Can Someone Please Be A Referee In An Argument In The Tl Household

[TigerlilyCD]

We were watching a TV drama and a gay man hooked up with a woman on a Tinder type app, had sex, then declared that he was gay. She was outraged and said it was rape. I think it's a deception rape. Mr TL says he met her for casual sex therefore he has done nothing wrong. Who's right?

[douglas9401]

I find in these matters it's prudent to come down on the side of the gay person.
Avoids a lot of pointless interaction with the shrill.

[ToraToraTora]

She consented, end of.

[Zacs-Master]

Why would it be rape if he was gay? Sounds like a well thought out programme.

[youngmafbog]

Sex under false pretences ZM?

[drmorgans]

There was a prosecution a while ago where a woman pretended to be a man and had sex with young girls (in the dark) using a prosthetic. I can't remember whether the illegality was because she wasn't a man or due to the girls being underage.

[Zacs-Master]

Is that a legal basis to claim rape has occurred then, YMB?

[Redhelen72]

Oo that is a good question

My initial thought was deception rape too but then I thought it was OK as there was mutual consent

[jno]

Wiki defines rape by deception as "a situation in which the perpetrator deceives the victim into participating in a sexual act that they would otherwise not consent to". If that correctly states the law in the jurisdiction where the drama was set, it sounds like deception to me.

[douglas9401]

Except that our heroine was obviously gagging for the sausage and only after satisfying her lust decided everybody else was a fault it seems.

[Peter Pedant]

yeah I was gonna say 'this is a dray-ma, dont think too long about it'

dont try to learn law from fiction - only Mortimer ( who was a lawyer) gets it consistently right.

Seems she consented. The leading case I suggest is the UCPI ( under cover police inquiry) where Helen Steel had a baby by an undercover policeman ( hot copper) [snake in the grass (anguis in herba, more like)] - and Judgie Baby held that sex was sex and that fact that it was John SMith and not the Maharajah...was irrelevant. She was going to bed with THAT man

judges are so wise

[Paigntonian]

It's fiction.

[Peter Pedant]

yes to use Dougies rather crude example
and then she complains to the Judge - it wasnt bologna, it was salami or cheap Bratwurst.

I thought he was ein Berliner and found he was a cockney sparra !

[Canary42]

One could argue she was also practising deception by keeping quiet about her antipathy towards a gay man.

[Peter Pedant]

the case where the secret police pretended to be greenham protesters of the hairiest sort, is here - and gave them babies

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2018/3508.html

the women lose for criminal proceedings
win in civil law and also human rights ( difft cases)

[pixie374]

He is right. What if he was bisexual? Semi-rape? They met and consented. That's it.

[Peter Pedant]

In the case of leddies being given you now babies by secret policeman. -Hot in bed but cold shouldered in the courts

Monica, R v Boyling - - it is said

She was of the clear opinion that the jurisprudence running from 1888 to 2004 established only two species of fraud that vitiated apparent consent: first, as to nature of the sexual act, and secondly as to the identity of the perpetrator, and that the instant case could not be accommodated within these categories.

and it probably fits this

[Peter Pedant]

Jno - do you recollect the thread on universals and names
That key and a key

is John the same as 'John' ? and so on

The judges here seem to be of the idea - it is the man that is the er thing no matter if he is called Tom Dick or Harrty

[fiveleaves]

If she consented at the time he appears to have done nothing wrong. The fact he later said he was gay is irrelevant

[Peter Pedant]

yes. - - - not every lie cancels consent
R v Lawrance ( Jason Lawrance - there are a lot of them)

https://www.9sjs.com/news/vanessa-thomson-summarises-the-case-of-r-v-jason-lawrance/

and it seems pretty straightforward that a lie such as this does NOT make it rape

interesting q

[Atheist]

If the male had pretended that he fancied her sexually, but that he didn't really fancy her sexually, would that be rape?
If the woman had pretended that she fancied him sexually, but that she didn't really fancy him sexually, would that be rape? Surely that is what prostitutes do.