So, first a little bit of background to this story - as I mentioned before I listen to a comedy podcast called "Red Bar Radio". It is (mainly) a one man show run by a guy from Chicago and it is mainly him ranting about diverse stuff, in a rather comedic and irreverent way. He also takes delight in "fucking with people", especially D-list celebrities and the like, but also covering big scandal stories (such as the recent Bill Cosby stuff). So a lot of what he does is rather comedic - in a sense his humour is the darker side of Languish humour (or something like somethingawful). You could say he is a very succesful and amusing troll.
He also listens to a lot of comedy-related podcasts and gets a lot of his material from there. What follows is a story he brought up recently - and now, I have never heard of any of the people involved before, but people who are interested in the US comedy scene, like CdM, may have.
So, there is apparently this comedian, who is relatively famous, named Carlos Mencia. He used to be touring with another comedian, Brad Williams, who happens to be a midget. Now, Brad Williams was on another podcast and was asked to tell the craziest story from the time he was touring with Mencia. He told this story - on one tour stop there was this fan girl who wanted to have sex with Mencia, so much she actually gave the bus driver a blow job to get into the tour bus. Mencia did not want to have sex with her (hewas married at the time), so he played a little "prank" on her. They turned off the lights in one of the rooms and told her that Mencia is there - but instead it was the midget, Brad Williams. They started fucking and only after several minutes she realised something was wrong, turned the lights on, saw it was Williams and ran away horrified. And they all laughed and laughed.
So the Red Bar Radio guy went "wait a minute, isn't that essentially rape"? And now has been swamped with hate mail from Brad Williams' fans (which he enjoys). So what do you think? Rape or not rape?
For the record, I think it is rape.
It doesn't sound like a lady whose virtue is something to be concerned with, and no violence was done to her. Non-issue.
From what I remember of his TV show, you're fortunate to not know who Carlos Mencia is, Marti.
There wasn't any coercion in this - she was mislead - but it surely is non-consensual; she gave consent to having sex with a certain person, and this agreement was broken. So rape.
Here I am, trying to speak legalese in a forum flooded with lawyers.
Yes, but by American legal standards, probably 3rd degree, maybe 2nd degree rape.
By my standards, I'd still have them tried and executed for being high-level assholes.
Fun fact - the Red Bar Radio guy spurred his listeners into a tweeter war against the midget comedian and managed to get the midget's number by masquerading as his manager (this is the kind of shit he does) and talked to him on the phone on the show - so the midget is now claiming that was all a joke he made up (although it did not sound like a joke on the other podcast). More funny, the original podcast where he said the story was first pulled down (it was a show "Getting Doug with High"), then reuploaded with the rape story edited out of it, then they disabled the comments after all Red Bar Radio listeners started asking about it; and then the entire episode was pulled down again, this time for good. Also, the fact that the midget is now claiming it was a joke does not prevent his fans from sending hate mail to Red Bar Radio, saying it was not rape, as the chick was a slut and she consented to sex with *someone* anyway (I guess they didn't get the memo it was a joke).
The Red Bar Radio guy finds all of this hillarious.
I consider it rape. I have heard of an offence in HK called something like "having sex with someone under false pretence" or some such. Even if it doesn't fit the technical definition of rape, there should be another way to prosecute these guys.
Quote from: Monoriu on December 18, 2014, 04:09:57 AM
I consider it rape. I have heard of an offence in HK called something like "having sex with someone under false pretence" or some such. Even if it doesn't fit the technical definition of rape, there should be another way to prosecute these guys.
I mean, to me it is no different than a chick consenting to having sex with a guy - and then getting railroaded by his gang bang buddies (assuming no physical coercion is present).
That being said, a situation where a blindfolded guy is being sucked off by a cute girl only for her to be replaced by another dude is a premise of many amateur gay porn. :hmm:
Caveat emptor.
If she's willing to have sex with someone without speaking to or seeing them beforehand, it could happen with a guy who wasn't in on the bait and switch.
