By this 'logic' any woman wearing makeup or a push-up bra or having cosmetic surgery to appear younger is guilty of deceit. When it's a crime for a woman to lie about birth control to deceive a man (an actual online company sells tricks to feign pregnancy test results) maybe this will be taken seriously.
THE BASICS

Can sex be wrong if you withhold information or lie about yourself before having sex? It certainly seems so. For example, not being honest about having a sexually transmitted disease can make it wrong for you to have sex with an uninformed partner.
Let’s call dishonesty intended to increase the chance of having sex ‘sexual deceit’. Sexual deceit includes both failure to disclose information about yourself as well as lying about yourself. The question is under what circumstances sexual deceit will make a sexual act morally problematic.
Deceiving another person in order to have sex with them is morally wrong when it prevents the other person from giving fully informed consent to the act (Rubenfeld, 2012-2013). The reason for this is that informed consent cannot be given when you don't really know what you agree to when agreeing to have sex.
Sexual encounters involving deception that may qualify as sexual misconduct include (among many others) lying about the use of contraception, lying about your age, gender, marital status, religion or job, lying about having been tested for sexually transmitted diseases and infections, pretending to be someone’s partner, and falsely making the partner believe that the sexual act is a medical procedure.
For example: In 2009, California-resident Julio Morales was convicted for rape by fraud for sneaking into the dark bedroom of an 18-year old woman and having sex with her under the false pretense of being the woman’s boyfriend who had just left. The conviction was eventually overturned because the law of 1872 only criminalizes rape by fraud when someone impersonates a woman’s husband in order to get her consent. This loophole was closed when Assembly Bill 65 and Senate Bill 59 were signed into law in 2013.
In 2000 an Israeli man Eran Ben Avraham was convicted of fraud for pretending to be a pilot and a medical doctor in order to have sex with a woman. In Israel pilots and medical doctors are held in particularly high esteem by women and their mothers.
In 2010 a married Israeli Arab Muslim man, Sabbar Kashur, was convicted of rape by deception after pretending to be a Jewish bachelor interested in a long-term relationship prior to having sex with a Jewish woman he just met. His initial sentence of two years but his sentence was eventually reduced to nine months.
Starting in 2014 Ricardo Agnant posed as an NFL football player for the Miami Dolphins by the name of Maserati Rick in order to pick up women. He backed up his story by inventing a digital personality whose persona was based on images from his one-time participation in a regional combine at the Dolphins facility in 2014 as well as photoshopped images of Dolphin players. Agnant’s scam was revealed in 2017 but he was never tried or convicted.
As noted, sexual encounters involving deceit as a way to obtain “consent” may not in fact be consensual. Jed Rubenfeld argues for the stronger view that all sex by deception is non-consensual and therefore counts as rape. As he puts it, ‘sex-by-deception is always sex without consent, because a consent obtained by deception, as courts have long and repeatedly held outside of rape law, is “no consent” at all’ (2012-2013: 2).
There is no doubt that sex involving deceit can be morally reprehensible. However, it is less clear that deceit-based sexual acts are always morally wrong. Subjects may adhere to idiosyncratic consent rules that should not make the pursuing party guilty of rape. Suppose Jill would never consent to sex with someone whose father is older than seventy-five. Jack has always been embarrassed about having a very old father and thinks that he will be disliked or ridiculed if he reveals it. When he meets Jill and falls in love with her, he lies to her about his father’s age. The couple start a relationship and eventually agree to have sex.
This case involves deceit: Jill would never have had sex with Jack, if he had revealed his father’s real age. And Jack’s lie is not exactly okay. But Jack didn't rape Jill, as the sexual encounter cannot correctly be understood as non-consensual.
One way to capture when sex involving deceit qualifies as sexual misconduct is this: sexual encounters involving deceit are wrong when it is reasonable to believe that had you provided your sex partner with some information you have about yourself prior to the encounter, then he or she would not have agreed to have sex (owing to that information).
