Post: #1

A week old news, but couldn't find a thread on this landmark conviction.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/...21891.html
https://www.rts.ch/info/suisse/8296721-c...pport.html (original article in french)

Quote:A man has been convicted of rape after taking off a condom during sex without his sexual partner knowing.

The landmark decision by the Criminal Court in Lausanne, Switzerland, determined that having sex without a condom constituted rape if the use of one was expected.

The 47-year-old was given a 12-month suspended sentence on Monday, according to news agency RTS.

The unnamed man, from France, met a Swiss woman on dating app Tinder.

On their second date in June 2015 they started having sex with a condom, but the woman only realised it had been removed after it was over.

The court judged that the woman would have refused to have sex if she had known the condom would be removed.

Post: #2

By extension, if I tell a woman I'll love her and marry her before having sex and don't end up doing that, did I rape her?

Post: #3

I actually agree that removing condom without mutual agreement is wrong provided the girl was very clear she would not do it otherwise. But was she? 12 months suspended is also not too harsh a punishment and I would say it sounds adequate, were this rape in the classical meaning the punishment would be much more severe. I am sure many who consider an abortion a casual thing will disagree with me, but the punishment sounds pretty tame to me.

The only things that are troublesome to me is did she actually called police to report such a a thing? I am sure such a scenario has happened often around the world, but the girl must be pretty weird to call police over such intimate detail? And how was his guilt and her lack of consent proven did he confess or was it his word against her?

(01-17-2017 10:20 AM)dicknixon72 Wrote:  By extension, if I tell a woman I'll love her and marry her before having sex and don't end up doing that, did I rape her?

Unless, she revealed afterwards that she was a single mother or deceived you in other grievous way - you did betray her honor (if she is a virgin or a honest widow) and in a traditional society it would be considered a crime equal to rape.

Anyway, if you have to lie in this way to make a girl sleep with you then your game sucks. The skill and the fun is to make the girl go with it even trough she knows it's wrong and she takes the risks.

Post: #4

When I wake up the next morning after ravishing some skank and I see her with no make-up on.... I'm claiming rape

Post: #5

(01-17-2017 10:32 AM)Mage Wrote:  I actually agree that removing condom without mutual agreement is wrong provided the girl was very clear she would not do it otherwise. But was she? 12 months suspended is also not too harsh a punishment and I would say it sounds adequate, were this rape in the classical meaning the punishment would be much more severe. I am sure many who consider an abortion a casual thing will disagree with me, but the punishment sounds pretty tame to me.

By the same logic, the woman should get the same punishment if she had skipped taking her birth control pill and the man found out after sex, correct?

Post: #6

If a girl lies about being on birth control is it then by extension rape because she violates conditional consent?

Or are they going to pretend it's an 'STI issue' and has nothing to do with pregnancy to only allow women to make use of this precedent?

Post: #7

(01-17-2017 10:40 AM)alphaspiraton Wrote:  

(01-17-2017 10:32 AM)Mage Wrote:  I actually agree that removing condom without mutual agreement is wrong provided the girl was very clear she would not do it otherwise. But was she? 12 months suspended is also not too harsh a punishment and I would say it sounds adequate, were this rape in the classical meaning the punishment would be much more severe. I am sure many who consider an abortion a casual thing will disagree with me, but the punishment sounds pretty tame to me.

By the same logic, the woman should get the same punishment if she had skipped taking her birth control pill and the man found out after sex, correct? If not then GTFO with your one-sided ideology.

Yes I agree, the woman should get punishment. You could spare the GTFO phrase. You are too rash to antagonize people.

However the woman should be punished only if she wants to set you up as the legal father. If not then being a single mother would be her punishment. I don't see why a man should worry about woman stealing his sperm unless it is used to force him into alimony/child support or unwanted fatherhood/marriage. A woman spermjacking is a social not biological issue and in societies without child support it would not be a problem. Man impregnating a woman who doesn't want it harms her both socially and biologically trough.

Post: #8

Lucky guy! He could been paying her a monthly fine for the next 16 years of his life!

Post: #9

Just for my amusement, I translated this into normal, RVF English.

Quote:An older, French player was convicted of rape by a criminal court whilst on a Swiss Bang Mission, after sneakily unbagging without his Tinder slut knowing.

The court declared that going raw without the slut declaring "OK I have registered you are now going to hit it raw", is a 'rape'.