As for whether it's rape, I think you'd need to establish that Williams impersonated Mencia somehow. Some third guy telling her it was Mencia in the room isn't enough to qualify IMO.
Quote from: Monoriu on December 18, 2014, 04:09:57 AM
something like "having sex with someone under false pretence" or some such.
Like turning out to actually be Palestinian.
Like having sex with someone who is pretending to be interesting but is actually boring.......which makes 90% of sex rape :hmm:
The mind of Mencia has certainly wrought some awful things in our time.
Rapish, yes.
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on December 18, 2014, 05:23:25 AM
Like having sex with someone who is pretending to be interesting but is actually boring.......which makes 90% of sex rape :hmm:
I don't think this is a valid comparison, to be honest...
"Rape" has traditionally been defined as the use of force or the threat of force to obtain sex. Clearly that doesn't apply here. Calling something like this "rape", I think, is kind of an insult to anyone who has been forcibly raped.
Legally, whether or not it's rape depends on the jurisdiction. It would almost certainly meet the legal definition of sexual assault in any US state, but not necessarily rape.
Yeah; which is probably in part why almost all the states have either repealed their rape laws in favor of sexual assault laws, or amended their rape laws to cover sexual assault.
Quote from: Martinus on December 18, 2014, 07:00:39 AM
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on December 18, 2014, 05:23:25 AM
Like having sex with someone who is pretending to be interesting but is actually boring.......which makes 90% of sex rape :hmm:
I don't think this is a valid comparison, to be honest...
I think we have to go with consent, the fan did not consent to sex with the midget so she was raped.
If it ever went to court then the judge might well choose to be lenient with his sentencing.
The title of this thread got "Is this love?" by Whitesnake stuck in my head. THANKS MART. :mad:
Yep it is.
Quote"Rape" has traditionally been defined as the use of force or the threat of force to obtain sex. Clearly that doesn't apply here. Calling something like this "rape", I think, is kind of an insult to anyone who has been forcibly raped.
Consent's always been part of it though it wasn't just the use of force. Rape was having sex with a woman forcibly and against her will.
In 2014 rape.
In 1970 not rape.
I'm pretty sure "consent" applies only to the person you agreed to have sex with :rolleyes:
Quote from: Brazen on December 18, 2014, 09:03:59 AM
I'm pretty sure "consent" applies only to the person you agreed to have sex with :rolleyes:
:yes:
Quote from: Brazen on December 18, 2014, 09:03:59 AM
I'm pretty sure "consent" applies only to the person you agreed to have sex with :rolleyes:
It seems some of the Languish men think a woman's consent is like an open buffet...
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on December 18, 2014, 07:17:51 AM
Yeah; which is probably in part why almost all the states have either repealed their rape laws in favor of sexual assault laws, or amended their rape laws to cover sexual assault.
I guess it is a fair point, but I would say likewise that in casual modern language "rape" is often used to describe any sexual assault which actually involves vaginal, anal or oral penetration.
Can't believe the m-word is being thrown around here by folks who ought to be sensitive enough.
Incidentally, Polish law defines "rape rape" as "causing another person to participate in sexual congress through the use of force, threat or deceit."
If there is no sexual congress but "other sexual act", then it is a sexual assault.
So the conduct of the midget would clearly be "rape rape" under Polish law, with Mencia being an accessory.
Other forms of sexual crimes are sex with a minor, sex with an incapacitated person, or the victim is induced to have sex because of the authority of the perp.
Quote from: derspiess on December 18, 2014, 09:26:03 AM
Can't believe the m-word is being thrown around here by folks who ought to be sensitive enough.
I don't think words hurt people. Unlike rape. So go fuck yourself.
Quote from: Martinus on December 18, 2014, 09:29:20 AM
Quote from: derspiess on December 18, 2014, 09:26:03 AM
Can't believe the m-word is being thrown around here by folks who ought to be sensitive enough.
I don't think words hurt people.
:hmm:
Marti's problem in a nutshell?
