RE: false identity/non-consensual sex - TRIGGER WARNING - SPOILER ALERT

RE: false identity/non-consensual sex - TRIGGER WARNING - SPOILER ALERT (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

Awareness -> RE: false identity/non-consensual sex - TRIGGER WARNING - SPOILER ALERT (10/5/2016 8:59:08 PM)
No. The principle underlying rape is not consent but violation. (You can fuck someone without explicitly gaining their consent and it's still not rape). Nobody actually IS who we think they are, so in a sense, we're all dealing with a subjective interpretation of the person we're fucking. And reinterpreting past consensual sex as rape is the kind of nutty fucking nonsense feminism is advocating for, so of course I think it's utter fucking bollocks.

Awareness -> RE: false identity/non-consensual sex - TRIGGER WARNING - SPOILER ALERT (10/5/2016 9:01:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ohthat1percent I was thinking along the lines of a blind woman. I can see that, although I must point out that if you're going to call that rape then by the same token, a pre-op Mtf transexual who blows a heterosexual man can be considered a rapist and shouldn't be surprised if the heterosexual guy beats the shit out of him.

ohthat1percent -> RE: false identity/non-consensual sex - TRIGGER WARNING - SPOILER ALERT (10/5/2016 9:19:43 PM)
In rape cases, consent is part of the rape jury instructions: T.P.I. 10.01(2)(b) reads: that the sexual penetration was accomplished without the consent of the alleged victim and the defendant knew, or had reason to know, at the time of the penetration that the alleged victim did not consent; The also T.P.I. 10.01(2)(d) reads: that the defendant accomplished sexual penetration by fraud; Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-11-106(a)(13). ["Fraud" is defined as the term is used in normal conversation and includes, but is not limited to, deceit, trickery, misrepresentation and subterfuge.] So i wonder if that changes anyone's thoughts. Now this is just for TN, other States may be different. As I said for me the conundrum is -- physically. Physical penetration is what you are consenting to according to this -- specific - section of the code. so are youo consenting to a body penetrating, or are you consenting to a specific person that you identify as a specific person penetrating you If so, then if it would stand to reason that if the person is penetrating you based on misrepresentation then it can be considered rape by this code. if I am interpreting it correctly.

ohthat1percent -> RE: false identity/non-consensual sex - TRIGGER WARNING - SPOILER ALERT (10/5/2016 9:22:16 PM)
Awareness, it could very well mean that -- its all about interpretation of the law. And i am not above stating that this concept would also apply to men who claim rape due to a woman misrepresenting herself or impersonating another. that should calm your need to make this about feminism.

Greta75 -> RE: false identity/non-consensual sex - TRIGGER WARNING - SPOILER ALERT (10/5/2016 9:29:40 PM)
There was an extremely interesting case in my country. A woman pose as a man to woo a woman. Married her. And always had sex with her in the dark, and penetrated her with a strap on. I am imagining being conservative Asians, they must be having the craziest most basic and boring missionary. Like no fore play, and sex is just, switch off the lights, and penetrate, end of it. I also imagine the wife in question was a virgin so she has zero experience what sex is suppose to be like and nothing to compare with. Or even how a real dick is suppose to be feel like. Anyway, eventually when it was all found out. The woman pretending to be a male was jailed for her deception. Can't remember what was the charge though. But that was one of the craziest stories I ever heard. Oh I found the story: http://www.tnp.sg/news/singapore-news/woman-two-wives-pleads-guilty-sex-underaged-girl Okay she didn't get in trouble for misleading her "wife", but got in trouble for sexually penetrating a minor. Gosh this woman! Still what a crazy life! And how did she trick 3 females to think she was a male and managed to have strap on sex without them knowing it's a fake dick! Shows how innocent these girls were.

crazyml -> RE: false identity/non-consensual sex - TRIGGER WARNING - SPOILER ALERT (10/6/2016 12:34:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Awareness No. The principle underlying rape is not consent but violation. (You can fuck someone without explicitly gaining their consent and it's still not rape). No, consent is the fundamental principle underlying the definition of rape. See the FBI “Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.” https://ucr.fbi.gov/recent-program-updates/new-rape-definition-frequently-asked-questions See the UK's Sexual Offences Act 2003 (1)A person (A) commits an offence if— (a)he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis, (b)B does not consent to the penetration, and (c)A does not reasonably believe that B consents. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/1

MariaB -> RE: false identity/non-consensual sex - TRIGGER WARNING - SPOILER ALERT (10/6/2016 3:24:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 Not rape. It is consensual sex. Gosh, you know, NONE of my fuck buddies know my real identity. Even if they been fucking me for 2 years. I like to be able to disappear whenever I want to, so I never give them any real information about myself. False Name. False address. False job. Everything. I am protecting myself. As I got a bad experience of stopping to see a fuck buddy and he harassed the hell outta me and tried to blackmail me to want to pressure me to continue to having sex with him. I guess I'd be raping them all since I had sex with them under false identity. I take it you don't/cant check if these guys have an STI? and these guys can't check to see if you have one. Promiscuity is fine but there comes a point where people can get careless.

