to be shocked at the sentencing in the Gayle Newland case?

[hackmum]

Eight years seems excessive to me. This is the woman who had sex with a female friend while pretending to be a man. Story here:

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/nov/12/gayle-newland-sentenced-eight-years-prison-duping-friend-having-sex

^But I won't be holding my breath.

^^ Exactly.

The thing is, if Newland had claimed she was secretly trans, I doubt anyone would have gone near this case with a barge pole. But it does set an interesting precedent. Agree it is a horrible thing to do to someone, thus the trans issue is relevant as I've read posts by people excusing what would be sexual assault in the same way.

How does this compare (just wondering out loud here) to a case where a man paid for sex with a prostitute he thought was a woman, but who turned out to be biologically male? I have heard of incidents like this. Would that be rape in the same way that this is?

I didn't know anything about agreement to any sexual scenario in the Ched Evans case?

I do see that agreeing to one thing and then being "subject" to another is a problem.

agree with pp who said some sentences being too light isn't a reason for others to be made less heavy - if 8 years is average for rape then fair enough.

Yes Eccle, I get what you're saying, but it's kind of the reverse, isn't it, the victim in this case thought she was having sex with Kye Fortune, not Gayle Newland, and her distress is coming from that.

Yes, but Kye Fortune IS GN, I think. I could call myself all kinds of names (and invent different identities to go with them) but I'd still be EcclefechanTart.

I don't see any relevance to trans stuff. Other than of course any trans person needs to be honeat about themselves. Just because they see themselves as a certain gender doesn't mean that someone having relations with them won't care about their sex.

The thing this case did remind me of was the 'Anthony Laroche' case in France where a man pretended to be half his age and engaged in BDSM with blindfolded women. I think he has been charged with rape by deception, but I haven't seen a verdict.

Eccle - cross posted - really interesting point. The major difference for me is not the gender but the penetration issue which wouldn't apply in a reverse case.

Yes and also agree with vestal that the "exacerbating" element is the lesbian sex. I'm not sure why this should be, to be honest. Just because you like dick doesn't mean you want any old dick. Or Tom or Harry.

There is the parallel with the undercover policeman, but there's also the bit where she was penetrated by a foreign object that she did not agree to. If you agree to your partner sticking their fingers in you, but they actual use a bottle or their penis, or a vibrator then that's not consensual sex. And if you agree to them putting their penis in you but they actually put something else in you instead, then that's not consensual sex either.

It does all sound far fetched for what we might consider "normal" lives. But a lot of sex crimes are perpetrated against vulnerable adults who for a variety of reasons are more trusting and more naive than most people would expect. They are particularly vulnerable because in our culture, so many people still seem to think that naivety makes the victim somehow culpable and it's hard for them to get protection and justice after the abuse.

I'm struggling with the concept of the victim not knowing

From the article above:

Dutton [the judge] noted the defendant had sent the complainant numerous emails apologising for what she had done to her after the mask was ripped off.

That's pretty deep role-play.

This is a remarkably unsympathetic thread towards the victim. There's a tone of her being responsible in some way.

somepeopledontknowthat: "If I consent to penetrative sex with a man and he then inserts an object into me. I'd consider that rape."

To use the old joke, I'm not sure that would stand up in court.

EcclefechanTart, I wouldn't consider it rape, because men who pay for prostitutes essentially pay for a hole to stick their dicks into. There is no emotional involvement.
The only way this can happen is with oral sex (theoretically, anal, but at that point they'd notice), and in that case, they pay for a mouth and get a mouth.
So, it's not like expecting a penis and getting a prosthetic. It's more the "tricked into gay sex" thing.

www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-gayle-newland

full verdict, apologies if already posted.

It wouldn't be rape in England, because rape in England is defined as being penetration with a penis, nothing else counts. But it would be sexual assault.

There is no doubt a difference between physical and emotional deception. Maybe not in the trauma it may inflict on someone, but certainly in terms of law. I can't see how you could prove emotional deception. This case obviously has elements of both.

Eccle - cross posted - really interesting point. The major difference for me is not the gender but the penetration issue which wouldn't apply in a reverse case

Yes, I do see that being penetrated by something different from what you consented to be penetrated by is a big problem. But then that's different from the "sex by deception" bit, isn't it?

I am in no way unsympathetic to the victim, btw. I don't think she is at all responsible for what happened. I am just trying to work out how this can be a crime deserving of 8 years in prison.

Most of the posts are around how the law relates to consent and self-identification. It's not unsympathetic to the victim to try to ascertain how the law has been applied and if there are any wider implications.

But if we're getting into emotional deception as a crime, then pretending not to be married, pretending to be French when you're really Scottish (or whatever), pretending to have shared interests, pretending you want a long term relationship.... all these things are emotional deception. They're not crimes though.

charges were assault by penetration. carries the same sentencing powers as rape but a female cannot commit rape as it requires a penis

I think the deception of posing as the victim's best friend and using that position to encourage the romance with her alter ego is a huge part of why the sentence is 8 years. That, the long term nature of the planning and execution and keeping the deception going for so long makes it particularly cruel. Reading the case it is really horrendous.

I think if you are prepared to wear a blindfold you should accept the risks.

I think one of the points that is interesting is that Gayle Newland wasn't charged with emotional deception. Yet she couldn't have been found guilty of assault if the court hadn't decided she was guilty of emotional deception iyswim.
If she hadn't deceived the victim then it would have been found that the victim gave informed consent. So doesn't that mean that the deception has to supercede the assault? And if that's the legal position then what other types of deception can lead to conviction?

This article gives a bit more background. The bit about the other woman Gayle Newland contacted as Kye Fortune is really interesting.

EcclefechanTart; they are no crimes, but I think they should be. Because men have a tendency to lie about very important things when they want to put their penis into a woman.
It is difficult to say what kind of lie, exactly, should be illegal, but if a man lives together with ten women (who live in separate houses and have children with him), each of whom thinks she is the only one ... then that is emotional cruelty and also deception about the financial security of their children, and also a very shitty thing to do.