While some think cheating should not be illegal, often siding with the person wearing the scarlet letter, others have long thought it should be. :popcorn:
http://ift.tt/1Pq4vii
The definition of rape in almost all states requires penetration. That means except in non-typical scenarios, only a man can commit rape.
As of 2011 in most states (general population, not college), rape by deception occurs when a man conceals any fact from his sex partner (who later is enraged when she finds out, since she would not have consented otherwise). The definition of concealment and applicability of the definition is left unrestricted.
So, if a man cheats on his partner, most likely, he will not tell her and even use a different phone. Does that count as concealment? If so, under the law, if he has sex with her afterward, he has raped her. So, it is illegal for him to cheat on her, but not for her to cheat on him. In addition to not cheating, there is the possibility he could be charged if he ever lies about anything, as so many Americans are used to doing. She only must act enraged and say she would not have slept with him had she known he lied to her.
I'm not so concerned about the cheating aspect, but I do have a different intellectual question, about privacy vs consent. This actually parallels workplace privacy of employees vs employer consent for the employee to continue working there. Since the law makes no statement about what topics of lies count, does that mean that all do? Is he in a never ending police interrogation where he can't lie and she can, and failure to answer implies the worse answer, ending all privacy?
I don't think this discussion will appear in the news. Typically the news gets involved when a court case occurs. I doubt one will. If one party has so much power over the other as to be able to throw them in prison for 6 months, then all they need to do is point it out to the weaker party. That party will then obey her every command from then on, negating the need to go to trial and keeping it out of the news. With the exception of Texas, none of the states have a statute of limitations for her to press charges after she finds out about the lie or concealment.
I propose a few restrictions:
For a lie to count as rape, a jury majority must agree that it is a serious lie. Lying he makes much more money than he actual does is serious. Lying he makes less, because he is afraid of "gold diggers", does not hurt her. If the jury thinks the seriousness is borderline, then it must be accompanied by her prefacing the question with the fact that it is important. If the jury thinks the lie only protects privacy and is not harmful, then even her preface should change that.
http://ift.tt/1Pq4vii
The definition of rape in almost all states requires penetration. That means except in non-typical scenarios, only a man can commit rape.
As of 2011 in most states (general population, not college), rape by deception occurs when a man conceals any fact from his sex partner (who later is enraged when she finds out, since she would not have consented otherwise). The definition of concealment and applicability of the definition is left unrestricted.
So, if a man cheats on his partner, most likely, he will not tell her and even use a different phone. Does that count as concealment? If so, under the law, if he has sex with her afterward, he has raped her. So, it is illegal for him to cheat on her, but not for her to cheat on him. In addition to not cheating, there is the possibility he could be charged if he ever lies about anything, as so many Americans are used to doing. She only must act enraged and say she would not have slept with him had she known he lied to her.
I'm not so concerned about the cheating aspect, but I do have a different intellectual question, about privacy vs consent. This actually parallels workplace privacy of employees vs employer consent for the employee to continue working there. Since the law makes no statement about what topics of lies count, does that mean that all do? Is he in a never ending police interrogation where he can't lie and she can, and failure to answer implies the worse answer, ending all privacy?
I don't think this discussion will appear in the news. Typically the news gets involved when a court case occurs. I doubt one will. If one party has so much power over the other as to be able to throw them in prison for 6 months, then all they need to do is point it out to the weaker party. That party will then obey her every command from then on, negating the need to go to trial and keeping it out of the news. With the exception of Texas, none of the states have a statute of limitations for her to press charges after she finds out about the lie or concealment.
I propose a few restrictions:
For a lie to count as rape, a jury majority must agree that it is a serious lie. Lying he makes much more money than he actual does is serious. Lying he makes less, because he is afraid of "gold diggers", does not hurt her. If the jury thinks the seriousness is borderline, then it must be accompanied by her prefacing the question with the fact that it is important. If the jury thinks the lie only protects privacy and is not harmful, then even her preface should change that.
As of 2011, is cheating/ lying to a sex partner illegal for men?