Granted, that sounds like it wasn't the best situation, but where does the personal responsibility come in? I mean, this woman chose to have an extended sexual relationship with someone while never having laid eyes on them. If you stuck your dick in a glory hole and got a blowjob from a dude, can you really be that surprised or upset? Additionally, we have laws on the books here to protect those we've deemed as a society 'unable to consent'. I mean, the girl was 25 for Pete's sake. Now, the only way I can think of to help combat some of these buyer's remorse situations would be to determine one's ability to consent by examination, not arbitrarily by age.

Anything, essentially. She thinks any lie that may have changed whether someone would have consented to sex, invalidates the consent and changes it to rape.

Literally, any example you can think of would count, because she believes any lie can potentially invalidate consent. If you need an example: a man lying about having had a vasectomy would mean that the woman consented to sex with someone different than who she had sex with, thus, the sex was rape.

@JeffMurray with that example if she did not use birth control relyingd on his word I think that would be a problem. NOt sure I would call it rape

@btroje Actually, I left it vague, because to her, it wouldn't matter, but I was actually talking about a man lying and saying he hadn't had one, letting a woman think there was a possible pregnancy in her future. And no, I wouldn't call that rape. There's essentially no difference between a man who had a vasectomy not disclosing and a man who naturally shot blanks from not disclosing (or not even knowing).

Thanks for the example.

@JeffMurray i thought you were talking about lying that he HAD one but didnt

@btroje It doesn't matter either way. She argues that any lie the "victim" feels would have changed whether or not they would have consented constitutes the removal of informed consent, thereby making the sex, rape.

@JeffMurray why are you so concerned with her?

@btroje Also, the M-F juxtaposition of your situation would also constitute rape. If a woman lied and said she was on the pill, had a hysterectomy, would abort a pregnancy, poked a hole in a condom, was barren, etc. to sleep with a man it would count as rape.

@btroje Because she's on the path to succeeding in changing the laws with her crazy fucking ideas... People are also trying to change the laws to allow tax-exempt churches to endorse political candidates. Crazy shit like this needs to be talked about.

@JeffMurray how is she succeeding? rape that has involved extreme violence and murder has been minimized for so long why do you think someone trying to make a point like this would impact laws? your second issue is totally separate

@btroje Yes, it's separate, it was an example of why crazy shit should be talked about. She is becoming successful because she is gaining friends in the legislature. She is the 2017 recipient of the NY STATE ASSEMBLY “WOMAN OF DISTINCTION” award. Instead of seeing her as a batshit crazy lunatic, she's being given awards. Are you concerned yet?

@JeffMurray no I scanned over some things about her in google. if there is something real meaty there I will be glad to read it. I just do not see that getting passed into law even if it is introduced.Even if it is passed into law how successfully could someone be prosecuted for that?

I'm sorry, but how does this affect any of us? It's her life, not ours.

@JeffMurray they may have taken them off the books now but back in the day we used to joke about laws on the books that forbade sex in any other position than the missionary position. I guess we will agree to disagree on this topic

@btroje Again, this may just not concern you because you will likely never have to worry about it. 'Then they came for the Jews' and all that. Big difference between archaic laws people ignore and laugh at and new laws put in place by people with an agenda. Also, laws are not only about prosecution of the written crime, they are also about gaining leverage against the accused to force pleas and cooperation. You seem to have been extremely lucky so far in your life with how law enforcement has interacted with you and your family.

@JeffMurray you are making rash generalizations. You really have no idea what I think and you have chosen to think badly of me when I have tried to discuss this with you when no one else has had as many exchanges.Your response seems very emotional to me. Maybe you have something to worry about.Atheist said the same thing I am thinking and you have not ranted at him.Please,we can agree to disagree but probably for different reasons than you think

@btroje Are you not telling me what you think with your responses? I can only go by what you say, so if I'm being misled, you're likely misleading me. If there is a comprehension issue, please explain what I'm not getting.

You can call them emotional responses if you wish, but by that rationale, all things that anyone cares to talk about are essentially emotional responses. Furthermore, insinuating that I may have something to worry about is pretty accusatory and representative of your privilege in this area (e.g. most women have nothing to worry about because there is almost a zero percent chance that they will ever be accused of rape.)

I do not think you and atheist are saying the same thing.

That example was not brought up in our argument, but she would say that if the person who said they were a Virgo knowing it would get the person looking for a Virgo into bed, it would invalidate their consent and it would be rape.

@JeffMurray So, what she is saying is, the average two people who attempted to have sex would have to serve prison sentences before they could actually copulate. Maybe she is trying to spread abstinence in a very left hand way.

@JohnnyThorazine I asked her if two people could rape each other at the same time. She failed to respond.