The court, suspected to be comprised of a mix of bitter cat ladies and white knight virgins in their 40s and 50s, judged that the vag of a Tinder slut can't feel the difference between plastic and skin.

Post: #10

(01-17-2017 10:39 AM)Cr33pin Wrote:  When I wake up the next morning after ravishing some skank and I see her with no make-up on.... I'm claiming rape

Agreed...Its all about full disclosure

Post: #11

(01-17-2017 10:44 AM)Mage Wrote:  

(01-17-2017 10:40 AM)alphaspiraton Wrote:  

(01-17-2017 10:32 AM)Mage Wrote:  I actually agree that removing condom without mutual agreement is wrong provided the girl was very clear she would not do it otherwise. But was she? 12 months suspended is also not too harsh a punishment and I would say it sounds adequate, were this rape in the classical meaning the punishment would be much more severe. I am sure many who consider an abortion a casual thing will disagree with me, but the punishment sounds pretty tame to me.

By the same logic, the woman should get the same punishment if she had skipped taking her birth control pill and the man found out after sex, correct? If not then GTFO with your one-sided ideology.

Yes I agree, the woman should get punishment. You could spare the GTFO phrase. You are too rash to antagonize people.

However the woman should be punished only if she wants to set you up as the legal father. If not then being a single mother would be her punishment. I don't see why a man should worry about woman stealing his sperm unless it is used to force him into alimony/child support or unwanted fatherhood/marriage. A woman spermjacking is a social not biological issue and in societies without child support it would not be a problem. Man impregnating a woman who doesn't want it harms her both socially and biologically trough.

Lets just be reasonable here. Women rarely go to jail for anything these days so your analogy is rational but not in acceptance of reality.

And I've also pulled the condom numerous times while intoxicated, does that mean I'm guilty of rape as well ?

Women have done it as well obviously with no consequence.

Post: #12

(01-17-2017 10:20 AM)dicknixon72 Wrote:  By extension, if I tell a woman I'll love her and marry her before having sex and don't end up doing that, did I rape her?

No, probably not. There's an English case called R v Linekar, which is about a man who promised to pay a hooker £25 for sex, then refused to after the deed was done. This seems to be the most similar kind of case - obtaining sex by deception, a fraud case essentially. This was held not to be rape. The idea is that a woman was not deceived as to the actus reus or mens rea - ie, she knew what sex was, and consented to the sex. The marriage contract may have been a significant motivator for her, but it did not affect her ability to understand the nature of the sex act and to agree to performing it in that moment with the knowledge she had.

The law is slightly cloudier when it comes to things like transmission of STDs to hookers when instructed to wear a condom (and then whipping it off just before the act)(this also leaves you open to a potential charge of manslaughter should the hooker get HIV (though it's an interesting unresolved question as to whether this should be the case given that it is never the HIV that actually kills you)), and there was even an unpronounceable case R V Papadimitriou (or a very similar name) where a man was convicted of rape for impersonating a woman's husband.

Post: #13

The problem here is the term rape, it carries a heavy stigma. I can agree that for matters of health and safety if a man has sex with a woman with the unambigious undestanding that a condom is going to be used, it is morally dubious to remove the condom without her knowlege-however ape is the wrong term for this. Something like Reckless Indifference, or Moral Disregard.....Something not rape. I know this will bring a shitstorm down on me but a man should wear a condom if he says he is, and a woman should use birth control if she says she is.

Post: #14

12 months is insane. Even 1 month is extreme. "Consent" has crossed into absurdity, police and court resources do not need to be wasted on this. The woman has a perfectly acceptable recourse to any man who takes off the condom without telling her: dump him.

If he passes a STD to her, however, then he can be charged with fines or offenses for that.

What's next - will we throw men in jail for not performing the specific sex position she wants?

Post: #15

The purpose of this law is to reduce accidental child births. And ultimately population. It has nothing to do with rape. Nothing. How could you qualify this shit like rape. She´s already being fucked. If with a rubber or not. Doesn´t change the fact a dick is getting inside her pussy. The only difference is the possibility to get pregnant or not. And the state not the woman (what the fuck does woman know) wants her not to get pregnant.

Post: #16

(01-17-2017 11:10 AM)easternwomenrule Wrote:  Lucky guy! He could been paying her a monthly fine for the next 16 years of his life!

16??

Post: #17

Promissory estoppel.

Post: #18

I lost a condom from the tight pussy of an 18yo once. Her vag rolled it right off my dick I reckon.

