-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Schoolgirl, 18, posed as boy for three-and-half years to have sex with another girl
- Thread starter Robso
- Start date
- Status
Bony Manifesto
Member
Surely there must be some sort of detail missing from this report, because on the face of it, it doesn't seem like any crime was committed...
Perfect song for doing it in the dark is Bonnie Raitt's I Can't Make You Love Me what with the first line.
Turn down the lights, turn down the bed
Turn down these, male, voices inside my head
Lay down with me, tell me no lies (Could be an issue)
Just hold me close, don't patronize - don't patronize me
Turn down the lights, turn down the bed
Turn down these, male, voices inside my head
Lay down with me, tell me no lies (Could be an issue)
Just hold me close, don't patronize - don't patronize me
ZombieSupaStar
Member
what law is that?
I guess it looks pretty cut and dry then, she consented to have sex with a biological male named scott, what she got was a biological female named justine, in the dark, wearing a strap on.
frankie_baby
Member
to use an example guy goes out drinking, a girl comes overand starts chatting him up she tells him she's a model he thinks 'nice one i wanna bang her', they go off and have sex, the next morning turns out she works as at mcdonalds and he thinks 'eurgh why did i fuck some skanky burger flipper' so would that be a crime now?
Yep.
Well I believe it boils down to the whole "consent" thing. Would she had given consent if she knew Scott was a girl not a boy? That's the question really. The same logic is used in many consent cases, so I don't see why this one is any different, it simply didn't involve drinking.
The law cited in the article in the OP that no one read.
She consented to have sex with a boy, not a girl.
Thus, no consent was given for the sexual activity.
Thus, rape.
Not even slightly equatable, legally or logically.
Sine there is a sentence I will assume there is something that do justify it.
But this makes me think about other couples where on part later changes their gendered (assuming the "Scott" actually is transgendered), they have lived out the "lie" much longer and some even have kids, but I can't say I have heard of a case where any of them were sent to jail for it.
But yeah, if it was done for lols I get it, but if the intention really was to have a sex change I don't really see the problem in the legal sense?
Also I hope the other girl will come over it and be able to have healthy relationships later on.
But this makes me think about other couples where on part later changes their gendered (assuming the "Scott" actually is transgendered), they have lived out the "lie" much longer and some even have kids, but I can't say I have heard of a case where any of them were sent to jail for it.
But yeah, if it was done for lols I get it, but if the intention really was to have a sex change I don't really see the problem in the legal sense?
Also I hope the other girl will come over it and be able to have healthy relationships later on.
You're right, lying about your work totally equals lying about your fucking gender.
SquiddyCracker
Banned
Well, was she really impersonating someone known to the defendant?
I mean, she was impersonating... herself, as a boy.
Would this mean that a transgendered individual has an obligation to reveal their birthsex, on the basis that someone they have sex with might not want to have sex with them if they knew they were transgendered?
Because I don't think that sounds right.
Karsticles
Member
I've heard as much, but I don't know if that's federal, by-state, or what. I recall a case where a particularly sick SOB went around giving women HIV because he wanted to. I just did a Google search, and 15 years for giving someone HIV seems pretty typical.
That's the fine line; is that impersonation? Maybe. I would say it hinges on one factors:
Was the woman's employment the deciding factor for sleeping with her? This is why gender deceit is criminal, in my opinion. Most people would not sleep with the person they are with if they knew that person was actually of the opposite gender. It's a deciding factor. If the man slept with the woman because she is a model, then that's the bare minimum.
However, I would still be inclined to say it's not criminal, for this reason: impersonation is deceit involving one's personhood. An occupation is not a part of your person, but your gender is. It's an odd line to tread on, and there's surely a gray area (is makeup constitutive of deceit involving one's personhood?), but that's my inclination. HIVs should be prosecutable for entirely different reasons, of course.
Can you say it was consensual when one party didn't disclose major information of sexual nature?
tycoonheart
Member
What about lying about your age, your name, your job, etc, etc? Would those fall under the same law?
That's just a summary from wiki, there's probably all kinds of sexy details in the actual text.
frankie_baby
Member
but due to sex discrimination laws a woman should have as much right to lie to get her in to bed as a man did
Oh I am sure this will come up as a case very soon if it hasn't already.
No.
Well, age, maybe. Would be an exceptional circumstance to produce a conviction though.
chickdigger802
Banned
What was that award winning movie about a girl pretending to be a guy who dies at the end?
Think it was based off something real.
Think it was based off something real.
I'd say yeah, a transgendered individual has an obligation to reveal their situation. Legally? Not sure. If the partner involved is into the person they probably won't care but to not say anything isn't right IMO.
Related to the story: Section 76 of the Act introduces a number of conclusive presumptions.These are where the defendant deceives the victim to the nature or purpose of relevant act. Sounds pretty legit to me.
Boys Don't Cry. But the other girl was cool with it when she found out.
ShinNL
Member
Is it wrong if I say I don't wish to have a transsexual female? I would feel very abused and betrayed if someone made up stories to make it seem they were born as female.
SquiddyCracker
Banned
I mean, sure, it should be a moral obligation.
But legal?
