UK Court bans man with low IQ from having sex

I wasn’t sure where to put this thread, so I apologize if it needs to be moved.

UK Court bans man with low IQ from having sex

I don’t know how I feel about this. On one hand it seems unfair, but then I can kind of understand the concern. I’m not sure what an IQ of 48 means or what a vigorous sex drive means either.

:confused:

When I am about to have sex I think my IQ is around 47. During the act and expcially right before I am done it approaches near zero.

And how will they enforce this?

Exactly. Good luck with that.

You can punish anyone who has sex with him as a rapist.

Reading the article will answer that.

Otara

This is a British court case. It means anything beyond a raised eyebrow.
But really, if this chap is living in council-provided ‘sheltered’ housing, this restriction is not much different from those placed on adults with learning disabilities in residential homes, say.

I’m thinking cock cage.

I thought it was closer to 56.

There’s a “fucking his brains out” joke in here somewhere.

With an IQ of 48? Probably tell him his penis will explode if it puts it in anyone else.

How do they even determine IQ’s lower than say, 60?

I have read a number of psychological evals, particularly of kids, which include IQ calculations. A lot of the evaluations seem to be based on self report instruments and multiple choice-type diagnostics.

What kind of diagnostic can realistically show an IQ difference of between 45 and 50 with any efficacy? How does one with an IQ of 50 actually participate? And what does that even mean?

And even if the guy’s IQ is super low, does that not mean that he can’t appreciate intimacy?

Geez, talk about kicking a guy while he’s Downs.

It said this was determined by his “local council.” Is there a higher authority someone can appeal to on his behalf?

Was 69 too obvious?

Moderate “learning disability” is a misnomer, here. Maybe they’re trying to be PC, but 48 IQ falls into the moderate range of mental retardation.

This ruling was handed down by a court - it wasn’t simply a decision by the local council. I don’t know enough about the law to say if there’s any higher court that could hear an appeal.

So did they ban the other guy from having sex as well? It doesn’t make any sense. It says he has a relationship with this other guy and it didn’t sound like the other guy was complaining about it.

I wonder if this ruling isn’t really directed at the other guy, by implicitly threatening him with a rape charge.

This makes me wonder if there are rules about children having sex. Because what the article says, about the man not really understanding the implications, seems philosophically similar to having sex with, say, a four year old. The thought of a four year old having sex definitely makes me shudder, but it is this officially against the law?

ETA: Yes, I do know about statutory rape. But what if both of parties are young kids? Or if, say, one is twelve and one is three?

Here and in other cases involving an inability to give meaningful consent, it’s not generally a question of whether the other person is OK with it.

I’m not sure why, but I have different feelings on this based purely on the fact that it’s two guys. Since there’s no danger of procreation, it doesn’t bother me at all. If it were a woman with a 46 IQ wanting to have sex with a man, I’d have a big problem with it, because I don’t think she could understand the potential consequences, nor could she properly care for a child. But two dudes? Teach him how to use a condom and have at it.