In the case of Jack and Jill, Jack could not have predicted that if he had told Jill how old his father was prior to their encounter, then Jill would not have agreed to have sex with him on the basis of this information. So, even though Jack did something wrong by lying, he didn't do anything wrong by proceeding to have sex with Jill.
Berit "Brit" Brogaard is the author of On Romantic Love.
References
Rubenfeld, J. (2012-2013). “The Riddle of Rape-by-Deception and the Myth of Sexual Autonomy,” The Yale Law Journal, 122, 6: 1372-1669.
This is touched upon
-----"Sexual encounters involving deception that may qualify as sexual misconduct include (among many others) lying about the use of contraception"
"Rape" by deception
According to this article, about 99% of sexual encounters would be classified as "rape".
I disagree, since most sex is
I disagree, since most sex is within marriage or long-term relationships.
Is it?
That's the best statement yet. Before any champions of the chained start yammering about how great their sex life is after xx # of years of marriage, I'm not about to say there is no sex after marriage. Don't feel like you have to do your normal, attention grabbing routine just so the other married couples will quietly thank you later for lying on their behalf. I'm sure you are the exception to the rule. Being the exception, you know how rare you are. So don't speak for everyone. My point concerns everybody but you. MOST SEX IS WITHIN MARRIAGE OR LONG TERM RELATIONSHIPS BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE IT GOES TO DIE. But you can't count dead sex. That's like the census utilizing cemetary contents for population analysis. Most live sex is within non-relationships and short-term relationships. Marriage is a casket for oral sex and wild sex to rest in peacefully when nobody wants it anymore. Please tell me you don't believe that statement. That's the type of fiction you'd find in the Bible, right next to the talking snake and the boat full of animals.
Really?
You clearly led a very sheltered life if that is what you believe. Better head back to Sunday School before the devil catches you!
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:You clearly led a very sheltered life if that is what you believe. Better head back to Sunday School before the devil catches you!
Yes, most sex is within marriages. That was conclusively determined by one of the most thorough studies of sex in America, the Chicago Sex Survey.
And you think I'VE lived a
And you think I'VE lived a sheltered life? You are the one warning people about being caught by mythical creatures. The Devil?!? You better retake some science classes. Then you'll understand that organized religion made up The Devil to scare people like you into giving them 10% of your pay, on which they pay no taxes. The Devil, he says! Hahaha! I hope you believe differently than I on every available topic.
Easy there. Easy. Don't get
Easy there. Easy. Don't get triggered. Dont' take everything literally. It was not a statement premised upon all religions being provable facts.
Idiosyncrasies
No, what you say about makeup doesn't follow.
What follows from what you are saying is that you consider women who wear makeup deceitful.
It is not reasonable for a woman to think that a man would think this, so the "it is reasonable to think" part of the constraint is not satisfied.
Womanly Deception II
wrote:What follows from what you are saying is that you consider women who wear makeup deceitful.
Makeup is used to recreate neoteny and fix natural flaws. The fact that it's there for all to see doesn't diminish its effects. It's a form of "lying" to simulate youth, which nature prefers for reproduction.
And let's dispel this notion that women don't know what they're doing, they know exactly what they're doing. They "fall" for Maserati Rick-type con-men when they believe they can deceive them out of their (imaginary) wealth.
By this 'logic' any woman
Anonymous wrote:By this 'logic' any woman wearing makeup or a push-up bra or having cosmetic surgery to appear younger is guilty of deceit.
If you can't tell when a woman is wearing a push-up bra or makeup, you're dumb. I see nothing deceitful about it at all.
No?
Ok, what about women who feign romantic interest in a man after finding out he is a doctor, for example? Is she being deceitful, "at all"? Do you think it's "at all" traumatic for a man to find out he is losing half of his assets because his wife finally reveals the fact that she doesn't love him?
