Court Case: woman tricked into sex with a woman pretending to be a man

My view, is you enter a relationship with a person, a human being, not a few meaningless letters on a birth certificate or a set of arbitrary data from a genotype test. If you truly love a person that's all that matters, only your own insecurities will put paid to that.

That's all I'm gonna say in this thread as I'm sure the herpy derpy let's all point and laugh at the 'man' in the dress crew are about to crash into here at great speed with their vast omnipotent knowledge of something they know nothing about, except for what they read somewhere on Breitbart.
 
lafemmefatale said:
My view, is you enter a relationship with a person, a human being, not a few meaningless letters on a birth certificate or a set of arbitrary data from a genotype test. If you truly love a person that's all that matters, only your own insecurities will put paid to that.

That's all I'm gonna say in this thread as I'm sure the herpy derpy let's all point and laugh at the 'man' in the dress crew are about to crash into here at great speed with their vast omnipotent knowledge of something they know nothing about, except for what they read somewhere on Breitbart.
Click to expand...

It's a bit different for you though lafemme. You admitted to being bisexual (or whatever fancy name it is now) in the last thread. Therefore ofc you will not see gender as an important aspect.

Nothing wrong with that mind you. However you have to appreciate a lot of people do not have your sexual orientation.
 
Last edited:
lafemmefatale said:
My view, is you enter a relationship with a person, a human being, not a few meaningless letters on a birth certificate or a set of arbitrary data from a genotype test. If you truly love a person that's all that matters, only your own insecurities will put paid to that.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid you're living in a fantasy, life isn't that simple. You could truly love your first cousin but that doesn't mean you should have a relationship with them. Those letters on your birth ccertificate are not meaningless, they are a fundamental part of who you are. If you truly love a person then honesty is required from both sides. But yeh you're right, let's not derail this thread.
 
It's a totally weird case but, having given it some thought, I really don't think it should be sexual assault. And 8 years seems very harsh.

The victim agreed to have sex with a bloke she had gotten to know - the person she had been speaking to and "watching" tv with (whilst blindfolded) etc, and when sex happened there was no switch of person: she had sex with the person she'd been speaking to, even if that was just a persona/character invented by this Gayle Newland. Surely a sexual assault charge can't arise simply by tricking someone into having sex with you thinking you're a different gender to what you really are - that can't be a law, surely?

I'd be interested to know if the sexual assault charge was based on a technicality in that the victim had consented to penetration by penis, but not by object. There is certainly a difference in law, with rape only being applicable to nonconsentual sex with a penis - was that how it swung here?
 
I don't know how they've technically classed this as sexual assault, but morally I see it as wrong and punishable due to the deception and with the nature of this being quite a "tricky" case I assume they're setting a precedent with the outcome.
 
Ha! :D

Regarding the case, I think it's been mentioned that any deception, even one regarding prosperity is viewed quite seriously. Though I don't know the specifics of the law.
 
lafemmefatale said:
My view, is you enter a relationship with a person, a human being, not a few meaningless letters on a birth certificate or a set of arbitrary data from a genotype test. If you truly love a person that's all that matters, only your own insecurities will put paid to that.

That's all I'm gonna say in this thread as I'm sure the herpy derpy let's all point and laugh at the 'man' in the dress crew are about to crash into here at great speed with their vast omnipotent knowledge of something they know nothing about, except for what they read somewhere on Breitbart.
Click to expand...

In this case, one women was deceived into believing she was in a relationship with a man by a woman.

No gender fluidity or trans people involved.
 
very strange case. but what is the different if you met a girl, you slept with her 10 times then you found she was a man before (sex change) and she never told you?

does that means she abused you? sex offender?
 
wesley said:
very strange case. but what is the different if you met a girl, you slept with her 10 times then you found she was a man before (sex change) and she never told you?

does that means she abused you? sex offender?
Click to expand...

Not if you consented. I don't believe obtaining consensual sex through deception is a crime yet.

Perhaps it should be.
 
Terminal_Boy said:
Where in any of the reports regarding this case does it say the defendant is anything other a genetic woman who identifies as such?
Click to expand...

Issues with the term 'genetic woman' (as we established in the other thread that even that most staunchest of self-identified alpha males, Thompson_NCL doesn't know if he's a 'genetic woman' or not, and the same is true for his wife) aside, there's nowhere it says anything other than that.
 
Please don't feed the troll. Lafemme was doing this exact same thing in the old thread.

Either men who based their sexual preferences on gender I.e female were boring or were transphobes. Based purely on her sexual preferences (bisexual) she couldn't understand why men were so 'shallow'.

Or she thought men who suggested transgender women should disclose this information before sexual activity were being unreasonable and putting their rights above the transgender woman's.

She so mentioned something about victimisation of transgender women if males didn't want to sleep with them? I lost interest by this point so that might not be entirely accurate.

That should sum up any questions you have for her. No more feeding please.
 
lafemmefatale said:
Yet another set of ridiculous prejudices a trans person has to contend with on a daily basis.

Take this hypothetical example, the trans woman who has yet to change her name and complete all relevant legal documents to in the eyes of the law make her "female". Yet she's been self-medding for years and looks pretty good for it. If this woman were to run down the street topless she would be arrested under indecency laws for showing her breasts, yet legally she is "male". And should she find herself in prison, she would be in a men's prison.

That's right, a woman in a men's prison for showing her breasts.

The whole damn system is broken from top to bottom.
Click to expand...

Talk about missing the point because you're on one of your trans friendly crusades. You're actually agreeing with what I'm saying. You just need to stop talking once in a while and engage your brain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom