Consensual sex leads to 18 month in prison because he pretended he was Jewish

[elzoog]

IDK.... I think the Tennessee vs. Mitchell case was a criminal act. IDK how you can confuse your boyfriend/finance's voice w/ someone else. Or even their tone, slang, and ways to show affection. I'm sitting her trying to imagine this guy calling me and pretending to be Dustin ... I just don't think it's possible. Maybe it's because I work at call center and memorize familiar voices. Some of the callers have similar voices but the way they speak is different. You can "hear" their personality in their tone.

I do think that women and men have the right to set up sexual fantasies with their partners. And I think we have the right to assume that when we do this we can trust our partner. If something happens and either our partner deceives us by doing a bait and switch, or someone some how convinces me they are my partner than the sexual act should be punishable by law.

Yeah, the "Well, if you were too stupid to check and verify that it really was Dustin before you had sex with him, then you had it coming." is not a good argument.   I think it's stupid for JNTB to use an argument like that.   It might be very difficult to do, but it would be possible for someone to study Dustin's way of speaking in enough detail to call you on the phone and convince you he is Dustin.  If this "Dustin" were to then convince you to have sex with him, it would be sex by fraud and I think it should be punishable by law.

[Kimberly]

Yeah, the "Well, if you were too stupid to check and verify that it really was Dustin before you had sex with him, then you had it coming." is not a good argument.   I think it's stupid for JNTB to use an argument like that.   It might be very difficult to do, but it would be possible for someone to study Dustin's way of speaking in enough detail to call you on the phone and convince you he is Dustin.  If this "Dustin" were to then convince you to have sex with him, it would be sex by fraud and I think it should be punishable by law.

I agree. I just don't know where you draw the line.

[Nam]

The punishment for that is doused in gasoline then set on fire iirc.

Dude, that's harsh. But, also sounds a bit kinky.



-Nam

[elzoog]

For example, in this episode of Leave it to Beaver

Leave It To Beaver-01x27-Pt.1

I think that Wally should have canceled the date with Mary Ellen because he was manipulated into the date.

[JNTB]

Hey, I'm outraged by this. I started this thread. But you're going on with the hyperbole. Comparing killing someone with 18 months prison sentence, total hyperbole. Comparing punishing all cases of interracial sex with murder and punishing someone for tricking someone into sex, total hyperbole - remember, this doesn't happen everytime Palestinians have sex with Jews, it only happened once where the Palestinian lied about his creed. If a crossdresser tricked me into receiving a blowjob from him, I'd be fucking pissed too, and I'm honestly very, very close to being on the fence about if something like that should be criminal, it would be a great violation. Religious people can easily feel the same way.

If a woman identifies a man that she would like to shag, and she shags him without protest, there is no rape. There is no crime. It matters not what he told her before they shagged. If people wish to pass a law to say that it is rape, then they are wrong. If anyone wishes to define and implement rape by deception, then they need to prosecute nearly ever member of the human race. Somewhere, somehow, somebody has lied about something in order to get sex. Did you take out the trash? (no) Did you walk the dog? (no) Did you pickup my dry cleaning? (no) ... then you should be prosecuted for lying about any of those things in order to have sex with your wife/girlfriend/SO because you have entered into rape by deception.

If you go get a blow job by a tranny and later discover he actually has oranges under his shirt, that's your problem, not his (legally speaking). If you told the tranny that you will pay her $50 for a blow job and later discover that he actually has oranges under his shirt, then you might have a case of false advertising and get your $50 back (assuming that prostitution is otherwise legal in the jurisdiction in which you received the blow job).



If you want continue to fantasize that the Israeli government hasn't engaged in various, repetitive human rights abuses, I cannot stop you.

[JNTB]

Well, if the stupidity of the victim is a defense, then how about we not bother trying to prosecute guys that perpetrate Nigerian scams?   Or if I make an ad saying I will send you $1000 if you first send me $10, and I simply take the $10 and run, I shouldn't be prosecuted either.   After all, that is also a scam that probably only a stupid person would fall for.

Isn't that sexist?

The Nigerian email scams do not provide the recipients with the monies promised in the contracts made, and often cause the victims to lose more money than what was required in the deals. It is a matter of equity. Removing more money from a bank account than what was authorized and not returning it upon discovery of the error is theft. It is a matter of crime. You cannot compare the Nigerian email scams with a man pretending to have a Jewish penis because there was no deal involving something of value (money) and there was no theft (he couldn't remove her vagina from her body and take off with it). No crime committed, no contract breached. As I stated in my previous post, if she offered him $50 to put his Jewish penis into her Jewish vagina, she should be able to get her $50 back because of false advertising. That circumstance would be a matter of equity -- nothing more.