Listen (seriously... try it. It's not that bad), I'm not talking about disease or adultery. If it is that devastating for a woman when she finds out the guy she slept with isn't going to be rich, then she spread her legs for the wrong reasons and deserves that disappointment. I'm sick of women who act like the skies part and angel's sing when she disrobes. If there was a Genitaliamart, dicks would cost every bit as much as pussies. Get over the "I let him" routine. He let you, too.
Additionally, we men don't assume you have small, sagging breasts, making us dumb if we fall for the fake body parts you are attaching to yourselves. You know we can't just fucking stare at them. We get a quick glance at your deceitful appendages and we like them or we don't. I've been disappointed by a pair of fried eggs masquerading as cantaloupes on more than one occasion. Once, I was already inside the perpetrator. To my knowledge, she did not head directly to the police station or call 911 after stealing an orgasm to turn herself in for raping me. Now that sounds dumb, doesn't it? I thought you'd agree. And it sounds every bit as dumb when you ladies say it. Stop trying to jail men every time you don't what you want from them or can't control them. It's fucking repulsive.
There should be serious consequences for using police as a weapon when it isn't justified and I'm disgusted by the fact that a female doctor would encourqage this type of conversation. Somebody fell asleep in ethics class and is now failing to uphold her responsibilities as a role model for wayward women. And anybody who disagrees with that can fuck straight off. I won't read anymore cupcake psychology spewed by disgruntled old maids. If you reply, you will be replying to nobody. I'm heading to the grocery store to make friends. I feel a PhD coming on...
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Ok, what about women who feign romantic interest in a man after finding out he is a doctor, for example? Is she being deceitful, "at all"? Do you think it's "at all" traumatic for a man to find out he is losing half of his assets because his wife finally reveals the fact that she doesn't love him?
Not that simple. For some women, the turn-on is that he's a wealthy doctor. Men who insist love can only be "caring for you as a person" are total hypocrites, especially when they have no problem bedding a woman because she's "hot" even if they couldn't care less about her personality or her as a person at all.
wrote:If it is that devastating for a woman when she finds out the guy she slept with isn't going to be rich, then she spread her legs for the wrong reasons and deserves that disappointment.
There you go again, implying that the only valid "love" has to be the kind that men generally don't react to when it comes to bedding women in the first place. And you somehow think it should be "illegal" to love someone for anything less than "caring for you as a person", and not being turned on by how hot they are or how much money they have? Get real, naive newbie.
You sound like a whiny crybaby.
Thank you
I appreciate you validating my point. You are correct... there is another kind of love. There is the love of unearned money, which is not the "I care for you" kind you discounted in your comment. It's the fake kind that lazy, parasitic whores practice when they grow weary of their alarm clocks. It doesn't make me sad, it makes you a bum.
I'm not sure how I came off as a whiny crybaby. After having sex with 165 women, I don't feel there's anything to whine about. I just don't sit quietly when somebody, man or woman, tries to publicly justify their lies and abhorrent treatment of others to desperately attempt to shed the titlle of sociopath.
Do what you want with your soul. If you want to be a wrinkled shell of a woman driving a free Mercedes Maybach, it's your right. In fact, if you hurry up before the decay sets in any further, I'll let you have your turn at fellating me. But you'll have to keep your ignorant mouth shut when my dick isn't in it and you are only getting a glass of tap water to wash down my load and a stale slice of pizza for your efforts. Sorry, I don't overpay. Oh, and please don't let my neighbors see you as you walk home. They are used to seeing younger and much better looking women taking the walk of shame.
Do yourself a favor and at least try to stick to the topic if you insist on adding your two cents (sorry, your last victim's two cents). Otherwise, you just come across like a bitter old bitch. I'll let you get back to scavenging now. Don't forget to insert your fake tits. They are your only saving grace.
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I appreciate you validating my point. You are correct... there is another kind of love. There is the love of unearned money, which is not the "I care for you" kind you discounted in your comment. It's the fake kind that lazy, parasitic whores practice when they grow weary of their alarm clocks.
You're not very perceptive. What many women admire about a man with a lot of wealth is that it often comes with a man who's obviously very intelligent, hard-working, and good with people (in order to be able to make business deals and have people liking working for him). In fact, many women will admire a man who shows a lot of ambition BEFORE he's made wealth, but they admire the personal qualities that make him wealth, not so much the other way around. Fewer women would marry a dumb idiot who's unattractive just because he had money, thus disproving your shallow and limited view of how it really works for many women.
wrote:I'm not sure how I came off as a whiny crybaby.
See above. I just explained it for the 2nd time.
wrote:After having sex with 165 women, I don't feel there's anything to whine about.
Ah, so you feel insecure enough to have to say that? And, by the way, that indicates a possible attachment disorder. My number is not as high, and for good reason -- I found a very good woman that I'd rather stay with than find a new one.
wrote:I just don't sit quietly when somebody, man or woman, tries to publicly justify their lies and abhorrent treatment of others to desperately attempt to shed the titlle of sociopath.
Kind of a random statement. Not sure what that's direted to.
wrote:Do what you want with your soul. If you want to be a wrinkled shell of a woman driving a free Mercedes Maybach, it's your right. In fact, if you hurry up before the decay sets in any further, I'll let you have your turn at fellating me. But you'll have to keep your ignorant mouth shut when my dick isn't in it and you are only getting a glass of tap water to wash down my load and a stale slice of pizza for your efforts. Sorry, I don't overpay. Oh, and please don't let my neighbors see you as you walk home. They are used to seeing younger and much better looking women taking the walk of shame.
Really? You took the time to write that uninspiring drivel? LOL
wrote:Do yourself a favor and at least try to stick to the topic if you insist on adding your two cents (sorry, your last victim's two cents). Otherwise, you just come across like a bitter old bitch. I'll let you get back to scavenging now. Don't forget to insert your fake tits. They are your only saving grace.
You've provided absolutely ZERO insight in the last two paragraphs. You just sound like a potty-mouth crybaby. And you asked why you come off that way? Just read the two last paragraphs you wrote above. You must be a barrel of laughs for women with that attitude. Could one say, "no wonder you had to keep finding new women" so you ended up having sex with 165?
I know that what women find
I know that what women find attractive in a man is not the money, but the traits that lead to get that money.
But a question I have, let's take for an example there is a guy that is able to get a well paid job if he really wanted to, but he has his own ambition like for example wanting to get self-employed, starting a business or becoming an artist and because of that, has just not a high income.
He exercises six days a week, eats healthy, reads a lot of books, spends time on his side business, lives his life with a lot of discipline, treats others with kindness, has a lot of confidence and a great personality.
Would it not be unfair if a women would say "no" to him, just because he still needs some time to get the wealth?
visual appearance VS. hidden deception
Anonymous wrote:By this 'logic' any woman wearing makeup or a push-up bra or having cosmetic surgery to appear younger is guilty of deceit. When it's a crime for a woman to lie about birth control to deceive a man (an actual online company sells tricks to feign pregnancy test results) maybe this will be taken seriously.
No, by no sane logic would a man lying about being single, being a certain religion, being a naturally born man or woman be the same as wearing temporary and visible makeup or by a permanent plastic surgery.
Just as in advertising, there can be small inducements to purchase, making large outright lies are criminal.
Rape by deceit
Agreed, Ziggy. Sounds like one particular gender wants to sew up all of the advantages. Also by this "logic", it should also stand to reason that if a woman lies to a man and says she loves him, then has sex with him with the underlying motivation being access to his money, she is guilty of rape AND robbery. I'm serious. Sexually transmitted diseases must be disclosed because they can cause a serious downgrade in your partner's quality of life. On the other hand, the only thing that occurs when a man lies about his job or money to get a woman in bed is that she is denied an upgrade in quality of life that she doesn't deserve. She hasn't earned it... unless you want to argue that she deserves it because she had sex with the guy. But I'm pretty sure you ladies aren't going to start waving the flag of prostitution around while protesting so why don't you give it a rest? Rape? He lied and trumped her lie so lock him up and destroy his life? Shame on you.