I don't think that should be a crime tbh, the implication just doesn't sit well with me.
thetrin
Hail, peons, for I have come as ambassador from the great and bountiful Blueberry Butt Explosion
Boys Don't Cry
One thing, 'nature and purpose' is very narrowly defined in English law. Basically there is only deception as to the nature and purpose of an act where the victim doesn't understand that the act is sexual. There's an old case where a singing teaching told a student that he was doing something to improve her singing voice and he was in fact sexually assaulting her in some way (I can't remember the specifics). Legally cases such as this one shouldn't be resulting in convictions because the 'victim's' consent shouldn't be vitiated just because what they thought was a penis was in fact a dildo/strap-on. I think it's a combination of defendant's pleading guilty (as happened here) and trial judges being stupid which is resulting in these convictions.
There have been a number of cases like this and they make me really uncomfortable, given the implications they have for trans people. I don't know if the defendant in this case was trans (there is a reference to them telling someone they wanted a sex change in the Telegraph article) but the message these cases send out is that trans people can be prosecuted for not disclosing their gender history to sexual partners. Ignoring the quesiton of whether you think trans people should disclose to partners (I personally don't think they should have to - it should be a personal decision), we should be really, really reticent about getting the criminal law involved.
Ok just for the record Boys Don't Cry isn't about a girl 'pretending' to be a guy. It's about a trans man who is murdered because of his gender identity.
It's the same reason pretending to be someone else's SO and having sex with them under those false pretenses is sexual assault.
If she'd told her she was a girl and they had sex - Fine
If she'd told her she was a girl who would be seeking sex reassignment surgery and they had sex (and this was true) - Fine
If she had actually already been in the process of having her sex changed, she didn't inform the other girl that she was born a girl, and they had sex - Probably fine.
PflargBlarg
Member
You guys serious? You can't see anything possibly illegal with fraudulently manipulating someone into sex with you when you're pretending to be a different sex?
Pretending to be a different sex is different than "Oh, he's not really an airline pilot."
Pretending to be a different sex is different than "Oh, he's not really an airline pilot."
ComputerMKII
Banned
Who's Aguirre?
So this archaeologist finds out about the location of the last set of rare bones of male landwhale after paying off one of his informants an exuberant amount of money, the archaeologist gets to the dig site and all the lights are off. When he turns the lights on it turns out to actually be the female bones of a non-rare landwhale species. Essentially both the girl in the article and the archaeologists informer in the example have lied about the product/service and caused money/time/effort to be wasted in result. In our case the girl wasted emotional effort/ time / and possibly money on this internet boy she believed herself to be in a relationship with.
Hopefully this example helps out a little more.
Hopefully this example helps out a little more.
tycoonheart
Member
Gaf guy pretending to be gaf girl.
You don't visit the funny pictures thread often do you?
It's a tough situation that the public alone is having trouble figuring out. When you bring something like that into the judicial area, it becomes even more complicated. For me I feel like the latter wouldn't even be an issue if people followed that moral obligation you mentioned above but I'm sure some trans peeps feel like they shouldn't have to. Are they correct in that thought? I have no fucking idea.
SquiddyCracker
Banned
Pretending to be someone else's SO is impersonation though.
How can it be impersonation of you're still yourself?
She's basically lied about her sex, one of many facets of her being - not the major one. That being illegal is a bit iffy.
ComputerMKII
Banned
Karsticles
Member
It's definitely different, but I think it's good to ask whether the difference is essential, and if so, whether that essential difference is acceptably large.
She wasn't being herself, though. She was pretending to be male.
What is the major difference between:
"Hi, I am Karst, your husband." - really, I am Karst's evil and horny twin brother.
"Hi, I am Karst, a sexy woman." - really, I am a sexy man with superb makeup skills.
So if I get a blowjob from a "woman" that is actually a crossdresser or transgendered, I have been raped (as far as the law is concerned)?
I actually think as it's worded your bottom one would not be fine if she didn't disclose that information. To me it sounds like there is being a clear and distinct line drawn and they are bringing out the old "tricking" thing again.
Your own personal view of your gender and society's view may be different and can be different, but these days when dealing with someone and if they do feel "tricked" or betrayed or whatever the case may be you best have legal papers to back up your gender if you're trans or you'll probably face this same situation sans the jail time.
in this instance with respect to this case if you believed she was a biological woman and she didn't tell you ahead of time and you found out, seems like you could certainly claim sexual assault.
This would make an amazing RomCom (at the beginning) turned drama. I don't know if it's romantic or creepy. Maybe it's a little of column A and a little of column B. It's a shame that she wasn't born a man (physically), and she shouldn't have tricked the other girl for so many years, but still...the feels.
I'm going to go out on a limb on this one and say lying about one's sex in order to have sex with someone is a pretty big issue for the same reason lying about one's financial stability in order to have a financial contract with someone is a pretty big issue.
Likewise, lying about your financial stability when it comes to sex? No big deal. Lying about your sex when it comes to finances? Also no big deal.
frankie_baby
Member
if it is a law then its a fairly stupid law and possibly in breach of other more important laws, while i guess there may be more to it the passage quoted earlier about section 76 doesnt actually sound like it should apply to this case
however i'm not saying this isnt morally wrong because it is, but not everything that is morally wrong is or should be illegal
Count Dookkake
Member
Should be considered rape.
That's not the specific bit being violated. "where the defendant deceives the victim to the nature or purpose of relevant act (ie. Fraud)" is the relevant piece. In this case the expected nature of the sexual act was for the person she believed to be a man to penetrate her. The person in actuality is a female that mislead the victim to facilitate the act. She was not aware that the act was being performed by a woman with a strap-on when accepting the act. So yes technically this violates the above and is a really shitty thing to do.
- Status