She was certainly sexually assaulted. Whether the midget raped her depends on his mindset, not hers. If he thought she was willingly engaging in sex with him, he wasn't raping her. If he engaged in sex with her knowing that she hadn't consented to sex with him, then he did rape her. I don't think that there can be a rape victim without a rape perpetrator, though I may be legally wrong on that.
Quote from: grumbler on December 18, 2014, 09:32:36 AM
She was certainly sexually assaulted. Whether the midget raped her depends on his mindset, not hers. If he thought she was willingly engaging in sex with him, he wasn't raping her. If he engaged in sex with her knowing that she hadn't consented to sex with him, then he did rape her. I don't think that there can be a rape victim without a rape perpetrator, though I may be legally wrong on that.
Sorry, I guess I wasn't clear on that point. The way he told the story, he was in on the "joke". Of course I agree with you - if he, himself, had been the butt of the "prank", then clearly he would have lacked the mens rea.
Edit: although I wonder if that was actually the case, the party who orchestrated the "prank" wouldnt have been guilty. But I guess it depends on the exact language of the relevant rape statute. The Polish law I mentioned before could find Mencia guilty - as it does not require that it is the perp with whom the victim has sex.
Quote from: grumbler on December 18, 2014, 09:32:36 AM
She was certainly sexually assaulted. Whether the midget raped her depends on his mindset, not hers. If he thought she was willingly engaging in sex with him, he wasn't raping her. If he engaged in sex with her knowing that she hadn't consented to sex with him, then he did rape her. I don't think that there can be a rape victim without a rape perpetrator, though I may be legally wrong on that.
:huh:
Rape isn't contingent on the doer thinking he was a doer.
Quote from: Martinus on December 18, 2014, 09:34:32 AM
Quote from: grumbler on December 18, 2014, 09:32:36 AM
She was certainly sexually assaulted. Whether the midget raped her depends on his mindset, not hers. If he thought she was willingly engaging in sex with him, he wasn't raping her. If he engaged in sex with her knowing that she hadn't consented to sex with him, then he did rape her. I don't think that there can be a rape victim without a rape perpetrator, though I may be legally wrong on that.
Sorry, I guess I wasn't clear on that point. The way he told the story, he was in on the "joke". Of course I agree with you - if he, himself, had been the butt of the "prank", then clearly he would have lacked the mens rea.
That point clarified, I agree with you. Will wonders never cease?
Quote from: garbon on December 18, 2014, 09:34:49 AM
Quote from: grumbler on December 18, 2014, 09:32:36 AM
She was certainly sexually assaulted. Whether the midget raped her depends on his mindset, not hers. If he thought she was willingly engaging in sex with him, he wasn't raping her. If he engaged in sex with her knowing that she hadn't consented to sex with him, then he did rape her. I don't think that there can be a rape victim without a rape perpetrator, though I may be legally wrong on that.
:huh:
Rape isn't contingent on the doer thinking he was a doer.
The doer's liability clearly is, though. What the perp is thinking is at the core of the concept of mens rea, which is required for most crimes.
Seems rapey.
Quote from: garbon on December 18, 2014, 09:34:49 AM
:huh:
Rape isn't contingent on the doer thinking he was a doer.
I have no idea what "doer" means under the law, so I am not sure what idea this comment is supposed to be conveying.
And before CC calls me a shitty lawyer again, I am of course simplifying it - you could, for example, establish the existence of mens rea even if the perp does not think what he is doing fulfills criteria of a crime - as long as that belief is unreasonable.
Also, this is not the same as not knowing something is illegal - we are talking here about a mistaken understanding of facts, not law.
Quote from: garbon on December 18, 2014, 09:34:49 AM
Quote from: grumbler on December 18, 2014, 09:32:36 AM
She was certainly sexually assaulted. Whether the midget raped her depends on his mindset, not hers. If he thought she was willingly engaging in sex with him, he wasn't raping her. If he engaged in sex with her knowing that she hadn't consented to sex with him, then he did rape her. I don't think that there can be a rape victim without a rape perpetrator, though I may be legally wrong on that.