What's really unfair in the Jewish penis scenario is that if she had lied to him and said that she had a Muslim vagina, he would have zero ability to have her prosecuted for the deception of not providing a Muslim vagina. After all, in most jurisdictions in the world, men cannot be raped, whether by physical force or simple deception.

[JNTB]

I do think that women and men have the right to set up sexual fantasies with their partners. And I think we have the right to assume that when we do this we can trust our partner. If something happens and either our partner deceives us by doing a bait and switch ...

You are right, except there was no bait and switch, unless the woman gets an entirely different penis than what she asked for. Since the penis is attached to the same man, and since the penis cannot be removed and attached to a different man, the penis you get is the penis you wanted. If you get an entirely different penis, then by default you get an entirely different man. Only the latter is bait and switch.

... or someone some how convinces me they are my partner than the sexual act should be punishable by law.

By which law? A criminal law or a civil law? Why?

What if you sell me a bible for $100 and tell me that if I read it I will be saved in heaven, have you committed an act of deception? Sure. Is it punishable by law, criminal or civil? No.   Why not?

But then, like the video said, where do you draw the line. If my partner pretends to love me to have sex with me, I don't think that is rape.

How would it not be rape? Didn't he put his penis into your vagina through deception? If after having sex with you every day for the past 30 days, he says that he doesn't love you, and you made his statement of love a requirement for having sex, how is that not deception? It is no less a deception than him declaring that he is Mormon to get into your Mormon pants, but then later telling you that he is Catholic. It's all deception, but is the deception criminal? No.

[elzoog]

The Nigerian email scams do not provide the recipients with the monies promised in the contracts made, and often cause the victims to lose more money than what was required in the deals. It is a matter of equity. Removing more money from a bank account than what was authorized and not returning it upon discovery of the error is theft. It is a matter of crime. You cannot compare the Nigerian email scams with a man pretending to have a Jewish penis because there was no deal involving something of value (money) and there was no theft (he couldn't remove her vagina from her body and take off with it).

Hey JNTB, I have about 2 million units of money that I am willing to trade with you for $5,000.

(By the way this is entirely true, I do in fact have 2 million units of money, and I am willing to trade those 2 million units for $5,000)

[Smokeskin]

If a woman identifies a man that she would like to shag, and she shags him without protest, there is no rape. There is no crime. It matters not what he told her before they shagged. If people wish to pass a law to say that it is rape, then they are wrong. If anyone wishes to define and implement rape by deception, then they need to prosecute nearly ever member of the human race. Somewhere, somehow, somebody has lied about something in order to get sex. Did you take out the trash? (no) Did you walk the dog? (no) Did you pickup my dry cleaning? (no) ... then you should be prosecuted for lying about any of those things in order to have sex with your wife/girlfriend/SO because you have entered into rape by deception.

If you go get a blow job by a tranny and later discover he actually has oranges under his shirt, that's your problem, not his (legally speaking).

I agree, and I don't think it should be illegal. I don't think that people can just make up what they think is a personal violation and expect others to be punished for it. But there is a real violation going on here. Sex is special, and we react very differently to it than we do to everything else. If a mentally ill person pinned down a woman and rubbed my forearm against her forearm repeatedly for a a few minutes, she'd afterwards call it a strange experience - the same force and motion applied by his penis to her vagina, she'd be traumatized.

So no, I don't think it should be illegal. I think it is far out. But someone has still delibaretedly hurt someone else to get sex, and it is only a prison sentence. When you compare that to executing gays for having consensual sex, you are engaging in hyperbole.

If you want continue to fantasize that the Israeli government hasn't engaged in various, repetitive human rights abuses, I cannot stop you.

You don't read what I write, do you? The Palestinians are actively hostile and do their best to kill and maim as many Israelis as they can. The Israelis have the power to kill and maim any and all Palestinians and choose not to do it. There's is a HUGE gap between the level of hostility. And it is plainly obvious that the US reacts with a lot more prejudice against its enemies than Israel does.

I believe that the idea that you can fight a determined enemy while sticking to all human rights is a fantasy. But the Israelis seem to be doing a better job of it than almost any other nation that I've ever heard of, and under much more difficult circumstances.

If the Mexicans in California started acting like the Palestinians - terror bombings, kids TV talk a lot about the duty to kill Americans, demands for half of LA, etc. - what do you think the reaction would be?

[Kimberly]

You are right, except there was no bait and switch, unless the woman gets an entirely different penis than what she asked for. Since the penis is attached to the same man, and since the penis cannot be removed and attached to a different man, the penis you get is the penis you wanted. If you get an entirely different penis, then by default you get an entirely different man. Only the latter is bait and switch.

