Josh's heart is always in the right place!

I think the only problem is distinguishing between what's moral and what should actually be legislated against. No one would argue that lying to get sex is a crappy thing to do (and also INCREDIBLY sad...) but then, having sex with someone just because they're (supposedly) rich if you wouldn't have wanted to otherwise is pretty crappy too... So it sort of cancels out for me on the morality scales :joker:.

I mean, pretending to be a millionaire for sex is bad, but surely it's much better than pretending that you love someone for sex? And how many people do that!

Strange how when a woman speaks out, she's labelled a Feminist. As for stating it's nothing more than seeking revenge for being lied to, perhaps instead you should be asking yourself this question: "Would I be okay with being lied to by someone pretending to be someone else?" We all tell lies at times. We tell someone they don't look fat because we don't want to hurt their feelings or we lie and make an excuse when late for work. This is something else entirely. This is about men (and women) who deliberately lie about who they are to get what they want. If you're intimate with someone, wouldn't you want and expect them to be honest with you? Or is it okay to lie, con, dupe and manipulate so long as you get what you want out of it? Would you be okay if your daughter was lied to, conned and duped and manipulated, or would you call them whiny little feminist bitches seeking revenge? Sure, there are women and men out there seeking casual sex but that's not what this is about. Look at the bigger picture before judging.

You make very good points.But the question is'nt wether lying is moral,It's not nice to be lied to but the question is wether it is a form of rape and should be illegal and a prisonable offence.
Not judging,Just asking the question.
My opinion is that lying to impress somebody is not nice but it is not and should not be illegal.If it was then anybody who lies to their GF/BF would end up in court whenever they had a falling out.It would open up a whole can of worms in the courts when couples break up and hate each other.Divorce hearings would be full of 'rape fraud' accusations.

Lying and pretending to be someone you're not isn't moral, I wouldn't be ok with it, it's a ****ty thing to do... But would I make it illegal or brand the person who did it as a rapist?? Errrr let me think. No. That would be an absolutely behemoth overreaction. People lie. If we start locking them up for it the world will be pretty empty.

Wife: "I'm leaving you... I'm not happy. I've fallen out of love with you."
Husband: "but we had sex last night... And you said you loved me!"
Wife: "I'm sorry, I lied. I don't love you."
Husband: "you lied?? Rape! False pretences! I have been violated, you beast, off to jail with you!"

all men are evil!!!! i read something once that said 90% of men want to rape so it must be true!!!

To play devil's advocate here, we do criminalise lying all the time in cases like fraud, libel, slander etc. It's an offence to lie if you're extracting material gain from someone or if you're ruining their reputation so it's not that big a leap for it to be an offence based on causing emotional trauma. I get the sense that this is not really about one night stands where someone pretends to be rich to help his chances with a girl, but more about cases which could involve long-term deception which prey on someone's vulnerability. Cases more akin to this guy who would trick women into having sex with him thinking they were paying a sexual bribe to save a relative from non-existent legal trouble. It obviously would be extremely difficult to draw that line when a relatively harmless lie becomes a criminal act though.

..the vid isn't showing for me so it's hard to get the context of this exactly but rape is without consent and this surely would be with consent even if that person has sais that they're something/someone they're not..they've only not exactly consented to the 'persona' they are...

EyeBallPaul

You make a very good point....

"But the question is'nt wether lying is moral,It's not nice to be lied to but the question is wether it is a form of rape and should be illegal and a prisonable offence.
Not judging,Just asking the question."

So here's your answer:

Lying is not a crime. Morally reprehensible, but not criminal. Here's when it becomes a crime..... when it's used as a means to cause harm to someone.

So lying to attract a person is not prosecutorial. But lying to engage in a sexual act is prosecutorial because it induces consent to the sexual act that the victim would not otherwise consent to. They were deprived of their consent. The did not agree to their consent under the law.

Here's where the line is drawn...