A man penetrates a woman and
A man penetrates a woman and if he has lied about his health, his marriage status or religion then these are very important factors. If a woman wouldn't have slept with him because of STDs, because he was still married or because she was religious and he pretended to be of the same faith then this is rape in my book. completely and totally. And steveo no one cares about men like you who hate women so much. Go get a lot of therapy and stay away from all of them. Toxic cretin.
Totally agree. Lots of
Totally agree. Lots of cretins like Steveo. Probably had a lot of trouble getting action in high school and college. You can just feel it in his writing. Just ticked off...
Stop already
It's every bit as childish to speak for me and say I hate women when I don't as it is to ignore my previous comments, which stated that STD's and adultery were exceptions, as are a few other legitimate claims. This dialogue started with an example in which a man claimed to be a doctor to mislead a woman into having sex. That was considered to be rape by some lobbyist for the gold-digging industry. That is ridiculous. That's what my point was and is and will continue to be whether you continue to ignore it and run with the extremes or not. Women can't claim rape for that unless we can claim robbery when they pretend to be interested in a man to gain access to his money. Of course, not all women do this, though you probably would if you were attractive enough. If so, you might have even had the doctor routine pulled on you. Isn't it funny that those protesting against something while holding the largest signs are often the ones who are at absolutely no risk of being affected? I simply cannot keep chasing you around with the truth in an attempt to get you to swallow it, bit-by-excrutiating-bit. After this, you can have your coveted, if ignorant, last word. This type of misrepresentation exists in every species. I can tell you avoid research to validate your ideas. preferring to blurt at will, but just try it. It isn't that bad.
As far as your self-appointed role as Protector of the Vagina, I don't think I'm going follow your order to stay away from the rest of them. I love women... as often as possible. Crying and screaming in your straight jacket isn't going to change that at all. I'm rejoining the rest of the world in its failure to even notice you. No more arguing with idiots. And don't donate your therapy sessions to me, Crazy, you need them.
Entertainment Opportunity
If anybody gets entertainment by watching a crazy, bitter female scream when nobody is listening, but doesn't feel like going down to Hollywood Blvd., just read any further comments to this string. You won't be disappointed.
Rape by deceit
Agreed, Ziggy. Sounds like one particular gender wants to sew up all of the advantages. Also by this "logic", it should also stand to reason that if a woman lies to a man and says she loves him, then has sex with him with the underlying motivation being access to his money, she is guilty of rape AND robbery. I'm serious. Sexually transmitted diseases must be disclosed because they can cause a serious downgrade in your partner's quality of life. On the other hand, the only thing that occurs when a man lies about his job or money to get a woman in bed is that she is denied an upgrade in quality of life that she doesn't deserve. She hasn't earned it... unless you want to argue that she deserves it because she had sex with the guy. But I'm pretty sure you ladies aren't going to start waving the flag of prostitution around while protesting so why don't you give it a rest? Rape? He lied and trumped her lie so lock him up and destroy his life? Shame on you.
Weird
-----"Suppose Jill would never consent to sex with someone whose father is older than seventy-five."
No matter what age the man who marries Jill is, eventually his father (if not deceased), would turn 75. Would Jill then refuse to have sex with this man once his father turned 75? Or does this age limit only apply to the initial sexual encounter and not to ones thereafter?
This is very strange.
Jack's Papa
Jack's father should be wise enough at 75 to tell him, "Never stick it in Crazy."
Easy fix
Easy fix: just add "the first time she has sex with a person."
The idea was exactly to illustrate that silly preferences don't count. If you wish you can substitute "has brown hair" for "is older than 75".
The exact nature of the idiosyncrasy is irrelevant.
Our corrupt society
Our corrupt, dying society can't properly punish serial rapists and murderers, so nothing will come of addressing 'gray area' situations.