I was mostly talking about this:

In that case, what about the following scenario?   A boyfriend agrees beforehand that it's okay if his friend has sex with his girlfriend, but knows that the girlfriend probably wouldn't consent.   So he concocts a story where he fantasizes about having sex with his girlfriend while blindfolded in a bedroom while a party is going on outside (the bedroom).  So they have a party where they invite several people.   He then tells his girlfriend to get naked, put the blindfold on, and wait in the bedroom for him.   He then tells his friend that the girlfriend is waiting and to go ahead and go for it.

By which law? A criminal law or a civil law? Why?

Criminal according to Tennessee vs. Mitchell. I don't wanna rewatch the video to get the exact law used out of it. I'm sorry it's 10 min long, I tried skipping a head but can't seem to find it fast enough.

What if you sell me a bible for $100 and tell me that if I read it I will be saved in heaven, have you committed an act of deception? Sure. Is it punishable by law, criminal or civil? No.   Why not?

Only if I know/believe God doesn't exist. I don't it would be punishable by law because of the burden of proof. We have no proof their is no heaven.

How would it not be rape? Didn't he put his penis into your vagina through deception? If after having sex with you every day for the past 30 days, he says that he doesn't love you, and you made his statement of love a requirement for having sex, how is that not deception? It is no less a deception than him declaring that he is Mormon to get into your Mormon pants, but then later telling you that he is Catholic. It's all deception, but is the deception criminal? No.

I don't consider it rape. IDK a lie doesn't change the penis you have accepted. However in Elzoog's hypothetical there was a bait N switch. In the Tennessee vs. Mitchell the women thought they were having sex w/ their significant other. Why should it be treated differently than any other con, such as these Common Fraud Schemes

[trustall]

...I am the OP of this post because I found it completely insane and unjust. But implying that Israel is even comparable to Iran with regards to human rights seems like total hyperbole...

JNTB, Smokeskin's gotcha cold on this one. 

The two nations are not even remotely comparable quantitatively or qualitatively. 

The ultimate human rights violation is in gratuitous mass murder of innocent civilians, while the Zionist Jewish State has turned the killing of helpless women and children -- and the propagandistic defense of such murder before the world and particularly before Israel's American enablers -- into a predictable routine if not the national pastime.

http://www.btselem.org/english/statistics/casualties.asp?sD=29&sM=09&sY=2000&eD=26&eM=12&eY=2008&filterby=event&oferet_stat=before

Fatalities since the outbreak of the second intifada and until operation "Cast Lead"

Data by the date of event, 29.9.2000-26.12.2008

                                                                                                           Occupied Territories                             Israel
 
Palestinians killed by Israeli security forces                                                  4791                                              69
Palestinians killed by Israeli civilians                                                               45                                                2
Israeli civilians killed by Palestinians                                                             239                                            492
Israeli security force personnel killed by Palestinians                                     243                                               89

http://www.btselem.org/english/statistics/Casualties.asp?sD=27&sM=12&sY=2008&eD=18&eM=01&eY=2009&filterby=event&oferet_stat=during

Fatalities during operation "Cast Lead"

Data by the date of event, 27.12.2008-18.1.2009

                                                                                                            Occupied Territories                              Israel

Palestinians killed by Israeli security forces                                                    1397                                                 0
Palestinians killed by Israeli civilians                                                                  0                                                  0
Israeli civilians killed by Palestinians                                                                  0                                                  3
Israeli security force personnel killed by Palestinians                                          5                                                  1

Israel's ongoing illegal jailing of thousands upon thousands of Palestinian political prisoners, Israel's illegal jailing of democratically elected Palestinian legislators, not to mention Israel's bizarre jailing of a rapist who did not rape, really all seem pretty much trivial in comparison to all this killing for the sake of an overt land and water grab.

[JNTB]

I haven't read the Tennessee v Mitchell case, so my remarks are based upon the video posted in this thread. That case does not apply to the one in the OP (the Israel case) because, although I find it incredible to believe that the women couldn't discern the voices of their own lovers, the person who entered their homes and had sex with them was in fact a different person than who they thought. If they didn't give permission to the proper man to enter their homes, the perp could be guilty of trespassing. (A lot would depend on state law and specifically what was said in the prior telephone conversations.) Enter a home without authorization and engage in sex with the homeowner without authorization, and you have several violations of the law.

Nevertheless, if you blindfold yourself and unlock your front door with the expectation that the next person who enters is going to have sex with you, presumably with your permission, but you fail to verify the person who enters, then I am going to declare that any trauma you experienced is your own damn fault. Why would I decide anything else?


There is nothing special about sex, nor should there be. If you got the penis you wanted, where is the deception? There isn't any. If you got a different penis, then you were deceived, but if you contributed to the deception by not caring to verify what penis you were getting, then how can we logically or morally prosecute the penis for taking such an opportunity?

[Kimberly]

I haven't read the Tennessee v Mitchell case, so my remarks are based upon the video posted in this thread. That case does not apply to the one in the OP (the Israel case) because, although I find it incredible to believe that the women couldn't discern the voices of their own lovers, the person who entered their homes and had sex with them was in fact a different person than who they thought. If they didn't give permission to the proper man to enter their homes, the perp could be guilty of trespassing. (A lot would depend on state law and specifically what was said in the prior telephone conversations.) Enter a home without authorization and engage in sex with the homeowner without authorization, and you have several violations of the law.

Nevertheless, if you blindfold yourself and unlock your front door with the expectation that the next person who enters is going to have sex with you, presumably with your permission, but you fail to verify the person who enters, then I am going to declare that any trauma you experienced is your own damn fault. Why would I decide anything else?


There is nothing special about sex, nor should there be. If you got the penis you wanted, where is the deception? There isn't any. If you got a different penis, then you were deceived, but if you contributed to the deception by not caring to verify what penis you were getting, then how can we logically or morally prosecute the penis for taking such an opportunity?

I agree that it would be hard to believe someone couldn't tell the difference in their significant other and a stranger. Maybe you are right, maybe the responsibility lies on the couple. Talk about it in person, and come up with a "safe word". If someone walks in to the room and doesn't know the safe word then don't have sex with them. If they then apply force it would = rape.

IDK I'm still kinda torn on this one... I really see how it could be rape by deception, and think he should be punished. Any one know what the normal sentence is for rape? Maybe rape by deception should be a lesser offense? IDK I need to learn more before I can agree 100% with you JNTB.

[JNTB]

Talk about it in person, and come up with a "safe word". If someone walks in to the room and doesn't know the safe word then don't have sex with them. If they then apply force it would = rape.

Precisely. I was wondering why these women hadn't done the same thing. Of course, they couldn't tell the secret word to the guy on the phone, but they could always have a secret word for their lovers no matter the circumstance.

IDK I'm still kinda torn on this one... I really see how it could be rape by deception, and think he should be punished. Any one know what the normal sentence is for rape? Maybe rape by deception should be a lesser offense? IDK I need to learn more before I can agree 100% with you JNTB.

In the case that started this thread, why is religion and/or cultural identity tied to the deception while other types of deception don't matter? Why didn't she have him attend synagogue with her to confirm his religion? Why didn't she ask to see his Isreali ID card (assuming he was a resident of the Palestinian Territory)? Is she allowed to declare a deception without making any effort on her own to confirm what he told her? It seems that there was no effort to do either, so in his position, I would have to assume that she didn't ask because she really didn't care.

[Kimberly]

In the case that started this thread, why is religion and/or cultural identity tied to the deception while other types of deception don't matter? Why didn't she have him attend synagogue with her to confirm his religion? Why didn't she ask to see his Isreali ID card (assuming he was a resident of the Palestinian Territory)? Is she allowed to declare a deception without making any effort on her own to confirm what he told her? It seems that there was no effort to do either, so in his position, I would have to assume that she didn't ask because she really didn't care.

I don't agree with the ruling in the OP. Everything you said is on point.

[Smokeskin]

JNTB, Smokeskin's gotcha cold on this one. 

The two nations are not even remotely comparable quantitatively or qualitatively. 

The ultimate human rights violation is in gratuitous mass murder of innocent civilians, while the Zionist Jewish State has turned the killing of helpless women and children -- and the propagandistic defense of such murder before the world and particularly before Israel's American enablers -- into a predictable routine if not the national pastime.

Israel's ongoing illegal jailing of thousands upon thousands of Palestinian political prisoners, Israel's illegal jailing of democratically elected Palestinian legislators, not to mention Israel's bizarre jailing of a rapist who did not rape, really all seem pretty much trivial in comparison to all this killing for the sake of an overt land and water grab.

You're confusing capability with intent.

The Palestinians are the aggressors, they're just weak, so they don't cause many casualties, and when Israel takes steps to stop the aggression, they can inflict massive damage.

You could do the exact same number comparisons for any wars any western nation have been involved in for the last 30 years, and it looks the same. We take very few casualties, the enemy takes a lot. That doesn't mean we're the bad guys, though that would be the conclusion from your reasoning.

You do know that the weak party is not always the victim, don't you?