Cases that are prosecutorial require substantial proof. The police and Prosecutor must be convinced that the proof will actually sustain an indictment. It can't be a he-said, she said.

In addition, in all crimes, the victim must have behaved in a manner that is deemed to be "reasonable" behavior. And juries make determinations about that criteria all the time. Sexual Assault by Fraud cases would not be unique in that regard.

Chaos-

Actually, the statistic is 30%, and it has been tested 3 times. Once in California, in Canada and, most recently at the University of Nebraska where male college students were asked if they would force a woman to have sex with them if they thought they could get a way with it, with no repercussions.

When the description was changed to include the term rape, however, the response dropped to 13%, therefore, many men do not understand that forcing a woman to have sex with them is rape.

Toy Soldier_

You're being ridiculous. People have a right to change their mind. The person she had sex with was her husband, and she knew it was her husband. He did not conduct "false personation" to have sex with her.

In most states, consent is ineffective (legal ease for not-valid) if induced by deception. This basically means that no consent is given when sex is induced by deception.

In all acts of fraud, the victim provides what seems to be consent because they have yet to realize they have been tricked. Example- Bernie Madoff defrauded thousands of people of their assets. They not only agreed to give him thier money, they actually called their brokers or bankers and transferred funds in Madoff-managed accounts. But we have recognized that the deception invalidated their consent, and deemed their consent, no consent at all.

I am not being ridiculous at all - please give me valid reasoning for why it is more emotionally damaging to pretend to be in a high paying job in order to have sex with someone than it is to pretend to love someone in order to have sex with them?

Not about changing their mind ; in this hypothetical scenario, the partner who was planning to leave had known for months that they no longer loved their partner and had been planning to tell them for weeks. But when wanting sex they would tell their partner; "I love you" in order to encourage them into sexual activity.

How is that any different?

Here's another flipped example: what if a woman (as many women do) was to lie about her age? She tells some guy in a club that she's 35 and he then has sex with her, he then later finds out that she's 41,and this guy has sworn that he'll never have sex with anyone over the age of 40.

She has now raped him, correct?

I mean, not having sex with anyone over 40 would be a ridiculous stance is he was physically attracted to her anyway, but no more ridiculous than only having sex with "rich people".

But your stance is - and seriously now - that this woman who was embarrassed about her age, or this man who was embarrassed about his income, should be charged with a sexual assault? It's ****ing madness. If you choose to sleep with people you don't know (consensually!) then you accept that you don't know them.

What about people who are in relationships going out looking for sex with others and telling them that they're single when they're not? Are they rapists?

Hold on... So... When I was 13 and told a girl that I was a black belt in karate and had a dirt bike to impress her so that she would kiss me, was I actually sexually assaulting her?? ****, should I be on some sort of register?

I'm disgusted with you TS :nono:

I think all men should be accused of rape and then this way we catch 100% of rapists


disgusting creatures

So by this reasoning.The person being lied to has no responsibilty for their own actions or their own judgement.As soon as they're lied to that's it,All personal responsibility is gone,They cannot give consent,All responsibilty for what they do with their own body is passed over to the the person lying.
I can't agree.It is up to anybody to judge the situation for themselves and decide wether they give consent or not.That is our own responsibity and choice.
Being forced without consent or choice is then when it becomes rape.
If i took the risk of jumping onto a railway track thinking it was safe then i got hit by a train and somehow survived i would'nt blame the train driver.I took a risk which is something we all do when we consent to sleep with a person we don't know.They could be lying through their teeth to us but it is up to us as individuals as to wether we take that risk or not.Imo.

I think the problem here is that the definition of "rape" is being changed. Rape is forcing someone to have sex against their will and that's how it should stay imo

I agree.

I sometimes wonder if there's some sort of agenda to describe everything as "rape" in an attempt to actually dilute the term, and make ACTUAL rape seem less serious? I can't think of any other explanation :shrug:.

I can almost accept it being some sort of fraud, but it's not a rape or a sexual assault of any kind.