Greatlilbabygirl -> RE: false identity/non-consensual sex - TRIGGER WARNING - SPOILER ALERT (10/6/2016 5:13:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ohthat1percent Awareness, it could very well mean that -- its all about interpretation of the law. And i am not above stating that this concept would also apply to men who claim rape due to a woman misrepresenting herself or impersonating another. that should calm your need to make this about feminism. Ahhhh, but it doesn't include women raping men or oral sex. It only includes penetration. Even on three US Federal level rape is only unwanted penetration. Let that sink in. The legal concept of rape is sexist towards men. Legally on the federal level, woman cannot rape men. It's considered sexual assault at best, not rape

Greatlilbabygirl -> RE: false identity/non-consensual sex - TRIGGER WARNING - SPOILER ALERT (10/6/2016 5:17:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml quote: ORIGINAL: Awareness No. The principle underlying rape is not consent but violation. (You can fuck someone without explicitly gaining their consent and it's still not rape). No, consent is the fundamental principle underlying the definition of rape. See the FBI “Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.” https://ucr.fbi.gov/recent-program-updates/new-rape-definition-frequently-asked-questions See the UK's Sexual Offences Act 2003 (1)A person (A) commits an offence if— (a)he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis, (b)B does not consent to the penetration, and (c)A does not reasonably believe that B consents. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/1 Whoops. My bad. Looks like the FBI caught up to the times. It used to be worded so that women couldn't rape men even when forcefully penetrating them. Still, it looks like forcing a man to penetrate you still isn't considered rape. The UK is still behind I see.

ohthat1percent -> RE: false identity/non-consensual sex - TRIGGER WARNING - SPOILER ALERT (10/6/2016 5:39:47 AM)
I'm using the State codes of TN because that is the jurisdiction most rape cases are heard. To have it governed by federal law it has to be in conjunction with a federal crime. I have not had a chance to review However greatlilbabygirl, you are wrong on the State level, I haven't looked at the federal codes but here in TN the code reads: (1) that the defendant had unlawful sexual penetration of the alleged victim or the alleged victim had unlawful sexual penetration of the defendant. It clearly covers a woman raping a man. The legal definition of penetration they are using is: Sexual penetration" means sexual intercourse, cunnilingus, fellatio, anal intercourse, or any other intrusion, however slight, of any part of a person's body or of any object into the genital or anal openings of the alleged victim's, the defendant's, or any other person's body, but emission of semen is not required.3 Wow I should have done more research, the Federal Code actually says - not rape but sexual assault is: (D) inducing a belief by any artifice, pretense, or concealment that the person is another person; I am curious if any who don't believe its rape before knowing the law -- I will admit I didn't research it at first -- what your thoughts are now?

Greatlilbabygirl -> RE: false identity/non-consensual sex - TRIGGER WARNING - SPOILER ALERT (10/6/2016 5:44:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ohthat1percent I'm using the State codes of TN because that is the jurisdiction most rape cases are heard. To have it governed by federal law it has to be in conjunction with a federal crime. I have not had a chance to review However greatlilbabygirl, you are wrong on the State level, I haven't looked at the federal codes but here in TN the code reads: (1) that the defendant had unlawful sexual penetration of the alleged victim or the alleged victim had unlawful sexual penetration of the defendant. It clearly covers a woman raping a man. The legal definition of penetration they are using is: Sexual penetration" means sexual intercourse, cunnilingus, fellatio, anal intercourse, or any other intrusion, however slight, of any part of a person's body or of any object into the genital or anal openings of the alleged victim's, the defendant's, or any other person's body, but emission of semen is not required.3 Wow I should have done more research, the Federal Code actually says - not rape but sexual assault is: (D) inducing a belief by any artifice, pretense, or concealment that the person is another person; I am curious if any who don't believe its rape before knowing the law -- I will admit I didn't research it at first -- what your thoughts are now? Gotcha. I heard that about the Fed code. It's so backwards. Didn't know the TN code was so inclusive. Makes me feel a bit better about my state.

ohthat1percent -> RE: false identity/non-consensual sex - TRIGGER WARNING - SPOILER ALERT (10/6/2016 6:06:29 AM)
you've lost me -- what is inclusive and i doubt your state is much different. What's the Code in your State.

Greatlilbabygirl -> RE: false identity/non-consensual sex - TRIGGER WARNING - SPOILER ALERT (10/6/2016 6:17:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ohthat1percent you've lost me -- what is inclusive and i doubt your state is much different. What's the Code in your State. My state is TN. Lol.

ohthat1percent -> RE: false identity/non-consensual sex - TRIGGER WARNING - SPOILER ALERT (10/6/2016 6:19:06 AM)
Okay -- you still lost me -- most states probably are very similar to the Federal and TN Code. I don't know what you mean by inclusive.

