Should it be sexual assault to lie about loving someone so you can have sex with them?

[LesterJester]

New South Wales, Australia is pushing this?

Fk, did I move to the wrong country. Though it could be worse I suppose.

No it shouldn't be sexual assault, wtf kind of crap is this?

Feelings are a tricky thing and interpretation can be subjective. If you're going to try and charge someone for sexual assault because you had sex with someone who said they loved you, you need evidence and proof of deception.

You get a lot of teenagers and early 20 year olds getting into relationships all the time and thinking they love someone and maybe even want to marry them. But as time goes on, issues in the relationship arise and eventually if those issues are not resolved or get worse, that love can dwindle and eventually go away completely.

What then? You break up and then your ex charges you for sexual assault for the last several months or years even? Do they keep record of every time you two had sex and then each one of those on record stack up and you're charged for each sexual encounter and end up in prison for the rest of your life and become a registered sex offender?

And what about the other side of the coin where someone could truly be BS'ing you? You charge them for sexual assault because they said they loved you but really didn't.

How are you going to prove they never loved you at some point? They can say that they did love them but eventually they stopped loving them for one reason or another. They did, but now they don't.

Or they could still say they love them, so how are they going to prove they don't?

How are you supposed to regulate and prove this shit?

You can't. You're trying to enforce and regulate emotions through law and that's just fk'n retarded. There are too many ways to exploit this as well as the amount of loop holes is staggering.

So what about lying about your wealth?

That can also fall into a Gray area. What I may consider as a decent well being and income may not be the same as what you think.

Even so, why should it matter if I have a Ferrari or a Ford Tempo for someone to want to have sex with me? Why should it matter if I rent a small hole in the wall or live in a mansion on my own island for someone to decide to have sex with me?

Isn't that just showing her gold digging, semi-prostitution ways and isn't that worse?

What's more... If she was just going to have sex with me because of my financial status and implied she was wanting some financial compensation for sleeping with me, does that mean she never "Loved" me?

Does that mean I should charge her for sexual assault?

Look, in all seriousness, this all several levels of fk'd up. You are not married, you do not have legal protection or rights to someone else's wealth for sex. You do not have the right to charge someone for sexual assault in a situation where the sex was consensual from start to finish. You can not prove in a court of law without reasonable doubt someone's emotions or "love" towards someone else.

And unless someone has audio or video recording of you explicitly saying you're a Millionaire for the sake of having sex with some shallow skank, someone claiming you lied about your wealth comes down to a he said / she said situation... And who do you think is going to win?

Certainly not the guy, because we all know we're all scum bags after all.

Fk'n stupid.

[Investigator]

"The New South Wales Law Reform Commission recommended that if a physical relationship eventuated after a person was dishonest about themselves, sexual assault charges should apply.

The proposal contains a clause in regards to liars and people who 'fraudulently induce' others into sexual activity.

'We propose that the law should provide that a person who is fraudulently induced to participate in sexual activity does not, in law, consent to sexual activity,' the Commission said in its review of consent laws.""

Ostensibly, when you cut through all the bullsh*t, the New South Wales Law Reform Commission is trying to make the act of lying itself a crime. Of course, they don't and won't explicitly make that an element of this law, but that's the premise. I know politicians don't always make the best decisions (in my opinion, they usually don't; the good law is like the exception to the rule), but this is a step beyond the realm of logic--if ever it existed in the legal field. My guess is, a bunch of women were given "all the feelz" because a lot of men know that the fastest way to get women into bed is to feed her the right emotions and say the right things, and they feel that they're being lied to made the whole encounter rape. Maybe deception, but not sexual assault. "fraudulent inducement to engage in a sex act", how exactly do you even prove this in court? How do you prove this at all? We've gone from the #MeToo era, where women can now retroactively take back consent after sex and say they were raped or get men arrested for sexual assault on mere accusation to the #FakeLove brigade, where lying about your involvement is now a form of rape.

"'Telling someone you love them when you don't, pretending to be rich and well connected when you are not, claiming educational achievements that you don't possess, denying a complex sexual history - say, with same sex partners - could all conceivably count as fraudulently obtaining sexual consent,' he said.

