Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Is it ok to deceive a sexual partner about your biological sex?

290 replies

Clymene · 24/06/2021 21:13

This is not a TAAT but that is about a horrible violent attack and this question is quite separate.

In any sexual encounter, do you have the right to expect the other person to disclose their biological sex if they visually appear to be of the other sex?

Essentially, does a lesbian have the right to be upset if the person they were female before they got naked has a penis?

Does a gay man have the right to know that someone who appears to be male has a vagina before he has sex?

Does the nature of the encounter matter? If it's a casual encounter, is the onus on the person who appears to be the other sex to come clean in advance, or is it the responsibility of the other person to check before proceeding?

OP posts:
Ereshkigalangcleg · 25/06/2021 22:13

surely a man's point of view is particularly relevant in this case.

One man's reported musing. It's strange how lots of men don't feel my woman's perspective is relevant to trans issues, if they know other women who disagree with me.

Manteiga · 25/06/2021 22:11

@WanderinWomb, I mean the particular case of a drunken man receiving fellatio from a complete stranger whom he wrongly assumed was a woman. No women involved at all.

newstart1337 · 25/06/2021 22:06

Its not just about genitals. I do not want to have sexual contact with someone who has a penis or has had their penis chopped off.

Do you have to ask everyone you are about to come into physical contact with "are you a man or a woman". What if they say "a 'woman', how dare you ask!, but still have a penis? Are they deceiving me when they actually believe they are a woman?

What if they are 'legally a woman' because they have a GRC, are they deceiving me? How is one supposed to determine the sex of someone you are about to have physical contact with? DNA test?

Arbadacarba · 25/06/2021 21:57

@Ereshkigalangcleg

I for one am fascinated by what random posters' hubbies think about this issue.
It's hardly unreasonable to ask for a male perspective when this debate was inspired by the experience of a male.

I asked my husband what he thought - but he couldn't get past the idea that he wouldn't have noticed the person was trans (a good friend of his is a transwoman) before engaging in the activity.

WanderinWomb · 25/06/2021 21:57

[quote Manteiga]@Clymene, surely a man's point of view is particularly relevant in this case.[/quote]
In which case?

On Mumsnet, on the feminist board, on a discussion of sexual consent?

No not particularly relevant at all. I mean male mumsnetters can of course share their opinions on consent but since "cotton ceiling" pressures are not forced on them I think is a very long way from particularly relevant.

Manteiga · 25/06/2021 21:46

@Clymene, surely a man's point of view is particularly relevant in this case.

WanderinWomb · 25/06/2021 21:24

even if he is a solicitor.

😂 Ive had a kitchen accident through laughing too much😂

Ereshkigalangcleg · 25/06/2021 21:22

They do, apart from Relationship Purposes Robin, who was at least honest, bless him

Wallpapering · 25/06/2021 21:20

Loads of men say they would date transwoman if they was single funny that

QuentinBunbury · 25/06/2021 21:17

I did that about the solicitor not noticing the penis Grin

Original poster
Clymene · 25/06/2021 21:12

@Ereshkigalangcleg

I for one am fascinated by what random posters' hubbies think about this issue.
Me too! I particularly enjoy it on the feminism board. It's so refreshing when women share their husbands' perspectives. As if their own weren't enough to make an argument
OP posts:
MrsTerryPratchett · 25/06/2021 20:48

@Ereshkigalangcleg

I for one am fascinated by what random posters' hubbies think about this issue.
I made a very strange snort noise when I read that. Grin
Ereshkigalangcleg · 25/06/2021 20:47

I for one am fascinated by what random posters' hubbies think about this issue.

SmokedDuck · 25/06/2021 20:41

@HIVpos

But the judge in the case said he thought that if you were going to have a casual sexual encounter then you really needed to find out the sex of the other person if it mattered to you.

I find this thinking not only wrong, but kind of strange, but I would say that there seem to be people who also think this way in other areas, not just about disclosure of sex. So for example people who feel that there should be no necessity to disclose HIV status.

@SmokedDuck well, for the well over 90% of those living with HIV in the UK, in the case of something like a ONS why would they need to if they are no risk to any sexual partner? Not sure why you're making this comparison other than both can be highly stigmatised.

Because many people consider both to be things that should be disclosed, and think it is highly immoral not to.

It's also the case that some groups, like SW, want to argue that both things are ok.

So a pretty reasonable comparison of an area of controversy over disclosure and it's relation to consent, my point being that while many people think it is obvious that you should be obligated to disclose, some do not, and they tend to feel that about a variety of similar situations.

Original poster
Clymene · 25/06/2021 20:28

@DoingItMyself

Or alternatively, you could get their consent before

Read my post, dear.

