3 ms·
Another scenario: He ties her up and blindfolds her (maybe she's into bondage). She consents to only be penetrated by a sex toy. He lies to her, and pene
by pyre 12y ago
Another scenario:
He ties her up and blindfolds her (maybe she's
into bondage). She consents to only be penetrated
by a sex toy. He lies to her, and penetrates her
with himself instead. She doesn't notice until
later. Consent or non-consent?
Personally, I don't think that "as long as it's something un-noticable to her during sex[1], then it's not rape, just a lie," is the bar for deciding if it's rape or not. I don't think that it should be taken to the extreme (e.g. "he lied to her when he picked her up at the bar by saying he was a doctor making lots of money" shouldn't be rape), but with regards to the things specific to the action itself, I think that it matters.
[1] i.e. she doesn't realize that there is no condom
- swombat 12y agoIt's an interesting thought experiment. Here's my counter-scenario: She agrees to have sex only if he doesn't come. Unfortunately, he gets over-excited and comes anyway. She obviously doesn't notice until it actually happens. In this scenario, he obviously has breached the initial conditions. Is that rape though?
- pyre 12y agoThe problem with this scenario is that it's difficult to determine if it was accidental or not. Did he purposely ignore her request? In the Assange case, it's hard to say that he 'accidentally' didn't put on a condom after agreeing to put on a condom.