:huh:
Rape isn't contingent on the doer thinking he was a doer.
It does depend. In England at least rape is contingent on the doer not reasonably believing that the victim consents.
If they reasonably believe that the sex is consensual then they've not committed rape.
Quote from: Sheilbh on December 18, 2014, 09:41:49 AM
Quote from: garbon on December 18, 2014, 09:34:49 AM
Quote from: grumbler on December 18, 2014, 09:32:36 AM
She was certainly sexually assaulted. Whether the midget raped her depends on his mindset, not hers. If he thought she was willingly engaging in sex with him, he wasn't raping her. If he engaged in sex with her knowing that she hadn't consented to sex with him, then he did rape her. I don't think that there can be a rape victim without a rape perpetrator, though I may be legally wrong on that.
:huh:
Rape isn't contingent on the doer thinking he was a doer.
It does depend. In England at least rape is contingent on the doer not reasonably believing that the victim consents.
If they reasonably believe that the sex is consensual then they've not committed rape.
Interesting. Obviously this isn't from a legal side, but from many of the incidents here, there seems to often be the accused rapist claiming they thought it was consensual.
If I'm led to believe that I'll have sex with Scarlett Johansson and I realize half way through that I'm actually in bed with Nancy Pelosi, you bet I'll call it rape.
Quote from: Syt on December 18, 2014, 09:43:53 AM
If I'm led to believe that I'll have sex with Scarlett Johansson and I realize half way through that I'm actually in bed with Nancy Pelosi, you bet I'll call it rape.
What if, instead of Scarlett Johanson, it turns out to be Woody Allen?
Quote from: Syt on December 18, 2014, 09:43:53 AM
If I'm led to believe that I'll have sex with Scarlett Johansson and I realize half way through that I'm actually in bed with Nancy Pelosi, you bet I'll call it rape.
Nancy seems like she'd be fun. I'd roll with it, personally.
Quote from: Martinus on December 18, 2014, 09:19:28 AM
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on December 18, 2014, 07:17:51 AM
Yeah; which is probably in part why almost all the states have either repealed their rape laws in favor of sexual assault laws, or amended their rape laws to cover sexual assault.
I guess it is a fair point, but I would say likewise that in casual modern language "rape" is often used to describe any sexual assault which actually involves vaginal, anal or oral penetration.
In Norway, rape is generally under-reported. Mostly because people get drunk, end up getting shagged without really consenting and wonder WTF the morning after. Typically, young women don't report this, even if it is rape by the definition of the law.
Lack of explicit consent equals rape. End of.
Quote from: Norgy on December 18, 2014, 09:55:15 AM
Lack of explicit consent equals rape. End of.
I don't think I would agree with this. It seems like the only truly explicit consent would be saying "Yes, let's have sex now" which is not something that at least I, have seen happen a lot (-_-).
Explicit consent could be non-verbal. :blush:
Quote from: Norgy on December 18, 2014, 09:59:30 AM
Explicit consent could be non-verbal. :blush:
That strikes me as then it becomes a little less bright line, a little less explicit, no? I mean sure I guess there is something like actual insertion of penis into anal/vaginal orifice but then say blowjob doesn't mean consent to vaginal, or consent to vaginal doesn't mean consent to anal.
I guess there is a point to be made about the "doer's" belief about consent being reasonable. For example, even if the midget wasn't in on the "joke", I guess one could argue that if you are shoved into a dark room and being told "there is a chick in there who wants you to fuck her, go wild", assuming consent is unreasonable.
But in the same example, if after that he went in and asked if she wants to have sex with him and she said yes, he could be reasonably expected to believe she has consented to have sex with him - even if she was acting in error as to his identity.