I did. Dear.

If I don't like what I find when people get their kit off, I don't beat them up. And I don't expect them to assault me if I'm not what they expected. I do try to give people a heads up... 'I wouldn't, mate, I look even worse with my clothes off.' That kind of thing.

If they go ahead anyway, would that be your big 'aha'? Hmm

OP posts:
Manteiga · 25/06/2021 20:26

@KimikosNightmare: I suspect your husband's reaction would be typical. Saying that is or ought to be viewed as a sexual assault seems like making Stonewall's case for reviewing CPS policy on sex by deception for them.

MrsTerryPratchett · 25/06/2021 20:23

This leaves a great many trans individuals at risk of prosecution for a criminal offence.

This is interesting by Stonewall. The only possibility of prosecution is if the partner reports to police. The only reason I would report a sexual partner to police is if I felt violated and that a crime had been committed. If I didn't care either way why would I report?

What Stonewall are saying that that a 'great many' partners would feel violated but they don't care about that. Regardless of the morality of it, if they believe a great many people would be so upset they'd report, that's not freely given consent. And sex without free consent is assault.

HIVpos · 25/06/2021 20:21

But the judge in the case said he thought that if you were going to have a casual sexual encounter then you really needed to find out the sex of the other person if it mattered to you.

I find this thinking not only wrong, but kind of strange, but I would say that there seem to be people who also think this way in other areas, not just about disclosure of sex. So for example people who feel that there should be no necessity to disclose HIV status.

@SmokedDuck well, for the well over 90% of those living with HIV in the UK, in the case of something like a ONS why would they need to if they are no risk to any sexual partner? Not sure why you're making this comparison other than both can be highly stigmatised.

DoingItMyself · 25/06/2021 20:14

Or alternatively, you could get their consent before

Read my post, dear.

TheRebelle · 25/06/2021 20:06

I don’t want to have sex with anyone who doesn’t want to have sex with me, as the majority of the population are attracted by sex and not gender I think it’s pretty important to be upfront if you’re not what you appear to be.

KimikosNightmare · 25/06/2021 19:57

@Clymene

I think your husband would notice if he came across a penis when he was expecting a vagina, *@KimikosNightmare*, even if he is a solicitor.
I don't know what point you are making. I asked him if these exact same circumstances happened to him- he was expecting oral sex- and he had noticed at the point the convicted thug did- ie after the blow job , what his reaction would be.

His response was he would be embarrassed and angry with himself for not noticing or not caring enough to notice before he allowed someone to give him a blow job. He was categorically of the view that in the circumstances here this is not sexual assault.

Original poster
Clymene · 25/06/2021 19:41

I think your husband would notice if he came across a penis when he was expecting a vagina, @KimikosNightmare, even if he is a solicitor.

OP posts:
KimikosNightmare · 25/06/2021 19:32

@Arbadacarba

I think if you're unable to make your argument without referring to a particularly egregious case of male violence, it's probably not a very strong argument.

It wasn't the violence that was at the core of my argument, but the particularly casual nature of the sexual encounter in question. The violence isn't really relevant to the issue of consent - I think everyone, more or less, was in agreement that the violence was unacceptable.

It's the casual nature which is at the root of this for me. And neither you nor I were criticising people who have casual sex - I've done it myself.

I've just discussed this with my husband and asked him if this happened to him in these exact circumstances what he would think and feel. He said embarrassed and angry with himself for not noticing or caring but he absolutely would not think he had been the victim of a sexual assault. Husband is a solicitor and whilst criminal law is not his bag he has some experience of it.

QuentinBunbury · 25/06/2021 19:28

The minute you start putting conditions on consent, you weaken it. It should be sought in any and every situation.
Such a good point

Original poster
Clymene · 25/06/2021 18:47

@Arbadacarba

I think if you're unable to make your argument without referring to a particularly egregious case of male violence, it's probably not a very strong argument.

It wasn't the violence that was at the core of my argument, but the particularly casual nature of the sexual encounter in question. The violence isn't really relevant to the issue of consent - I think everyone, more or less, was in agreement that the violence was unacceptable.

Sorry, I do remember that before the thread got zapped. I think that can be discussed without referring to that particular case, can't it?

I would argue that the situation doesn't matter. That there is no context in which is it ok to deceive a sexual partner about your biological sex. Even if it's a quickie against a toilet wall.

The minute you start putting conditions on consent, you weaken it. It should be sought in any and every situation. And if you believe that by telling the prospective sexual partner that you're not the sex they think you are might mean that they don't want to have sex with you, they are not consenting.

OP posts: