The difference between lying to get laid for the night and lying to start a relationship is the difference between erecting a sand castle and erecting a castle made of sand.
Hope this helps,
Ace
“”"""""“Agree that people who do these things deserve no respect, disagree that it’s even close to rape. Somebody who has been given a date rape drug has been physically violated; somebody who has been lied to has not. Besides, the deceivee is presumably free to verify the information and responsible for the consequences if he or she makes the choice not to do so.”""""""""
Somebody who has been given a counter-intelligence algorythm applied from human determinism studies is also being physically violated. This brings up the issue of claiming sincerity from ignorance; which is the rule of thumb in these scenarios.
I think we are mixing up a few things here. Contradictions are not necessarily lies, and techniques used to confuse individuals and bypass the decision making process of the mind are not purposeful deception by default. I find it unfortunate that the female selection process rewards inconsistency - however, males by default are more likely to automate the systems of contradiction and abuse which innitiate submission; even self-professed players have scarcely the slightest clue how disturbing the parts that actually work are… they usually chalk it up to some other aspect - a defense mechanism to keep the system that works ‘alive’.
“”“I’d also argue that it’s very hard to deceive a reasonably intelligent adult who doesn’t choose to play along with the deception.”"""
Knowledge and intelligence are two entirely different aspects of potency. Intelligence is a ‘use it or lose it’ proposition in terms of our critical mass, educationally speaking. By this I mean that someone with an IQ of 350 is going to fly through college no matter what - however, as the IQ numbers drop 200 points or so; an very industrious person with an IQ of 80 can outperform and surpass someone with an IQ twice their own simply from exposure, discipline and experience to the learning process. Depending on the sort of social groups each person respectively adopts; a marked increase or decrease in IQ will be observed over time as well; to the point where the person with an 80 IQ could jump to 115 or so and the old 150 could slump to 120 or even lower. Now you have two people with proportionate IQ’s with one of them actually knowing much more than the genius at the outset.
People with IQ’s up in the stratosphere fail to notice the simplest truths of historic record and observation (like the association between clouds and rain). This basic knowledge provides advantage to the ‘lesser’ intelligence that is quite marked, in terms of sociability options and some very fundamental opportinity in relation to weather cycles.
“”"“If you don’t bother to check whether your sexual partner has a penis – and anybody concealing a secret that big would surely send up some red flags with their behavior – you’ve just got to expect surprises.”"""
I can’t speak for those who experience things like suprize or offence. I have difficulty understanding how something wouldn’t be expected. There are sensory variations that form in any combination and conceptual limitations that form in any combination; this seems self-evident to me.
(To be fair, most of the examples in the OP are slightly less easy to verify – but I’d imagine that an hour or two of casual conversation would expose all but the most well-rehearsed fake doctors or Englishmen. Heck, a genuine Sleepless in Seattle fan would probably have no problem spotting a fake one. Married people, in my experience, invariably give themselves away sooner or later; if you choose to sleep with them sooner, it’s your business and you accept the risks.)
These types of techniques are brazen, outrageous and unimaginitive at best. Saying you’re a doctor when you’re not is hardly mentionable as deception in regards to how this process works. This type of individual does not posess the capacity to run generalized counter-intelligence techniques that permeate the environment at large; they capitalize on tidbits with the hope that such an acute focus will actually hit the jackpot. Professional ‘gamblers’ don’t gamble.
“”"""""“None of this makes the deceivers any less scummy, of course, but I can’t see it as being in the same category as rape at all.”"""""""
If you possessed a well understood framework of how these scenarios are concecrated, I am quite sure that you’d feel differently about the rape part. I do agree that they are not ‘scummy’, just ignorant.