Quote from: garbon on December 18, 2014, 10:01:28 AM
Quote from: Norgy on December 18, 2014, 09:59:30 AM
Explicit consent could be non-verbal. :blush:
That strikes me as then it becomes a little less bright line, a little less explicit, no? I mean sure I guess there is something like actual insertion of penis into anal/vaginal orifice but then say blowjob doesn't mean consent to vaginal, or consent to vaginal doesn't mean consent to anal.
Relevant points, I agree. It's sort of difficult to have non-consentual oral sex, I suppose.
So how to define consent (you have to forgive me for using explicit, as I am probably unaware of its legal ramifications in the English language) remains the line between rape and a shag.
One of my exes fought a long legal battle against what she was pretty clear on was rape, and the perpetrator was certain was just sex when drunk and drugged out of their skulls. However, she was asleep. Hard to consent when you are asleep. Those rapes really are the ones most under-reported, and I imagine that could be the case in the gay community too?
So I suppose in the end "explicit" boils down to being somewhat conscious and willing at the time.
Quote from: Martinus on December 18, 2014, 10:30:54 AM
I guess there is a point to be made about the "doer's" belief about consent being reasonable. For example, even if the midget wasn't in on the "joke", I guess one could argue that if you are shoved into a dark room and being told "there is a chick in there who wants you to fuck her, go wild", assuming consent is unreasonable.
Did you mean to say it is
not unreasonable?
Is this rape - is this rape - is this rape - is this rape that I'm feeling?
FWIW I think that a celebrity impersonator who has sex while "undercover" isn't a rapist in a sense that does justice to rape rape.
Quote from: sbr on December 18, 2014, 10:56:35 AM
Quote from: Martinus on December 18, 2014, 10:30:54 AM
I guess there is a point to be made about the "doer's" belief about consent being reasonable. For example, even if the midget wasn't in on the "joke", I guess one could argue that if you are shoved into a dark room and being told "there is a chick in there who wants you to fuck her, go wild", assuming consent is unreasonable.
Did you mean to say it is not unreasonable?
I think it'd be somewhat unreasonable to assume that the girl was consenting because some third party told you.
Consent was implied by her willingness to give the bus driver a smoker.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 18, 2014, 12:19:21 PM
Consent was implied by her willingness to give the bus driver a smoker.
She consented to participating in sexual acts with two people so she consented to sexual acts with anyone who happens to be around?
How does it take several minutes to realize you're fucking a midget?
Agreeing with Garbo.
Quote from: garbon on December 18, 2014, 12:15:51 PM
Quote from: sbr on December 18, 2014, 10:56:35 AM
Quote from: Martinus on December 18, 2014, 10:30:54 AM
I guess there is a point to be made about the "doer's" belief about consent being reasonable. For example, even if the midget wasn't in on the "joke", I guess one could argue that if you are shoved into a dark room and being told "there is a chick in there who wants you to fuck her, go wild", assuming consent is unreasonable.
Did you mean to say it is not unreasonable?
I think it'd be somewhat unreasonable to assume that the girl was consenting because some third party told you.
Exactly.
Quote from: garbon on December 18, 2014, 12:24:30 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 18, 2014, 12:19:21 PM
Consent was implied by her willingness to give the bus driver a smoker.
She consented to participating in sexual acts with two people so she consented to sexual acts with anyone who happens to be around?
Yeah, by this reasoning if a slut wants to have sex with a guy, she is also consenting to have sex with his gang bang buddies. I don't buy Yi's reasoning.
Quote from: HVC on December 18, 2014, 12:25:17 PM
How does it take several minutes to realize you're fucking a midget?
If Game of Throne taught us anything, midgets are cunning linguists.
I wasn't being 100% serious. :sleep:
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 18, 2014, 01:34:46 PM
I wasn't being 100% serious. :sleep:
This is Languish. :P
Here every poster follows the Poe's law and is indistinguishable from his or her parody.
Yes, of course.
It is a rather strange case since the intent was not at all to simply get sex from this woman. All that dude would have needed to do to get consent would just say 'yeah you can see Mencia but first you have to have sex with me' and it seems like she would have done it willingly no problem. This was just done for the lolz. It is kind of hard to credit that even in the dark somebody could not notice such a dramatic physical difference, or wouldn't at least expect the other person to say something.