And like I said earlier - if you consider that to be fraud, then you sort of have to wonder... is the woman sleeping with someone just because he's rich (unless she's made it clear that it's her reason beforehand) not also fraud to the same degree? Hmmm.

Yes, that's actually what I was thinking myself aswell.

It might be morally wrong to lie to someone to get them into bed but you still choose to do it so it's not rape by any stretch of the imagination and it's pretty insulting to victims of actual rape to suggest that it's anywhere even near what they went through

Best point of the thread, not here for people getting out of rape on a technicality based on whether someone was informed or not about the attackers history

The claims in this video are balderdash. For one thing, Rape by Fraud has nothing to do with being "jilted."

And my recommendation about checking someone's ID when you meet them by internet dating is totally mischaracterized. It should be standard procedure to check the background of anyone you meet through internet dating. Don't wait 'til you're on your way to the bedroom.

Paul is apparently not at all in synch with the concept that every human being under the sun has the right to self determination over what they do with their body. Lies and manipulation strip you of your ability to knowingly consent.

Anyone wanting further information should read my book, Carnal Abuse By Deceit, which Paul, seems not to have done, thought he clearly expresses that he has a firm grasp on what I'm saying..... Absurd!

Strewth..
Where do we draw the line, what about us poor old housewives that are in bed with Poldark, have a great romp and then realise we were fantasising and it's the tried and tested hubby.
Have we cheated On said hubby?
Have we raped said Hubby!
Have we just had a great romp and who gives a chuff.



Seriously, if you are prepared to have a bonk with someone you think is a banker then get upset because he/she flips burgers at a fast food joint, put it down to one of life's experiences and get back out there on the prowl.

Lol.

I only slept with Leather Trumpet because he said he worked in Hedge Funds. Turns out he doesn't even have a hedge. B*stard...

Well i agreed with everything you said up until this line 'Lies and manipulation strip you of your ability to knowingly consent'.We as humans have the ability to consent or not whatever lies somebody is telling us.It is up to us to judge wether somebody actually is rich or infact works in McDonalds and is lying(not that being rich should be a reason to sleep with somebody).That is our responsbilty imo.I think we will have to agree to disagree on that.

He did, but he cut it down so that he could get a better view at the ladies sunbathing in the next door garden.

Trumpets Strumpet :idc:

Working on the lawsuit even as we speak...

Kirk told me that he was Nigel Farage but he had actually just put on an old spitting image mask. I wanted to be close to the power, but all I got were broken dreams and a broken coccyx.

Romps with bankers vs McDonald burger flippers is not what sexual assault by fraud is about. in fact, romps are not what it's about either.

Yes of course it would be.

I'm not going to bother replying to this thread anymore because it is obvious that nobody agrees with me though I have my opinions and I will stick with them :)

You really need to drop the banker vs McDonald Burger flipper thingy. That's not a case of rape by fraud.

In all cases of fraud, the victim appears to be giving consent because they are not "knowing" and are fooled into consent. But in every jurisdiction across the globe, CONSENT is INVALID when obtained by FRAUD.

Fraud is not just a crime that stands alone. It's a tool that is used to carry out a crime. Using fraud to steal something is theft by fraud. Using fraud to sexually assault someone is sexual assault by fraud.

When you lie to attract someone, you are not conducting a crime. When you lie to secure sex it is a crime because all sex requires consent and consent is INVALID when induced by DECEPTION.

Rape, sexual assault, is not only so when committed through violence. Violence is another tool that invalidates consent. Doping, Intoxicating, coercing and duping are all tools to sexually assault.

JoshBB-

You're correct. There are cases in London where women were tried, and convicted of rape by fraud.

..do you have any website links to those cases, Joyce..?...it would be interesting to read about them...

A woman cannot be convicted of rape in the UK unless she has a penis. She can be convicted of accessory to rape, or she can be convicted of sexual assault.

I think you're doing a disservice to women and to genuine rape victims by trying to liken the two, personally and I say that as a woman