-Justhink
“”""""""""""""“For those that haven’t seen it, USA Network (and now ABC) have a TV detective series called “Monk.” Tony Shaloub stars as a brilliant detective afflicted with OCD after the death of his wife; Bitty Schram is Sharona, his long-suffering assistant. One evening, Sharona’s on a first date with a man and Monk briefly joins them. In the space of five minutes, Monk notes several inconsistencies in the man’s stories and unmasks him - he’s not really a neurosurgeon, or whatever he was claiming to be. Humiliated, the man leaves… and Sharona is furious at Monk. Puzzled, Monk explains that he was doing her a favor; the man was lying to her. Sharona retorts, “Everyone lies a little on a first date! Who cares?””""""""""""
Well, Sharona definately fits a typical female profile here. Contradictions up the yin-yang. Although, I’d attribute this conversation to calculated appeasement of ignorant veiwers to effect an emotional/opinionated response to either of two sides that are both moot. Monk must have relied on encyclopedic knowledge to expose this, something actually tangible to females as evidence. What’s funny about this type of scenario is how an application of truth in regards to the psychological system taking place will actually increase female attraction to the person in question, the more one consecrates their own value perception on the females behalf (by applying severely dumbed down symbolic truth patterns into the conversation), one can literally increase the females attraction to the other individual at the expense of cannibalizing her perception of your value. This dynamic is inversely proportional in my observations. Aparently this charachter ‘Monk’ assumed that females rewarded some sense of transparency with any form of intimate selection. Not particularly astute on his part; this would be indicitive of a personal attraction on his part to the woman in question if this were real life - he let emotion and idealism get the better of his rationality which would have not interfered. Sometimes situations like this are required to map cognitive age precisely as well - in which case he would now understand what level of discourse is appropriate in order to maintain her percieved sense of free-will. Her being female (presumably attractive if on television) opens a phenomenal door for other males to sweep in for a gang-up-on-monk validation of her ego crisis were he to tamper with it when she percieves herself to be an ‘adult’. It would in effect sever their relationship, create new friendships and intimate partners for her (all the saviors with gossip & and judgement validations). This type of scenario would presumably compromise his job and working relationship. There seems to be quite a bit to extract here, and I’m rambling…
-Justhink
“”"""""""“Now I’m not so sure. If both parties believe that this is just a one night stand, then who ever plays the game best gets the bed prize.”""""""""
People who can play the ‘best game’ would shoot themselves in the head before doing it - besides there existing a lack of motivation; it actually presents an anti-motivation as the techniques involved would negate the entire point of this person for existing. The ‘best game’ is always defaulted to the most ignorant of the group.
-Justhink
Do you guys consider women to be objects? Or people? It is hard to tell with many of these posts.
“”"""""“Do you guys consider women to be objects? Or people? It is hard to tell with many of these posts.”"""""""""
I consider them very young people, and treat them with the complexity of respect afforded to young ego’s.
While they may not possess the degree of cognitive age that understands this in their lifetime; I make a concerted effort not to abuse this loophole as a reason to treat them as informed peers.
I would interpret myself as a “women consciousness” speaker and proponent to that degree. An apt term coining IMO to describe the severity of cognitive age differences between the sexes.
-Justhink
Possibly I would, if knew what the hell you were talking about. What’s an “existential hit” ?
Quick, some female doper please dress up as an alien intelligence agent with mind-control technology, since I predict this will satisfy Justhink’s fantasy. Maybe if he gets laid he’ll start making sense.
“”"""""“Possibly I would, if knew what the hell you were talking about. What’s an “existential hit” ?”"""""""
Existential - the existential question aka. is there a point?
Existentially positive = point
Existentially negative = no point
Generally associated in the context of whether to live or not.
I was referring to the phenomenon of individuals who plan to commit a non-consensual act for the sole purpose of it being non-consensual - like a serial killer. Individuals who have the constitution to take one of these hits will quite likely save the act from being performed non-consensually. The whole point in the serial killer one is to ‘look like a victim’ and then play out the role of a resistant victim, to appease the killers thirst; respecting both the killer and the victim at the same time. Those who are astute at personality transactions in regard to sexuality may facilitate these unions by sacrificing their own desire to be in the scenario (or not in the scenario as the case may be), by cannibalizing their own existential value in relation to the attraction dynamic in order to assure mutual consent. There are certainly male ‘conquests’ to this regard which are a direct result of intervention from the person judged and discarded; which facilitated the union. This degree of ethical planning and complexity tends to extend far beyond the scope of anything remotely composing the beliefs or personalities of so called ‘good people’ or ‘players’ who feel validated for whatever reason.