Quote from: garbon on December 18, 2014, 12:15:51 PM
Quote from: sbr on December 18, 2014, 10:56:35 AM
Quote from: Martinus on December 18, 2014, 10:30:54 AM
I guess there is a point to be made about the "doer's" belief about consent being reasonable. For example, even if the midget wasn't in on the "joke", I guess one could argue that if you are shoved into a dark room and being told "there is a chick in there who wants you to fuck her, go wild", assuming consent is unreasonable.
Did you mean to say it is not unreasonable?
I think it'd be somewhat unreasonable to assume that the girl was consenting because some third party told you.
I guess I don't know enough to judge because I skimmed the OP, but I think if this prank is true she was definitely sexually assaulted, if not raped.
If you were told by a third party that she wanted to have sex and then she freely proceeded to have sex with you once you went into the room, that would seem like consent to me in the same way that most consent seems to be given, non-verbally. Or by not saying no. If she was restrained or unable to resist or reluctant in any way, then I would say you would need direct consent from her.
I just don't have any idea how something like this could happen in real life though. I mean the chick is in the room waiting for one dude but bangs some other dude (who is very obviously different physically)? No one talked, touched opened their eyes?
Maybe I am old fashioned but how could someone not know who they are having sex with if they are not restrained in some way? Last names are a bit formal, but this is really out there.
Quote from: HVC on December 18, 2014, 12:25:17 PM
How does it take several minutes to realize you're fucking a midget?
:lol: That was my first thought.
Iirc, rape by fraud is illegal in every state. This is rape by fraud. It's really not a question.
Quote from: sbr on December 18, 2014, 02:28:14 PM
Maybe I am old fashioned but how could someone not know who they are having sex with if they are not restrained in some way? Last names are a bit formal, but this is really out there.
It notes that the lights were off and she noticed after a couple minutes. She was probably also drunk and/or high.
Quote from: Ideologue on December 18, 2014, 02:32:40 PM
Iirc, rape by fraud is illegal in every state. This is rape by fraud. It's really not a question.
Yep.
Quote from: garbon on December 18, 2014, 02:32:48 PM
Quote from: sbr on December 18, 2014, 02:28:14 PM
Maybe I am old fashioned but how could someone not know who they are having sex with if they are not restrained in some way? Last names are a bit formal, but this is really out there.
It notes that the lights were off and she noticed after a couple minutes. She was probably also drunk and/or high.
Yeah as far as this story goes, it is rape no question and I didn't intend to defend what happened. Apologies if it looked that way.
I misread/misunderstood Marti's comment and was just correcting what I though was a mistake, and then played that out a bit. If a guy (or anyone) is told that there is someone in a room that wants to have sex him, and then the person in the room has sex with him with no effort of figuring out who he is, I don't think it is unreasonable for him to assume it was consensual. I'm not sure how that could ever happen outside of Literotica or fuq.com, but who knows with kids these days.
I know I used some legal terms in the above, but it is in no way meant to be a legal argument more of an ethical/moral issue.
Quote from: sbr on December 18, 2014, 02:41:35 PM
I misread/misunderstood Marti's comment and was just correcting what I though was a mistake, and then played that out a bit. If a guy (or anyone) is told that there is someone in a room that wants to have sex him, and then the person in the room has sex with him with no effort of figuring out who he is, I don't think it is unreasonable for him to assume it was consensual. I'm not sure how that could ever happen outside of Literotica or fuq.com, but who knows with kids these days.
I don't know. It sounds very much like what could happen in the case of a college gangbang rape. Girl gets drunk/is drugged and is brought by a frat guy into a room. He does his thing and then tells a buddy (who let's say knows nothing of the other's activities) that so and so is in that dark room and wants to have sex with you. I think it would be wise to be cautious if you are guy 2.
