserved for situations like falsified identity (as you suggest) and extreme scenarios like sex where there was a belief that marriage was imminent (unfortunate as it is, there are studies suggesting that up to 1/4 of colonial-era women were pregnant at the time of their weddings).  IIRC it was seen less an issue of assault or personal violation (certainly not from any sort of proto-feminism), and more of an economic offense; arising from the idea that via marriage opportunities, dowry, etc a woman’s virginity had economic value, and that a man who bedded her on through an assurance of marriage without thereafter marrying her had economically harmed both the woman and her family. 

The legal issue, to my mind, is very distinct from the *moral* issue; in the latter scenario, clearly the “I thought he was a virgin!” or “he said he’d marry me!” lines are not in the least exculpatory.  (Though a bishop would be wise to consider that a broken heart/lost confidence in men is a significant part of the spiritual damage such a young woman has suffered, and would counsel accordingly.) 

Edited December 9, 2017 by Just_A_Guy

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Yes, to all of your questions.

The point I was driving at was that one broad over-generalization about an entire gender, would seem to deserve another.

As to the common-law issue of rape by deception—IIRC (and please understand it’s been a decade since I studied this)  it was mostly reserved for situations like falsified identity (as you suggest) and extreme scenarios like sex where there was a belief that marriage was imminent (unfortunate as it is, there are studies suggesting that up to 1/4 of colonial-era women were pregnant at the time of their weddings).  IIRC it was seen less an issue of assault or personal violation (certainly not from any sort of proto-feminism), and more of an economic offense; arising from the idea that via marriage opportunities, dowry, etc a woman’s virginity had economic value, and that a man who bedded her on through an assurance of marriage without thereafter marrying her had economically harmed both the woman and her family. 

The legal issue, to my mind, is very distinct from the *moral* issue; in the latter scenario, clearly the “I thought he was a virgin!” or “he said he’d marry me!” lines are not in the least exculpatory.  (Though a bishop would be wise to consider that a broken heart/lost confidence in men is a significant part of the spiritual damage such a young woman has suffered, and would counsel accordingly.) 

These examples you give pretty much outline some wonderful examples of the proper way to treat offenses such as these.  It cannot be categorized as "rape".  But most can be categorized as "fraud".  And that, too, is both illegal and immoral.  The thing about fraud is that (as a lawyer, you'd know better than I) that the plaintiff must provide evidence of some loss.

I think the argument that Joyce was making was that some cases where this fraud occurred, the loss in question is "severe emotional distress".  And such is difficult to prosecute.  Back in the day, as you described, a woman's virginity had economic value.  Thus it was easy to prosecute.  In today's immoral world, it seems it does not.  But it does.

<< I was going to link to a Huffpo article about a woman who sold her virginity for $3.7 MM.  But the images were less than LDS standard. >>  Just trust me.  A woman did so.

If a woman can sell off her virginity for $3.7 Million, then apparently, it still has economic value.  Any woman could prosecute -- if her virginity were still intact prior to the encounter.

Now, even though I agreed with Joyce on that one point, I believe she went too far to call the encounter "assault", even more so "sexual assault" or "rape".

[Anddenex]

50 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

The legal issue....

I'm am deeply dumbfounded that this could even be a legal issue, and I wonder how far they are willing to take this "sex by fraud" -- a more correct term. We have people who perform certain surgeries, now should someone sleep with someone and then after the deed is done the next morning the woman reveals she was once a man. Will the law, legal issue, be willing to prosecute this "sex by fraud"?

Edited December 9, 2017 by Anddenex

[NightSG]

4 hours ago, Grunt said:

That's a symptom, not a disease.  Men need to get married before having sex.

Not a solution; plenty of men (and women) lie to get married.

[Just_A_Guy]

1 hour ago, Anddenex said:

I'm am deeply dumbfounded that this could even be a legal issue, and I wonder how far they are willing to take this "sex by fraud" -- a more correct term. We have people who perform certain surgeries, now should someone sleep with someone and then after the deed is done the next morning the woman reveals she was once a man. Will the law, legal issue, be willing to prosecute this "sex by fraud"?

The more interesting question, IMHO, is whether people will be legally free to decline to have relations with such individuals.  The recent experience of a certain adult film actress, who was cyber-bullied into suicide after announcing via Twitter that she wouldn’t work with actors with a certain type of resume, suggests that many people think the answer should be “no”.  

Edited December 10, 2017 by Just_A_Guy

[Grunt]

34 minutes ago, NightSG said:

Not a solution; plenty of men (and women) lie to get married.

I'm willing to bet the numbers are significantly less than those that lie to have sex.  

[Guest MormonGator]

1 hour ago, NightSG said:

Not a solution; plenty of men (and women) lie to get married.