Basically, to answer you question – a person is killing themselves, and in the process likely saving you or a loved one in the process; you applaud this behavior over a sense of personal responsibility to assert consensuality; completely oblivious to the intricate sacrifices playing behind the scenes.
-Justhink
What makes you think women are being considered as objects? What makes you think that this is even something necessarily gender-specific?
As mentioned above, people moderate their personalities for good reasons too - because they genuinely like someone and want to be liked too. While honesty, in the long-term, is generally the best policy, I fail to see how every tiny deception is equally unacceptable. I don’t believe that morality is “either/or” in every situation.
Telling a woman you’re a fireman when you’re actually a toilet-cleaner is no big deal, in my book. Anyone who sleeps with someone based on their job title deserves to be duped.
It’s not the same as a date-rape drug, that is physically altering someone’s mind to disempower them mentally and physically. That is rape.
The case of transgendered people is a difficult one and not really analogous to either of the above cases. Yes - I do think it is deceptive and wrong to come on to a man if you are still physically a man yourself (penis) if you know he is only interested in women. Getting to know him first on a personality basis, becoming friends, and then letting him know to see if he is open-minded, fair enough. It may seem like that’s a harder course for a transgender person, but tough luck. Ugly people have to make more effort with personality to attract someone than beautiful people do, life isn’t fair.
Another issue is people carrying infectious diseases. Yes, this needs to be disclosed. It is IMO a deceptive and criminal act to expose someone else to risk.
I personally despise pure gold-diggers. But let’s say you are a woman who genuinely wants a man with a good income, because you want to have children and stay at home to look after them, etc etc. Fine. So do your research. Don’t be gullible. Don’t sleep with him until you are sure he is a viable partner for your needs. (Read The Rules, for fuck’s sake). Use common sense.
I think the minimum we should be able to accept as given from another human being when picking up or being picked up for sex is that they are the gender we want and they are not going to physically harm us (either by disease or non-consent violent sex play).
Looks, money, job, fame - so what? If you’re shallow and stupid, bad luck.
But this approach confuses intent and motive. The woman intended to give consent. The fact that the woman was motivated to give that consent because the guy said he was a neurosurgeon is of no moment.
It’s like murder. If the guy intended to pull the trigger and kill the other person, we don’t care if his motive was a mugging, revenge, or boredom.
As for the morality of it, I don’t think this type of deception is a difference in kind than other deceptions used to get ahead, from puffing on your resume to claiming you’re a movie star in order to get a reservation. I think those are improper, so I think deception in order to get laid is improper. But I don’t think it’s super-duper improper.
Then again, I’ve been deceiving my girlfriend for about a year. She think’s I’m actually listening when she talks about her day. 
Sua
Sua:
I could argue, however, that consent obtained by false representations meets the criteria of fraud: it’s a misrepresentation or concealment with reference to some fact material to the “transaction.” It is made with knowledge of its falsity, with the intent to deceive, and it’s relied upon by the other party, who is (presumably) injured as a result of that reliance.
Yes?
- Rick
Yeah but the injury is not so great. If it was a marriage, and part of the understanding was that one partner would provide, then fair enough. This is just a one night stand.
But feeling pissed because you shagged a milkman not a millionnaire? Come on!
:eek:
Jeez, Justhink, you’re either one brave dude or one brave fool, why not just post “please take me to the Pit”…
Most of those writing in the thread are basing ourselves on that the man and the woman are persons of equal capacity and dignity, the argument being to what extent either party is morally wronged by use of deception or by playing along with an expectation of mind-games.