Quote from: Norgy on December 18, 2014, 09:59:30 AM
Explicit consent could be non-verbal. :blush:
Depends. I might think it's explicit consent, she might just enjoy yanking my, eh, chain.
Sounds to me as an urban myth, I've heard this story before with other protagonists. I think this is rape.
Quote from: Valmy on December 18, 2014, 01:53:56 PM
Yes, of course.
It is a rather strange case since the intent was not at all to simply get sex from this woman. All that dude would have needed to do to get consent would just say 'yeah you can see Mencia but first you have to have sex with me' and it seems like she would have done it willingly no problem. This was just done for the lolz. It is kind of hard to credit that even in the dark somebody could not notice such a dramatic physical difference, or wouldn't at least expect the other person to say something.
I think the probability is that the story is made up.
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on December 18, 2014, 07:35:38 AM
Quote from: Martinus on December 18, 2014, 07:00:39 AM
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on December 18, 2014, 05:23:25 AM
Like having sex with someone who is pretending to be interesting but is actually boring.......which makes 90% of sex rape :hmm:
I don't think this is a valid comparison, to be honest...
I think we have to go with consent, the fan did not consent to sex with the midget so she was raped.
If it ever went to court then the judge might well choose to be lenient with his sentencing.
While there was certainly a crime committed (if the story is in fact true), I think you might have a hard time getting a jury to convict.
So in related questions, I've seen a lot of instances where people tweet out pictures of them with famous people, only the people are just ordinary guys. For example, "Wow everyone, I met LeBron James at the supermarket, What a Guy!" only the associated picture is a random dude vaguely looking like it might be lebron james.
So if one of these guys closes the deal, is that rape?
No. It's not about specific identity, but whether consent is given to the specific person. For example, if I walk up to some woman and claimed to be the President of the United States and she bangs me, then that's not rape. If Michelle Obama were bent over helping some poor customer at Target, never turning around as I claimed to be the President of the United States and railed her, that might well be rape, if she in fact did mistake my voice for our commander-in-chief's.
Well isnt that just a less extreme version of the original question? The woman willingly had sex with the guy in the room, only she thought he was mencia.
The other examples being given involve spouses. She had never met mencia before.
No, they're different. An enormous amount of puffery is permitted by law in romance.
Quote from: Ideologue on December 19, 2014, 10:53:58 AM
No, they're different. An enormous amount of puffery is permitted by law in romance.
I think it is a difference in degree only.
Changing the scenario slightly. You lead a woman at a bar to believe you are Carlos Mencia, and your buddy calls you Carlos, and then you hook up with the woman. You've misled the woman into thinking she is with Carlos Mencia and she gave consent on that basis.
In this case, a guy said "Carlos Mencia is in that room" the midget apparently to some extent impersonated Carlos Mencia, and she gave consent on the basis she thought she was with Carlos Mencia.
If it qualifies as puffery to impersonate someone famous, I'm not sure if our short friend crossed the line.
I would bang Tina Fey, even if she convinced me she was actually Sarah Palin.
And of course, claiming to have a good job when you don't, or saying you're five years younger than you are, or pretending to be more confident than you actually feel inside are also frequently-practiced forms of deception, but the line has to be drawn somewhere. Tricking someone into having sex with a physically different person than they expected to might be the place to draw it.
Quote from: Tonitrus on December 19, 2014, 08:37:27 PM
I would bang Tina Fey, even if she convinced me she was actually Sarah Palin.
Logically, then, the reverse would also be true.
However, the real question is whether you'd bang Tina Fey if she convinced you she was actually Carlos Mencia.
If she told me she was Carlos Mencia, and that she wanted to have sex with me, well...what is in a name, anyway? :P
GROSS
Tina Fey in her SNL prime and on 30 Rock gave me wood, but she looked past warranty in that movie where she's on the Princeton admissions committee. The racoon look in particular was a bad move.
Tina Fey was hott when she was doing interesting stuff. Now, not so much.
I'm sick of hearing about what's in Fey's "20".
Stop listening.