Was this rape?

Post: #19

(01-17-2017 04:43 PM)Laner Wrote:  I lost a condom from the tight pussy of an 18yo once. Her vag rolled it right off my dick I reckon.

Was this rape?

No, not rape-just some really good tight pussy. Hats off to you...

Post: #20

If removing a condom is rape because you might cum in the girl, is pointing a gun at somebody murder because you might shoot them?

Post: #21

(01-17-2017 09:27 PM)Space Cowboy Wrote:  If removing a condom is rape because you might cum in the girl, is pointing a gun at somebody murder because you might shoot them?

Disease is also an issue. Again, this should not be called rape-but if you are having sex with a girl and she implicitly says use a condom or no sex, you should put on a condom or not have sex. I am all for lying to get sex, but even my dishonesty has limits.

Post: #22

(01-17-2017 10:20 AM)dicknixon72 Wrote:  By extension, if I tell a woman I'll love her and marry her before having sex and don't end up doing that, did I rape her?

That's called seduction and whether it is a crime or not depends on the jurisdiction.

Even if it may still be on the books in some countries, I haven't heard of anyone being prosecuted for it.

Post: #23

Purposefully pulling off a condom during sex when the woman asks you to wear one obviously isn't rape but it's a fucked up thing to do and makes you a dirtbag piece of shit. Of course if the condom falls off or breaks it's a different story.

If a sloot pulled a condom off your dick during sex that you put on because you knew she bangs a lot of guys, and she somehow did it without you knowing, and you got herpes because of it, I don't think you'd be ok with it and I imagine you'd want her to face repercussions.

As Atlanta man said, rape is definitely not appropriate here and it just waters down the word and the concept even more, which does nothing but hurt real rape victims and has huge potential for a girl to simply claim a man did this if she wants to hurt him or get back at him for whatever reason. And the burden of proof for that claim is almost non-existent.

Post: #24

(01-17-2017 09:27 PM)Space Cowboy Wrote:  If removing a condom is rape because you might cum in the girl, is pointing a gun at somebody murder because you might shoot them?

No, but there are a shitload of other laws that you'd have broken. Here in Australia it would be classed as assault with a deadly weapon, assault including the mere threat of use, not to mention the litany of gun specific laws you'd be hit with.

This was chalked up as rape because consent was given under terms and when those terms were deliberately broken then consent was presumed to be revoked.

Sorry guys, but this is molehill stuff, not mountain.

p.s. regarding sentencing or the specific charge I'm not saying one way or the other. But the guy crossed a line.

p.p.s I'm not sure they could ever get a conviction on a he-said she-said charge of this nature. Are guys actually copping to this stuff? If so, why? What ever happened to "I want to talk to my lawyer?"

Post: #25

(01-18-2017 04:33 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

(01-17-2017 09:27 PM)Space Cowboy Wrote:  If removing a condom is rape because you might cum in the girl, is pointing a gun at somebody murder because you might shoot them?

No, but there are a shitload of other laws that you'd have broken. Here in Australia it would be classed as assault with a deadly weapon, assault including the mere threat of use, not to mention the litany of gun specific laws you'd be hit with.

This was chalked up as rape because consent was given under terms and when those terms were deliberately broken then consent was presumed to be revoked.

Sorry guys, but this is molehill stuff, not mountain.

p.s. regarding sentencing or the specific charge I'm not saying one way or the other. But the guy crossed a line.

The definition of rape is having sex without consent. Not the way the sex is done for fuck sake. A condom is just an accessory or a lateral subject. They are broadening the concept of rape to idiotic levels. Let´s say you pretend to be rich. The girl then founds out your poor. She wouldn´t have given consent. Was she raped? Of course not. If you say your a pilot. Fuck a girl and afterwards she founds out your not. It´s rape? In both cases she gave consent based in false conditions. You say a girl you love her. Than dumps her. All the sex you had was based in a false premise. It´s rape.

At best. And this is already an exaggeration to which I don´t agree but could concede. The person taking off the condom could be responsible for potential damages. As moronic as it sounds. But never, ever criminal penalties.
If the person has aids or other serious disease and knew about it or should know based on sexual behaviour. It´s still not rape. But a felony. A crime. Which already exists in most codes. There´s no need to create a new crime.

The only difference are aids and the ability to get pregnant. And I believe it´s about not getting pregnant. State has no say into human relations. No say. Specially intimate.