 

30 minutes ago, Grunt said:

I'm willing to bet the numbers are significantly less than those that lie to have sex.  

@Grunt is absolutely correct. 2% of men lie to get married, while 98% of non-religious men have probably lied before to try and get a woman.

sorry ladies, but if this is a surprise to you, you've never been to a fraternity party before. 

Edited December 10, 2017 by MormonGator

[NightSG]

1 hour ago, MormonGator said:

 

@Grunt is absolutely correct. 2% of men lie to get married, 

I'd be willing to bet that a lot more than 2% of men have lied about or at least intentionally concealed something they knew would prevent the marriage from happening.  

[Guest MormonGator]

9 minutes ago, NightSG said:

I'd be willing to bet that a lot more than 2% of men have lied about or at least intentionally concealed something they knew would prevent the marriage from happening.  

 Since the ramifications for getting caught in a lie after marriage are much worse then getting caught in a lie the morning after (trying to be polite here) I highly doubt it. 

Why would a guy lie in order to get married? Many men don't really want to get married in the first place.

[Just_A_Guy]

2 hours ago, NightSG said:

Not a solution; plenty of men (and women) lie to get married.

Sure—hence, the legal remedy of annulment (fraud in the inducement).

[Guest]

1 hour ago, MormonGator said:

 Since the ramifications for getting caught in a lie after marriage are much worse then getting caught in a lie the morning after (trying to be polite here) I highly doubt it. 

Why would a guy lie in order to get married? Many men don't really want to get married in the first place.

My wife has a cousin who was dating a non-Mormon.  She told him that she wouldn't marry anyone outside the temple.  He took the discussions.  He got baptized.  They waited.  They got married.  He stopped going to church.  Then he flat out told her that he never believed this stuff anyway.  He only got baptized so he could marry her.

[Guest MormonGator]

12 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

My wife has a cousin who was dating a non-Mormon.  She told him that she wouldn't marry anyone outside the temple.  He took the discussions.  He got baptized.  They waited.  They got married.  He stopped going to church.  Then he flat out told her that he never believed this stuff anyway.  He only got baptized so he could marry her.

Sad, but to me that seems like an outlier. That is a lot of effort to deceive someone if all you wanted to do was have companionship. No offense at all to your cousin but virtually no man/woman is so irresistible that you are going to go through all that just to end the marriage months later or play mind games with the poor victim.  

Edited December 10, 2017 by MormonGator

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Sad, but to me that seems like an outlier. That is a lot of effort to deceive someone if all you wanted to do was have companionship. No offense at all to your cousin but virtually no man/woman is so irresistible that you are going to go through all that just to end the marriage months later or play mind games with the poor victim.  

Well, he didn't end the marriage.   He did want to marry her.  He REALLY wanted to marry her. She was quite a catch.  But he simply never felt anything regarding the faith.  And, yes, he really did a good job of faking that part of it.  But he really did love her enough to be married to her.

[zil]

3 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

But he really did love her enough to be married to her.

I couldn't disagree more.  Love is not selfish.  He wanted her.  That's not the same as loving her.  I don't care how good to her he is / was, that's not the same as love.  What he did, he did for himself, not for her.  (Sorry, pet peeve.  Carry on.)

[Just_A_Guy]

5 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Well, he didn't end the marriage.   He did want to marry her.  He REALLY wanted to marry her. She was quite a catch.  But he simply never felt anything regarding the faith.  And, yes, he really did a good job of faking that part of it.  But he really did love her enough to be married to her.

Though one might say it’s a screwed up kind of love that doesn’t respect her or her values. 

Sometimes (before marriage, at least) the supreme act of love towards a woman is to walk away.

[Guest]

Just now, zil said:

I couldn't disagree more.  Love is not selfish.  He wanted her.  That's not the same as loving her.  I don't care how good to her he is / was, that's not the same as love.  What he did, he did for himself, not for her.  (Sorry, pet peeve.  Carry on.)

Maybe.  But if complete selflessness is required to be married at all, then 90% of people would never get married.

[Guest]

Just now, Just_A_Guy said:

Though one might say it’s a screwed up kind of love that doesn’t respect her or her values. 

Sometimes (before marriage, at least) the supreme act of love towards a woman is to walk away.

Screwed up kind of love.

Yes, this is a description that I wouldn't argue about.

[zil]

1 minute ago, Carborendum said:

Maybe.  But if complete selflessness is required to be married at all, then 90% of people would never get married.

Lies and deceit (on a massive scale, frankly) are not the same as "reasonably selfless".

Honesty regarding your opinions of your girlfriend's religion is not "complete selflessness" - it's pretty basic human decency.