Precisely because men and women are equally persons, I believe both have a reasonable expectation that important decisions will not be based on misrepresentations. They also have a right to determine what their conditions are for “getting laid”. BUT, OTOH, as responsible humans they should really exercise some due diligence. The girl who digs Jewish cowboys should ask to see “Bucky Goldstein”'s horse and ask his mother for her recipe for matzoh ball soup, if it’s that important. Otherwise, her real fetish is “guys who SAY they’re Jewish cowboys” . Me, I despise the idea that the playing of mind-games is to be expected (“The Rules”, the schmules!) anyway, but that’s partly because that’s adding unnecessary complication to life.
What did the prostitute say when the John’s check bounced?
“I’ve been raped!” 
Y’know, I’ve known women who were raped. A couple of them told me that they would rather die than be raped again, that if they ever got in a similar situation, they’d literally fight to the death. Every woman I’ve known who was raped was really traumatized by the experience.
I’m not sure I’ve ever known a woman who shagged a milkman she thought was a millionaire. Somehow, I have trouble imagining a person saying she’d rather die than have a one-night-stand based on deception again.
I think that women’s consciousness speaker was trivializing rape, which is if you ask me pretty despicable.
Daniel
So the twin brother that impersonates his brother to sleep with his sister-in-law – rape? Or just very clever? Or despicable, but not rising to the level or rape?
I’m not a firefighter but I went to school for it 
You may wish to note, people sometimes are attracted to the type of person who gravitates toward a certain occupation Women and firefighters, men and nurses (I live all of your sexy nurse fantasies every night. Love ya Cyn!!!) I would make a lousy veterinarian considering I would rather let a small animal die than ask owners to pay hundreds if not thousands of dollars to save a family pet. I’m just not the “save the fuzzy critters” type. Finding out a girl is the fuzzy critter type and claiming to be some kind of animal rights activist and regaling her with stories of hand feeding kittens abandoned by their mom to get her in the sack is total bullshit. Not rape but just scummy. Many occupations require a specific combination of intelligence, confidence, physical stamina, problem solving ability, sheer testicular fortitude, tact, pick any number of traits.
One of the things my wife likes about me is as an ex-EMT I speak medical. She can talk to me about her day at work without having to explain every item of medical terminology. IF I never actually worked in the medical field she would find communicating with me far more difficult with respect to her job.
By using some job titles, many traits are “assumed” because to survive that job, you must have them.
I would respond that the falsehood does not meet the materiality criteria. Remember, we are talking about a one-night stand, not a relationship. I would argue that the only material criteria for a one night stand is attractiveness and performance - not occupation.
After all, if you buy a car from a used car salesman just because the salesman swore to you that he had been one of the Apollo 13 astronauts, you wouldn’t have a case for fraud, because that has nothing to do with how good the car is that you are buying. Similarly, if you are a woman out trolling for a one-night stand, you gain no additional benefit if the guy you tumble into the sack who has a private island in the South Seas. It’s a one-night stand; you aren’t going to the South Seas to frolic on the island.
So if the guy falsely claims to have a South Seas private island, you have suffered no loss.
Sua
I’m not a firefighter but I went to school for it
You may wish to note, people sometimes are attracted to the type of person who gravitates toward a certain occupation Women and firefighters, men and nurses (I live all of your sexy nurse fantasies every night. Love ya Cyn!!!) I would make a lousy veterinarian considering I would rather let a small animal die than ask owners to pay hundreds if not thousands of dollars to save a family pet. I’m just not the “save the fuzzy critters” type. Finding out a girl is the fuzzy critter type and claiming to be some kind of animal rights activist and regaling her with stories of hand feeding kittens abandoned by their mom to get her in the sack is total bullshit. Not rape but just scummy. Many occupations require a specific combination of intelligence, confidence, physical stamina, problem solving ability, sheer testicular fortitude, tact, pick any number of traits.
One of the things my wife likes about me is as an ex-EMT I speak medical. She can talk to me about her day at work without having to explain every item of medical terminology. IF I never actually worked in the medical field she would find communicating with me far more difficult with respect to her job.
By using some job titles, many traits are “assumed” because to survive that job, you must have them.