The reforms would cover conversations on dating apps such as Tinder as well as real-life encounters. They would apply to people of all genders and would forcing people to be careful about what they say about themselves to prospective lovers."

So, if a guy saying "I love you" that turns out to be false is considered a contributing factor to rape, is rape now merely the usage of artifice to entice an individual to engage in sexual activity? "forcing people to be careful about what they say about themselves" is only half the story, what about fraudulent actions? If a woman is wearing makeup and a pushup bra, can I claim I was raped because the woman I thought I was bringing home is not the woman in my bed? If a guy woos a girl with wealth just by flaunting supposedly expensive bling and it turns out he's broke, is that rape? If a girl gets plastic surgery and doesn't tell me, is that rape? How far can you take this train of thought?

A law like this is just begging to be abused, because it could apply to basically anything and seemingly has no upper limit.

[Randomawkwardness]

Eh, it gets a little sketchy here. It is manipulative to enforce the idea on someone that you love them when it's purely for sex. It's emotionally abusive to do that to anyone. However, with the picture you listed, lying about wealth shouldn't really factor in. It's a little different to manipulate someone and just fudging a few numbers. I mean, why should wealth matter in this situation anyway? Is it morally wrong? Yes. Should it be considered sexual assault? Probably not.

[Katerina_Belle]

No just no. Sexual assault is non-consensual i. e. the person did not want to engage in the act. A lie is a lie. Two very different things, sexual assault isn’t hypothetical. It’s things like this that makes real sexual assault cases a joke 😒.

I understand the point that if it wasn’t for the lie then things would be different but that’s deception not sexual assault.

[AustinMan]

It's just plain old fraud!

[indianninja]

Lying about your wealth is cheating if there is some promise for getting some sex in exchange of money/ forging a relationship/ marriage with misleading information. I mean to say can be actually incriminating.

Lying that you love someone and having sex: If there is promise for marriage and sex is obtained through such promise and not kept then it can be crime in certain countries.
However, saying that you love someone and then having sex without any promise to be kept for obtaining such should never be sexual assault since sexual assault is a serious crime and happens against or in absense of consent. Sexual act between consenting adults should not be held as crime in regards to whether someone confesses love to someone, as love can also mean different thing for different people. Some use it seriously as a lifelong commitment and special connection and some mean it as infatuation or may simply not be sure about their feelings. Loving someone does not have a concrete legal definition and is not a prerequisit for sex between consenting non-intoxicated adult. Someone can be feeling that they are loving someone during the period when the sex happens, and may not harbor the same feelings later as love is not a legally binding agreement ( living together can be and marriage is). Therefore labelling this as sexual assault dilutes the actual serious crime and incriminates the average person with a serious crime.

Lying about this is morally wrong, or ethically, but should not be held as this serious crime.

[Massageman]

Maybe it's something in the water by New South Wales that makes thinking foggy. But that's another story.

I don't think that this change would make any logical sense. This would not be considered "assault" which is a verbal threat. Nor is it "battery" which is actually touching the person who is the object of one's threat. (Hit them with a bat, flogger, bullet, or other object and it becomes "aggravated battery"). But that's still another story!

Fraud involves dishonest and deceptive conduct by a person or a party for the purpose of obtaining an UNFAIR AND UNLAWFUL gain. The fraudulent act can constitute both a crime and a civil wrong. This new "law" COULD be considered "fraud", "misrepresentation", or a "deceptive practice", a serious misdemeanor at best, a felony at worst. In most areas of the US, if there is any "exchange of consideration" (something of value such as money or a bartered item), then it would be at least a Class 4 felony.

That said, this is NOT like mail fraud ( ala Al Capone ), which was clearly defined and was proven relatively easily. The wealth argument might have a TINY bit of merit, but saying "I love you" when you "don't" leaks like a sieve: that part will never hold water.

[EABsTUQ]

I just recently a year ago experienced this. A girl I was with was pretty free with me at first but then she didn't want us to do anything until we were in love or whatever. She told me she loved me and I just couldn't tell her I love her. I wasn't about to tell her I love her just so we could be more free. Tbh me even dating this girl was just me being an asshole and it took everything for me to just date her and not feel bad about it because I never really liked her. I promise myself that I wouldn't push it to hard and that would have been crossing a line that I could not return from. I was testing this thing. This quote. "If you want something you've never had, you must be willing to do something you've never done." And I found the quote to be true... I wish that everyone could find love and never feel lonely but the true and reality is that there are people who never date anyone ever and people who die virgins etc You never hear about it from such people but it is a reality for a lot. There are also people who love the wrong people etc etc. Love is so fake these days and Im not sure it ever has been real. I should reread this but whatever

[truthbeknown]

I don't like how this give people the ability to retract sexual consent after the fact. Being assaulted is when you are receiving action against you that you do not want at the time. To have willing sex and then find out later you were deceived and then be able to file for sexual assault is not right. It should be some sort of fraud crime for sure, and I do agree it is wrong, but it's should not be classified as a sex crime. This is why people need to be responsible and find out who it is they are sleeping with in the first place. You date and get to know them first.

[hellionthesagereborn]

Let me guess, this is Canada? The same place that has made it sexual assault if a man pokes a hole in his condom but also has made it so its not sexual assault if a woman does it or if a woman lies about using contraceptive (and also has paternity fraud being perfectly legal). Yeah no, that's stupid if your having sex with a guy because he says he is rich and it turns out he is lying, your as scummy as he is an you had it coming. If he lies about loving you well you should have held out and done what others do and waited long enough to see what kind of person he is, just because you where niave doesn't mean we need yet another law for women to abuse and use to destroy men's lives.

[sindicated]

Then every divorce becomes a sexual assault case "your honor he said he loved me" no thanks. I get the idea, people give themselves to one another on certain mutual understandings. When they fall apart or you discover the lie it is invasive and the feeling of being used, and abused can come to the forefront.

But like any law of government, innocent people are more likely to get hurt than criminals (from the U. S. believe in the founding principals of my country). This law would be no different, and it introduces dangerous opportunity for exploitation and the destruction of innocent lives.

[Myonzon]

I don't see this as an assault because one, it's the other person's own responsibility of themselves to give consent if they allow that other person to have sex. Two, it would be an assault if the other person starts to force that individual into sex or other inappropriate actions if that person doesn't give any consent at all or if there's a certain one they won't allow.

Yes, it can hurt someone for feeling that they were just used for sex from the other person, but again, it's their own responsibility of their body. They should've been more careful/cautious with who they're having sex with emotionally.

[ShortCircuit]

No. If someone's consent to sex is dependent on some sort of criteria being met, then the onus is on them to properly vet potential sexual partners before having sex with them.

If someone will only have sex with someone who is in love with them, they should consider taking extra precautions, like staying abstinent for a long enough time to deter liars from sticking around. If they don't, it's not the other person's problem.

[hahahmm]

If women get arrested for:
Wearing spanx to hide big bellies.
Plastic breasts.
Butt implants.
Excessive makeup.
Fake eyelashes.
Fake hair.
Fake nails.
Facial waxing.
Genital waxing.
Leg shaving.
Saying, “I Love you” while flirting with others.
Fake tears to get sex.
Being open to all kinds of sex before marriage but not in the marriage.
Pretending to have nice personalities when the reality is later revealed to be otherwise

[integrale77]

It's just manipulation saying "I love you" is 3 strong words but it can still mean different things for different people.
And if your getting sex because your implying your wealthy well that saves someone from getting with a gold digger for one night.

If laws are introduced that will be difficult to enforce.

[frostwalrus]

Yes. And I also think flirting of any type is sexual harassment. People should report someone they see flirting in public to the authorities. Even if the person being flirted with doesn't mind it, it's still wrong. And the perpetrator should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

[Drumlin2001]

Should wearing a push up bra to entice a man be seen as sexual assualt? Thats a mirepresentstion. Make up? Heels? All used to change characteristics to appeal to someone. Is lying any different?
Maybe people should be more careful who they go to bed with. Not jump between the sheets so easily

[MannMitAntworten]

Curious just how far people are willing to take this. I mean, I have had a lot of wives but have never been married. Not because I seek out wives, but because they lie about either being single or being divorced. They 'choose' to share this fact 'after' sleeping together. Is this not the same? After all the question is of a morality based variety.

[ActiveSh1tter]

Women are literally admitting sex is just a trade resources that they use to get commitment from a man.

This law isn't a surprise considering how women who have casual sex always claim to feel "used, raped, and worthless". Proof that the act of rape is nothing but the theft of sex, and women go apeshit hysterical over it because they cannot accept giving free sex to any man without getting his house and car in return.

[ZeussLightningBolt]

No, I guess they're trying to do this in India, but something like this would be very difficult to proof in court.
On the other hand. The girl shouldn't have been so naiive. Is it morally wrong, yes! But the truth is, the girl was horny as hell and simply couldn't wait 'til marriage. She is just as responsible.

[cheeznob]

no they chose to have sex with u cos they wanted,
sex and emotional attachment (love) is not linked, theyre 2 different things,
so if they chose to have sex with u... they did it for sexual pleasure in tht moment and still dont regret it even after finding out u dont love them cos they still think ur hot... regardless if u love em or not... cos u dont need someone to love u for them to be hot... it was her choice at the time

[Anonymous]

No.

Sexual assault is sex with or sexual behaviours towards someone without their explicit consent. So let's not **offend** people who have been & are legitimately sexually assaulted or **trivialize** the crime itself.

Seriously. If you're dimwitted enough to think the guy or gal you just had a one night stand with legitimately loves you as example you need help.

[CharlieBadger]

That is an interesting question. Other lies can certainly fall into that category. So I can see where arguments could be made.

The problem is how do we prove it was lie? Do we have a way to actually prove love. It seems almost impossible to prosecute.

[MusicMayhem]

Well it should take at the bare minimum a couple of months before someone legitimately loves you, by which time most people would have had sex several times unless they were waiting for marriage so this is an absolute crock of shit.

[JohnnySigma85]

No because it's consensual. Just because someone lies to the person they sexually want shouldn't be labeled sexual assault. Especially if the person got off on it because during their sexual experience together, that person isn't thinking about being sexually assaulted. They're thinking that they're making love with that person that doesn't love them. If that person admits they lied about loving them or being in love with them just to get in their pants then that's on that person for poor judge of character. If the person claims sexual assault then they're salty as fuck because they played themselves.

[R_Cakes91]

Lol no that is silly. Then every single guy on the planet would be a sex offender. Just learn how to tell between genuine and deceiving people.

[boredguy01]

No. That would be the most idiotic law ever because there is no way to clearly define love and it would be impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt whether someone loved their partner or not

[NellyNarcotic]

NO. FUCK NO. THIS IS INSANE, RETARDED AND BEYOND STUPID. Like hurting someone somewhat isn't on near the same fucking level as an actual sexual assault you know. It's like comparing a little playful punch to getting beaten to death. No one would seriously consider adopting that

[genericname85]

no it should not because sexual ASSAULT involves physical violence. that's like calling fraud murder. it's different things. either is not good but there's clearly a difference and also one is worse than the other.

[Twalli]

People may fall out of love. So that would essentially mean you can never have sex because you could be accused of saying that when you didn't really love someone because you fell out of love before you last had sex.

[morimeme1]

No, that is a shitty thing to do but just because someone is gulliable enough to believe a guy they met today loves them - he should not be charged with sexual assault wtf, he did not force her or endanger her in any way.

[Liam_Hayden]

No. If there is consent, there is consent. Frelling SJW's want to criminalize everything. Love is proven by actions, not words. How about people just use their own common sense instead or trying to make every bad choice a crime by someone else?

[guesswhereivebeen]

Thank god your to fuggly to ever get fucked because you don’t have a clue between your drama filled “feelings” and maybe getting your fucking ass kicked and fucked up the butt by some nasty stranger in a bush or whatever... your a fucking idiot

[smalls95]

I would say it’s emotionally abusive and manipulative. I wouldn’t say it’s sexual assault though.

[themaker39]

Looks like Australia. You're going through some sadistic shit. Just imagine how sick they will be off this kind of abominations when this shitty movement ends.

[adidas0169]

How could it even come close to assault? assault is a crime. your stupid one that dropped your pants for them. what are you going to do call 911 and say someone lied to me saying that they love me so they can fuck me? really you would be laughed at unless your in cali and everything there is a liberal joke.

[OddBeMe]

Not as legal assault. Because that gets into Orwellian thought policing. But I think there are ways to suss our whether people are lying about loving you. A guy won’t put in months of work just for a quick lay... I would think...

[Kiran_Yagami]

May as well make it rape to use push-up bras, makeup, and high heels. EVERYONE lies in some way or another. We're trying to pretend to be more than we are. If you make that a crime then we might as well just start shooting each other.

[Taylor_C]

How would you legally determine what somebody´s feelings towards the other party was at a certain point in time? It would be totally arbitrary, hence not compatible with citizen´s rights and a judicial democracy.

[PondyPand]

feelings change so I don't think this will be exactly easy to enforce.

[MikeGaveO]

It's manipulation, but no, not sexual assault. Just being a complete asshole.

[BlacklightShade]

Often people have sex to have sex, not to make love.

[xkildy]

Haha , not funny but you have to wonder what there thinking up there.

[WalterRadio]

Men tell women what they want to hear.

Women choose to believe them or not.

[Faint]

It's not sexual assault. It's manipulative but if you both consent to sex it is mutual sex. There's no real why to prove feelings though if they lied or not unless they admitted to it.

[Anonymous]

There are a about a million women who are gonna rush out and retain a lawyer to cash in on this the second it passes. Might as well make premarital sex a crime again

[Daisy007]

No, it's "manipulation" which is bad to the person recieving it but in no way should it count as sexual assault ;-; 😱😱

[ToastyTimothy1828]

The sexual encounter was still within the bounds of consent. As for the circumstances under which the encounter occurred? Grounds for ending the relationship (e. g., trust issues).

[MustachePenguin]

Hey, if she lets you mate with her then it's no longer sexual assault. Mating has nothing to do with love, it's all about making little chicks. If you're mating for "love" then you are naive. If you love them, then what's the big deal!

[esotericstory]

No that stupid, there is no standard for what constitutes as love. Therefore it is impossible to to say in a court of law whether person X loved person Y during the act of sex

[DeshawnMGTOW]

what if I have sex with a woman because she looks hot and then I see her without all the makeup and she looks way uglier? Can I then say I was deceived and raped? Dumbass feminists.

[chriscdi]

if its going to be a crime, maybe make its own category

[Juxtapose]

Honk honk!

[BrotherFrost]

For the sake of argument let's assume you could determine the truth behind this. Next thing you know people are demanding anti-manipulation law. Then all women and politicians are in real trouble.

[Anonymous]

Shouldn't be sexual assault. They're consenting to sex with a person and not a doctor. However it should be considered "entrapment" because that's what it is.

[YHL6965]

No, as messed up as it is, it's still consensual. People trying to put anything and everything behind precise terms just screw up everything.

[Smegskull]

Love is at best poorly defined and at worst completely undefined so I don't see how even if this were a crime it would be provable.

[Daniela1982]

Sexual assault is not words and you didn't say no. It is terribly misleading but that kind of stuff goes on all the time.

[NickiB]

No. It's mean but hell no. Send someone to jail for that? 😂😂😂

[OfDeath]

No. That's kind of stupid. I could just say I liked about lying.

[_SOARER_]

Yes, you are manipulating someone to use them. Its despicable. That being said its hard to prove as love has become something meaningless and fickle in secular societies.

[InfobotsMom]

In a way, yes, but legally no. Trying to pass that into law would be interesting. Trying to prove such cases in court would be even more interesting.

[Jjpayne]

Well it's seriously something to think about. To call it something extreme, because it's using someone for their body and that's not fair or classy, proper.

[emmily2396]

No, but we should have laws for emotional abuse, this being a part of emotional abuse.