Greatlilbabygirl -> RE: false identity/non-consensual sex - TRIGGER WARNING - SPOILER ALERT (10/6/2016 6:32:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ohthat1percent Okay -- you still lost me -- most states probably are very similar to the Federal and TN Code. I don't know what you mean by inclusive. It's ok, I'm lost now too. It's too early in the morning.

BitaTruble -> RE: false identity/non-consensual sex - TRIGGER WARNING - SPOILER ALERT (10/6/2016 7:15:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ohthat1percent AGAIN TRIGGER WARNING AND SPOILER ALERT -- I am watching law and order and there is an interesting case .... I've worked in the legal world and part of that was in prosecution at one time, so I am always interested the take and interpretation of the law. Do you think this should be considered rape in the legal/criminal Just a little Wednesday night what the heck let's see what people think thread. No right or wrong answers, just curious. If we could try and keep it within the scenario and not say well people should do this that and the other or shouldn't not vet people etc. I'd like to keep it within discussion of should this be considered rape. She is a hooker who got stiffed by a jon. Happens every day. Hookers don't get to cry rape. She can cry foul because she didn't get her payment, but no..you don't get the benefit of your illegal activities. Next time she will know to get the payment up front before she spreads her legs. A different scenario which does not include a barter..sex by fraud is illegal in my state by fairly recent re-write of a statute that had been on the books in CA since 1830 if memory serves. I read this last night but I am pre coffee right now so year might be off. If you lie to get sex in CA..that's considered perpetrating a sex by fraud and..the charge is rape. I think that was put into effect in 2013 after a case was ajudicated based on the technicality that the vic wasn't married. Guy crawled into her sleeping bag and started to have sex..she woke up to the sex thinking it was her boyfriend. The 1830 law (might have been 1880)..was specific to a man impersonating a husband to gain sex. Since the woman was single..that law could not be used. Ensuing outrage..quick bill, passed both Houses unanimously and Gov Brown signed the bill and the changed the wording to include single people. The perp was tried under the new law and got a min/man I think of 6-8 yrs.

ohthat1percent -> RE: false identity/non-consensual sex - TRIGGER WARNING - SPOILER ALERT (10/6/2016 7:19:29 AM)
Yes also part of the fed and TN state statute says knowing the are unconscious asleep etc now too. It's interesting as to the interpretation of the fraud view.

Awareness -> RE: false identity/non-consensual sex - TRIGGER WARNING - SPOILER ALERT (10/6/2016 8:17:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Greatlilbabygirl quote: ORIGINAL: ohthat1percent Awareness, it could very well mean that -- its all about interpretation of the law. And i am not above stating that this concept would also apply to men who claim rape due to a woman misrepresenting herself or impersonating another. that should calm your need to make this about feminism. Ahhhh, but it doesn't include women raping men or oral sex. It only includes penetration. Even on three US Federal level rape is only unwanted penetration. Let that sink in. The legal concept of rape is sexist towards men. Legally on the federal level, woman cannot rape men. It's considered sexual assault at best, not rape Interestingly when the definition of rape is expanded to include "made to penetrate", the number of men being raped is on a par with the number of women being raped. The idea that rape is a gendered problem is a particularly egregious piece of misrepresentation by the man-hating feminist lobby.

Awareness -> RE: false identity/non-consensual sex - TRIGGER WARNING - SPOILER ALERT (10/6/2016 8:22:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ohthat1percent I'm using the State codes of TN because that is the jurisdiction most rape cases are heard. To have it governed by federal law it has to be in conjunction with a federal crime. I have not had a chance to review However greatlilbabygirl, you are wrong on the State level, I haven't looked at the federal codes but here in TN the code reads: (1) that the defendant had unlawful sexual penetration of the alleged victim or the alleged victim had unlawful sexual penetration of the defendant. It clearly covers a woman raping a man. The legal definition of penetration they are using is: Sexual penetration" means sexual intercourse, cunnilingus, fellatio, anal intercourse, or any other intrusion, however slight, of any part of a person's body or of any object into the genital or anal openings of the alleged victim's, the defendant's, or any other person's body, but emission of semen is not required.3 Wow I should have done more research, the Federal Code actually says - not rape but sexual assault is: (D) inducing a belief by any artifice, pretense, or concealment that the person is another person; I am curious if any who don't believe its rape before knowing the law -- I will admit I didn't research it at first -- what your thoughts are now? I think paragraph D covers misrepresenting yourself as someone who is known and trusted by the victim, but should also cover misrepresenting your true gender (IE: Trans rape). Misrepresenting yourself as a captain of industry when in reality you're a janitor? No.

ohthat1percent -> RE: false identity/non-consensual sex - TRIGGER WARNING - SPOILER ALERT (10/6/2016 8:55:21 AM)
I agree but I don't think it's that women are the issue more so men are, in that they don't want to believe the can be raped and that their egos won't allow the reporting and going through the same crap women who go to trial do. You like to blame women for a lot of things it appears :-)

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875