Um no
This is so ridiculous. Lying is part of the game. Both sides do it. Lying can be actively telling a falsehood or not telling a truth. So before I have sex with you, give me the weekend to document every aspect of who I am so you can make an informed decision. Then oh boy will we have such passionate love making. No one would ever have sex.
"It is reasonable to think"
This is why the constraint is preceded by the clause "it is reasonable to think".
In other words, if it is reasonable to think that a person would not consent, had you revealed some crucial information, then the person didn't provide informed consent.
I agree with Tony
I've had sex with well over 100 women, and more than a few of them I'm pretty sure I didn't even get their real name. While I agree that if you have a disease, you should fess up. But I don't count on it, that's why I wear a rain jacket.
Ever hear the song: Out Last Night by Kenny Chesney
Lying is a standard part of getting laid on a regular schedule.
Becky Is A Silly Non-Business
Becky didn't have an organism on a doctor. She had an orgasm with a washed-up musician. She wasted that night on a crap guy. She'll go out at night and get back into it. This time, she will ask to see a hospital badge.
Sex is not a business contract. We shouldn't consider empowering others by effectively interpreting it as such. Exploiting the whimsical sexual desires of others is not morally wrong enough to be a legal wrong.
It definitely shouldn't be considered rape to pretend to be a hot-shot doctor at a club for some vagina. It's stupid for sure. But those same women will have sex with non-doctors. It may just be the confidence and intelligence associated with doctors that the woman was attracted to. It's hard to know if being a doctor was a requirement. Dating is a bunch of pretenses. We pretend to be sane. We pretend to be as pretty as our makeup. We mislead about the size of our dicks. So what.
Sex with a doctor doesn't reap you the benefits of being in a relationship with a doctor. I think that a lot of our dating preference and sexual desires are rooted in associations, illogicality and whim which is too hard to winnow through in order to form a contract out of it.
zero benefits
George Mack,
Being in a relationship with a male doctor is way way way out of proportion to its reality. Male MD's are intelligent and disciplined enough to get through medical and make a decent salary, but they are not "gods gift to women". How many women doctors play the
"doctor card" game? There is fantasy in thinking that disposable income from having sex with a high wage earner means vacations & luxuries, but the reality is there is lots of skirt chasers wanting a relationship for a real male doc, especially good looking doctors and that in itself can turn ugly if the male doc likes all the attention from the skirt chasing women. I can see some man using the doc equation = skirt chaser women card though..pathetic
Totally overboad
Is telling your intended bed mate "I love you" a deception akin to stating "no condom needed, I have only had one partner and I have tested negative for every disease possible." when you actually have AIDS? Of course not.
How about a supposedly straight married man, seducing his best male friend by getting him drunk and saying "buddy, I have always loved you" when he is actually just very hot and you want to have sex with him?
Even better, "sure honey, if you give me oral sex after I orgasm, I will return the favor." Of course after a man has a orgasm, the last thing he wants to do is preform oral sex on a woman. He would rather go to sleep or say goodbye.
This is the same mentality that is going on now that equates total allegations, with no evidence, that a man molested a woman, decades ago to a reported rape.
I don't no a normal person who hasn't lied in some manner to obtain sex. Most of the lies are so superficial as to be part of the mating process.
I've never liked those books
I've never liked those books/films/plays where the nebbish guy longs for a woman way out of his league, and ends up deceiving her by pretending to be someone she does find attractive. (Think various Shakespeare plays, Revenge of the Nerds, Nutty Professor). It's almost as if the guy is punishing the woman for turning him down. Classic pick up artist behaviour. Of course, being Hollywood it all ends up happily ever after, the woman falls for his nebbish charm and overlooks the deception, when really the nerd is just as cruel and manipulative as the jocks and popular guys he despises.
Too extreme
Rape is a horrific, violent crime. Lying to get somebody to date and/or be intimate with you isn't nice, but it isn't a violent crime. Since one doesn't need to have a physical advantage to lie to somebody, both genders would be equally eligible to be accused of this. It would be interesting to see how the proponents of these laws would react to women being sent to prison for a violent crime simply for lying about being single, birth control, etc.
Due diligence
Here is a thought.
Due diligence. Take responsibility for KNOWING the person you are going to have sex with. This whole 'victim' BS is crazy. In fact, three of the examples sound like gold-diggers who got played while trying to play their mark.
Right up there with the women who have sex willingly and then later regret or are embarrassed and then decide it was rape, after the fact, to displace their shame.
This whole infantilizing of women is WAY out of hand. They are adults and need to be responsible rather than credulous fools.
Due diligence. Take
Anonymous wrote:Due diligence. Take responsibility for KNOWING the person you are going to have sex with. This whole 'victim' BS is crazy. In fact, three of the examples sound like gold-diggers who got played while trying to play their mark.
Actually, in fact, you sound clueless. None of the stories indicate that the women got a dime. Furthermore, the deception was by the men, not the women.
wrote:Right up there with the women who have sex willingly and then later regret or are embarrassed and then decide it was rape, after the fact, to displace their shame.
And who exactly is "right up there"? Any of Weinstein's women? Are you a doofus?
wrote:This whole infantilizing of women is WAY out of hand. They are adults and need to be responsible rather than credulous fools.
Actually, you have it completely backwards. If you're talking about the big ruckus in the news, it's about empowering women to speak out about their real, actual, and substantial unfortunate experiences with the men essentially getting off scott-free, no pun intended.
Learn some.
Anonymous wrote:Learn some.
You're not leading by example, that's for sure. You seem to have the typical MRA doofus view of it. You can't even support your rant with credible arguments.
Learn some.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Learn some.
You're not leading by example, that's for sure. You seem to have the typical MRA doofus view of it. You can't even support your rant with credible arguments.
Sure. Quite the credible argument you put forth here. Oh, wait, it's just a petty insult. Carry on.
BTW, MRA Doofus? Really? What are you, 12?
Since the first response to me was full of assumption (of that never detailed in the article) and lacking in anything but unsupported assertion;
I will have to assume you disagree with my view that it would be a good to exercise due diligence. Care to explain why? I suppose you fall in the credulous fool category, and believe the world should look out for you, instead of taking responsibility yourself? Just guessing by your tone.
Good luck with that.
Sure. Quite the credible
Anonymous wrote:Sure. Quite the credible argument you put forth here. Oh, wait, it's just a petty insult. Carry on.
You're providing zero arguments.
wrote:BTW, MRA Doofus? Really? What are you, 12?
And you complain of petty insults? Where are your sound arguments and cogent reasoning?
wrote:Since the first response to me was full of assumption (of that never detailed in the article) and lacking in anything but unsupported assertion;
Still no supporting arguments. I, in fact, outlined a few basic factual views.
wrote:I will have to assume you disagree with my view that it would be a good to exercise due diligence. Care to explain why? I suppose you fall in the credulous fool category, and believe the world should look out for you, instead of taking responsibility yourself? Just guessing by your tone.
Still not a shred of argument to support your view.
OK, so let's get off the stupid back-and-forth you're presenting here, which is utterly boring. The ambiguity with your comment here is you seem to be going from the specific examples in this article and seeming to imply that this "victimization" of women is significantly part of the top topic in the news today, object of TIME's "person of the year". So, IN THAT CONTEXT, which a reasonable person can take from your comment, you seem to be suggesting that your comment about women in this article applies generally. You did not say so specifically, but all of language is always in a context. So please tell us what you meant more precisely.
Due Diligence Doesn't Always Reveal Deception
I might have agreed with you except I was recently a victim of rape by deception. I am still dealing with the trauma of the experience. But, I am thankful this law exists because I can hold the person who harmed me accountable. The important thing to realize is that due diligence cannot protect you against a pathological liar. I knew this person for 3 years before this incident and the lie that he used to deceive me would not have been revealed through due diligence. Rape by deception is a real thing. I am a victim of it and - while I think it is a rare thing - as a Christian woman, I would have never had sex with this man had he not agreed to marriage. I was very clear about my beliefs, my views on marriage and sex. I was very clear that outside of marriage I would not have sex. He entirely violated our marriage and lied about his beliefs for sex. I feel entirely violated. What I gave him, I can never get back. I do not want to press charges against him but I feel so traumatized and violated. It is a real crime to deceive someone, especially someone who doesn't have sex. The physical, psychological and emotional trauma is overwhelming is all I can say. Try to think of all of the persons impacted by this law before you draw conclusions and remember this is a law protecting those who have been deceived. Those who deceive usually check out on paper. The person who did this to me is a prominent community member who everyone - from the mayor to the milkman - respects and loves. That's why it is called deception it isn't discoverable through due diligence.
Disease and Marital Status are of paramount importance.
Anonymous wrote:I might have agreed with you except I was recently a victim of rape by deception. I am still dealing with the trauma of the experience. But, I am thankful this law exists because I can hold the person who harmed me accountable. The important thing to realize is that due diligence cannot protect you against a pathological liar. I knew this person for 3 years before this incident and the lie that he used to deceive me would not have been revealed through due diligence. Rape by deception is a real thing. I am a victim of it and - while I think it is a rare thing - as a Christian woman, I would have never had sex with this man had he not agreed to marriage. I was very clear about my beliefs, my views on marriage and sex. I was very clear that outside of marriage I would not have sex. He entirely violated our marriage and lied about his beliefs for sex. I feel entirely violated. What I gave him, I can never get back. I do not want to press charges against him but I feel so traumatized and violated. It is a real crime to deceive someone, especially someone who doesn't have sex. The physical, psychological and emotional trauma is overwhelming is all I can say. Try to think of all of the persons impacted by this law before you draw conclusions and remember this is a law protecting those who have been deceived. Those who deceive usually check out on paper. The person who did this to me is a prominent community member who everyone - from the mayor to the milkman - respects and loves. That's why it is called deception it isn't discoverable through due diligence.
Disease and Marital Status are of paramount importance.
When it comes down to age, looks, job and even religion well those are harder to prove or count as damaging.
But any man/woman who knows they have an STD and/or is still married and lies about it, should be punished harshly.
I'm the victim of a brilliant mastermind evil guy.
He knew that I simply never ever date anyone who is not single and more importantly, certainly not someone who is still married.
This monster went as far as to create a FAKE divorce decree.
And it was impossible to verify because of privacy rights.
He even had friends back up his lies.
So yes, I completely understand you when you say due diligence can only go so far.
Here's how it works
"Take responsibility for KNOWING the person you are going to have sex with."
Even if you do, you will eventually know her lawyer a WHOLE lot better than you ever will her.
Nah. You are either severely
Nah. You are either severely stupid or intentionally obtuse.
Either way, good luck with that. You can have the last word.
You are welcome to do a little victory dance to boost your sad little ego. You know you can't resist :)
Why do yo bother replying
Why do yo bother replying again if you still can't offer any support for your dubious claims, or what the scope is of your first statements?
The concept of "gold diggers" is getting a bit stale these days, in which a lot of men are unemployed and women are getting college degrees in significantly greater numbers than men in the USA.
....and yet you still come
....and yet you still come after our money and property. And from that comment you are finally admitting that the higher education system is a vast cesspool of female privilege?
Who is "you"? Interesting
Who is "you"? Interesting that you think you're replying to a woman. Shows what a doofus you are. You give men a bad name.
No I presumed I was replying
No I presumed I was replying to a feminist. Correctly I think. Call me what you like, accuse me of being whatever you want. Your opinion means nothing to me. The only difference between you and a sack of shit is the sack.
- Previous
- Page 1 (current)
- Next