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

[Clymene]

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?

Its simple. You shouldn't lie about your sex.

Maybe they will stop. Maybe they will be ok with it. Either way that needs to be based on truth. Consent matters.

I don’t think it’s possible to simultaneously stress the importance of consent and claim that sex is irrelevant.

Either a prospective sexual partner won’t care, and then it doesn’t matter if sex is revealed, or they will care and it should be revealed. There is no right to sex.

I was wondering what the law said, and noticed that @ArabellaScott kindly provided a link to CPS guidance.

www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/rape-and-sexual-offences-chapter-6-consent

A decision to prosecute should take into account

"The nature and level of the relevant sexual activity;

The nature and duration of any relationship between the suspect and complainant"

That seems reasonable to me. But there's more that's very concerning. The section is titled "Gender Deception", and under "Evidentiary Requirements" it says

"Whether there has been deception as to gender will require very careful consideration of all the surrounding circumstances including:

How the suspect perceives his/her gender;

What steps, if any, he/she has taken to live as his/her chosen identity; and

What steps, if any, he/she has taken to acquire a new gender status."

I'm not a lawyer, but is it saying if a man really, truly, believes he's he's a woman at heart, there's no question of deception?

So, deception extends to yourself, it is ok to deceive other people? Does that work in other areas of law.

I believed that very expensive sapphire necklace was truly mine, so I took it home in my pocket of course.

CPS: Ah, not straightforward theft look at the context.

if a man really, truly, believes he's he's a woman at heart, there's no question of deception

Mr Average doesn't shag a woman's heart, he shags her vagina. Ergo, she needs to have one. What she believes is neither here nor there, it's what actually is that matters.

I'm not saying transpeople aren't entitled to find love. They just need to be open about who they are. It's the same for the rest of us. Don't deceive the people you want to be close with.

if a man really, truly, believes he's he's a woman at heart, there's no question of deception

Ah. The Tinkerbelle Theory of Identity. If you clap really really hard...

Sorry. Tinker Bell.

Does solicitor hubble have something he'd like to add?

The hypocrisy on this thread is awesome. I'm sure if "hubble" was "gender critical" he'd be welcome with open arms.

@Manteiga

I was wondering what the law said, and noticed that *@ArabellaScott* kindly provided a link to CPS guidance.

www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/rape-and-sexual-offences-chapter-6-consent

A decision to prosecute should take into account

"The nature and level of the relevant sexual activity;

The nature and duration of any relationship between the suspect and complainant"

That seems reasonable to me. But there's more that's very concerning. The section is titled "Gender Deception", and under "Evidentiary Requirements" it says

"Whether there has been deception as to gender will require very careful consideration of all the surrounding circumstances including:

How the suspect perceives his/her gender;

What steps, if any, he/she has taken to live as his/her chosen identity; and

What steps, if any, he/she has taken to acquire a new gender status."

I'm not a lawyer, but is it saying if a man really, truly, believes he's he's a woman at heart, there's no question of deception?

The case which set test rules is this.

www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2013/1051.html

There is a world of difference between the situation described in that case and a quick blow job from a person barely any time after first meeting them. From that guidance I don't think there is any grounds to bring a case in the latter situation.

@KimikosNightmare

Does solicitor hubble have something he'd like to add?

The hypocrisy on this thread is awesome. I'm sure if "hubble" was "gender critical" he'd be welcome with open arms.

It's not that. Women on here don't tend to quote their husbands as an authority to back up their arguments. Particularly legal ones, as the board is often heaving with lawyers.

A 'quick blow job'? Are you saying that the duration of the sex act has any bearing on the need for consent?

It's not that. Women on here don't tend to quote their husbands as an authority to back up their arguments. Particularly legal ones, as the board is often heaving with lawyers

That is simply not true.

And how patronising to assume I was using him to "back up my argument". The reference was to the specific reaction of the male thug in that particular case to the reaction of another heterosexual man. The fact he is a heterosexual man who also understands criminal law was an aside.

Oh and the boards might "be heaving with lawyers" - there's also a fair number who pontificate with zero understanding of legal issues - e.g all the posters on the deleted thread going on about the thug being "raped" .

Yes quite, Datun.

@ArabellaScott

A 'quick blow job'? Are you saying that the duration of the sex act has any bearing on the need for consent?

Have you actually tried reading the guidance linked to ? Or the case?

Are you suggesting the trans woman forced the thug's penis into her mouth?

What's simply not true? That women on here don't typically invoke their husbands to shore up their arguments or that many women on here are lawyers?

Both those things are true @KimikosNightmare

None of us who are biologically female can have experience of receiving a blow job - so it's perfectly reasonable to get a view from someone who has.

@KimikosNightmare

It's not that. Women on here don't tend to quote their husbands as an authority to back up their arguments. Particularly legal ones, as the board is often heaving with lawyers

That is simply not true.

And how patronising to assume I was using him to "back up my argument". The reference was to the specific reaction of the male thug in that particular case to the reaction of another heterosexual man. The fact he is a heterosexual man who also understands criminal law was an aside.

Oh and the boards might "be heaving with lawyers" - there's also a fair number who pontificate with zero understanding of legal issues - e.g all the posters on the deleted thread going on about the thug being "raped" .

Your husband blaming himself has got nothing to do with whether or not sex by deception is acceptable. It isn't.

And of course, women on a feminist board are going to be looking at this through the eyes of a female, not a male. A male deceiving another male is one issue. A male deceiving a female, is quite another. The balance of power will lie, in that case, with the deceiver.

And of course, women on a feminist board are going to be looking at this through the eyes of a female, not a male. A male deceiving another male is one issue. A male deceiving a female, is quite another. The balance of power will lie, in that case, with the deceiver.

Yes. This. So much.

There is a world of difference between the situation described in that case and a quick blow job from a person barely any time after first meeting them.
What I don't understand was how the person receiving came to find the person giving had a penis. It does sound like something non consensual happened there.

Shall I shout over fence to bloke next door ask his opinion before ring my dad back and ask him also likely be sweary answer from dad

By being ok with deception you are also saying it ok for same to happen to women!

Consent what so hard to understand.

Thank you @KimikosNightmare. You're right: a world of difference. What bothers me is that the current CPS guidance should imply that it makes any difference at all whether "Scott", in the case you cite, claims to identify as a man rather than admits to pretending to be one.

Your husband blaming himself has got nothing to do with whether or not sex by deception is acceptable. It isn't.

This. Which was the reason for my original comment.

What's simply not true? That women on here don't typically invoke their husbands to shore up their arguments or that many women on here are lawyers?

Both those things are true @KimikosNightmare

Indeed.

Are you suggesting the trans woman forced the thug's penis into her mouth?

A male person doesn't have to do this perhaps get your top lawyer husband to teach you about sexual offences legislation?

In the case of Justine McNally, the judgement quotes the Sexual Offences Act:

'"For the purposes of this Part, a person consents if he agrees by choice and has the freedom and capacity to make that choice."

And it also states:

"The case for the Crown was that M's consent was obtained by fraudulent deception that the appellant was a male and that had she known the truth, she would not have consented to acts of vaginal penetration."

That seems pretty clear cut to me. Consent should not be about context as some are arguing. And context was not brought into it by the prosecution either. That was the defence argument - which was rejected by the Court.