What do you think of this...(possible rape)

[differentnameforthis]

Now I think this is rape. I appear to be a lone voice however, as most are calling those who fell for this stupid.

Opinions?

Rape?

persona?

Person A

:)

Micah - I don't think anyone is denying that what she did was bloody stupid. But one can do something bloody stupid and that still doesn't make the resulting rape okay (not that I think you're saying that - just that I wonder what the point of your post is when the question under discussion is "was she/wasn't she raped?", not "was she/wasn't she bloody stupid?")

"Which means a ahell of a lot of rape has happened out there..." Well you are right there!

Lying about your occupation is not the same as lying about who you are. This man purported to be someone he wasn't. He was actually a completely different person. Although if we are talking about lying about your occupation there have been some cases of undercover policemen and having sex with women with deceit (even having children with one of them).

As Buffy says - look at the man's behaviour. Intent to deceive, intent to penetrate these women, no matter what. That is rape.

Under English/Welsh law women cannot rape men. Rape requires penetration by a penis.

Dunno what my point is . Just looking at it from all sides and asking questions.

Micah, I don't think many of us can imagine doing what she did and that's why I think he must be either highly manipulative (like in many abusive relationships where women agree to things that seem crazy in retrospect because they've had their boundaries systematically destroyed) or very good at seeking out women whose naivety makes them vulnerable.

I believe that yes, legally it is rape.

i had the undercover policemen cases at the back of my mind too scallops, though obviously that is a different scenario to this one. i'm struggling to understand how anyone can't see that the case in the OP is rape

Man's actions = rapist
Woman's actions = gross stupidity

Just because you are stupid doesn't mean it wasn't rape.

I'm not sure - she did actually have sex with the man in the room, there was no swapping of bodies, all the on-line conversations were with the man she had sex with, she never met the person in the photo.

I agree that it is rape. He deliberately manipulated a situation to have sex with this women knowing fine well that if there were no manipulation, she most likely would not have had sex with him.

Her actions are irrelevant as she did nothing wrong. We may not choose to do what she did but that doesn't make it wrong.

She's an adult, not a child. Seeing what he looked like before any sexual activity took place would have taken a second.

Imagine if a woman was speaking to a man online and showed him a picture of a gorgeous young bikini model with large perky breasts claiming it was her and the man agreed to meet up with a blindfold on and not see her until after they had sex. Then when the man sees her he finds out the woman is actually hideous and looks like a wrinkly old witch. Would the man have been raped? Or was the man stupid not to confirm the woman's wild claim was true before they had sex?

I guess after all these years the general public have had access to the internet some people still can't grasp the idea that the internet is full of liars and anyone can claim anything.

Funny isn't it, that every single thread about rape always has a number of people who focus completely on the woman's actions, while excusing or completely ignoring the man's.

I don't mean funny ha ha either.

Yes, and people who start coming up with bizarre hypothetical cases in which women do the things that we are talking about a man actually doing.

The logical conclusion of what some of these posts are saying is that only clever people can claim to have been raped. Which is clearly not true.

Whether its rape in the legal sense depends on the law you're applying. Under English law, it isn't rape for same reason that the undercover policemen who had sex/children with the those women also wasn't rape - because there is no actual deception as to identity.

Its only rape if the man claims to be 'Bob' Smith but is actually 'John' Smith.....and the woman KNOWS Bob Smith and was deceived into thinking she was having sex with the Bob Smith that she knows.

What this guy has done is deveived the women as to what he 'looks' like, not as to his identity, because they didnt in fact know him or the model in the picture.

I wonder how many people would think it was rape, if it was a man who agreed to meet and sleep with a woman who claimed to be a model, only to find out later that she was in fact 65 years of age.

I don't think this is rape. They interacted and made arrangements with a stranger, consented to being blindfolded, consented to sex. You cannot determine a person's entire identity based off of a single picture. They may have been naive, silly, stupid even - but I would not agree they were raped.

Posters who think it isn't rape - again, why are you focussing on the woman's behaviour? Whether it would get to court or not, he clearly went out of his way to be dishonest in a prolonged fashion in order to put his penis into someone who would not have wanted it there had he not been spectacularly dishonest.

That's some very shitty behaviour. Perhaps focus on the shittiness, hey?

"why are you focussing on the woman's behaviour?"

It's not a gender specific issue. Myself and at least 1 other have pointed out it would be no different if it were the same scenario with the genders swapped

It was rape. If a man crept into your bedroom in the night, shoved your partner in a cupboard and then had sex with you, and you went along with it willingly because you believed him to be your partner, that would be rape. Even if you'd enjoyed it, even if you hadn't been physically forced, it would be rape. Because you had consented to someone different, not the person who raped you.

But the only deception was a picture - she did not know either man and the only interaction she had was with the guy she slept with - his words, his voice, his touch.

Flower, we've already had that scenario. It would still be sexual assault by deception (under English law anyway). Hope that clears it up for everyone.

And rape isn't a gender specific issue?

Oh. My. Sides.

Annie, similar has happened, but the rapist was acquitted, because he said he thought the woman was his GF....

That's not my point ciwa. In this instance, it is a woman who is a victim of this prolonged deception by someone seeking to take advantage of their persistent lies.

I will rephrase if you prefer to "why the focus on the victim rather than the fraudulent manipulative persistent liar?"

"...If a man crept into your bedroom in the night, shoved your partner in a cupboard and then had sex with you, and you went along with it willingly because you believed him to be your partner, that would be rape..."

Spot on - that would be rape because your partner (who he was pretending to be) is a real person whom you know......

.....which by extension is exactly why the story in the OP is not rape - because the women did not in fact know the person who the man was pretending to be.

Whether or not he 'looks' like the model is irrelevant, because what someone 'looks' like is subjective.