ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Not unless she went through considerable (read: superhuman) efforts to hide her ugliness.
like buying me beer?
The Banned Debate: Are Sexually Active Transgendered Persons Rapists?
- Thread starter Traditio
- Start date
like buying me beer?
Under the criteria you are using, NO, they are most certainly not rapists.
"Or sex with those incapable of consenting..."
A victim of fraud and deception is, by that very fact, incapable of consenting.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Under the criteria you are using, NO, they are most certainly not rapists.
his argument goes to the nature of consent and whether it is valid if it is based on fraud :duh:
Deception and fraud are NOT the same as rape. A married man who hides his wedding ring to have fling with a co-worker is an adulterer and slime ... however, IF she consented, he is not a rapist.
It's a fairly simple concept ... even for you.
"With those incapable of consenting." Can a fraud victim consent or not?
I'm not entirely sure what to make of this. At first glance, the deceptions seem to be different in kind. The adulterer fails to signify, by means of exterior signs, that he is married. The transgendered person, however, actively signifies, by means of exterior signs, that he is a woman.
The adulterer isn't telling a lie. He's simply failing to disclose the truth.
The transgendered person's very appearance is a lie and a fraud.
How far would you like to take this *rape* scenario, Traditio? IF a man marries a woman, but doesn't let her know he had a fling with her sister PRIOR to marrying him, is it rape?
IF a man tells a woman he is a virgin PRIOR to marrying her and he really wasn't, is it rape?
The adulterer is deceiving TWO people (more if there are children), whereas the transgender is deceiving one. Also, I have a hard time believing that someone wouldn't be suspicious in the case of a transgendered person. Case and point: Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner. It's obvious enough to raise red flags.
Leave it to you to make excuses for adulterers while slamming a transgender. Hypocritical much?
So ADMITTEDLY, you know by the appearance they were previously the other gender ...
Frankly, the only dishonesty I am seeing in this thread is in your posts.
In this country, the answer is essentially no. Most states don't address the point at all and have no enforceable law on the particular.
Though there is some variance, rape is usually about penetration without consent. Informed doesn't play into it, though it can make a consensual act criminal in other ways, as when someone with a disease knowingly inflicts that upon a consensual partner whom he doesn't make aware of the fact.
Consent really goes to capacity. It doesn't mean that had you known the woman was a Baptist, or a racist, or formerly, legally a man and had you known any of those things you'd have chosen to abstain that consent wasn't given to the act.
Now in a limited number of jurisdictions, including California, Montana, Colorado, Tennessee, and my own, there is a law called "rape by fraud". Usually those have to do with deception in a more traditional sense, like sneaking into a woman's bed under cover of darkness impersonating her husband, or faking nuptials in order to bed someone or twins swapping lovers, or a bigamist bedding wife number two. That sort of thing.
While I do think a transgender person should inform sexual partners of their change I wouldn't call it rape if they don't. Possibly some kind of lesser charge.
Do you think a married person who conceals their married status would he a rapist too?
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
You're saying that you're not cognizant enough of what you've been posting to have any idea?
"Various things." That's one way to disassociate yourself from what you said there that was probably as bigoted and contemptible as the things you've said here.
It's a safe assumption.
Of course it's true.
Ridiculous.
glassjester
Well-known member
If anything, this might just be an argument against casual sex, or sex between people that don't know each other well, or trust one another.
I'm not very sure this works as an example of rape.
If it is rape, then there's a lot more that you'd have to also consider rape.
He actually is in a handful of jurisdictions, as per my last, if he conceals to induce consent.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
only if they have sex outside their marriage
of course, then they're an adulterer and should be executed on that basis
but now that homosexuality is hunky-dory, what about a man married to his wife who cheats on her with another man?
is that adultery, rape or just a guy "exploring his sexuality"?
Exploring is not frowned upon anymore. When I pass people at the store I feel like everyone wants me - :rotfl:
glassjester
Well-known member
What kind of stores do you go to? :think:
What if someone married the pretend "woman" - you don't see a problem with that?
Scam artists who marry people for $ get prosecuted for that kind of fraud, why not this kind?
No? What if a man consented to sex with what he thought was his wife, and it was really his wifes twin sister?
What would you call that?
Under the criteria you are using, NO, they are most certainly not rapists.
Are you really able to consent if you are being tricked?
yes, if he married the new person while still married.