Is there anybody else here asserting that one must do a background check on every woman who looks twenty that you want to sleep with?
Say whatever else about him, he is keeping this thread from being an echo chamber.
I got into a similar argument with Dio about whether a man should have to pay child support to a woman he sleeps with who gets pregnant by deception or sabotage. (Lying about birth control, poking holes in condoms, or whatever.) His position is the same, it never happens and if it does then it’s the man’s fault for taking the risk of sleeping with a woman he didn’t know well enough. He has an intense desire to see people punished for having sex outside of a committed long-term relationship.
I wonder if he feels the same way about that guy in the news who was having affairs with multiple women and knowingly giving them HIV. It’s their fault for sleeping with a guy they didn’t know well enough to know that he had AIDS, right? The bitches had it coming! Or is your hatred only directed at men?
Just cause I’m curious, I think the same thing, that men should pay child support even if the woman lied to him, and I think child sexual assault charges shouldn’t have a “I thought she was 18” defense. Does that make me have an “intense desire to see people punished for having sex outside of a committed long term relationship”.
C’mon, I dislike Dio and I think his insistance that men being deceived is impossible to be wrongheaded, but this is just plain stupid.
If it’s possible that men can be decieved, then why shouldn’t child sexual assault charges have a “I thought she was 18” defense? One can argue for the child support from the tricked man on the basis that the child needs support, but there’s no analogous need for the man to bear responsibility when a child tricks him into sex. This is of course keeping in mind that the exception would only apply when the man can convince the jury he was genuinely fooled, which will pretty much prevent it from happening with actual child-children.
Dio said that if a man sleeps with an underage girl that lied to him about her age, and presented him with a convincing fake ID, he should imprisoned for life and chemically castrated. link So no, I don’t think what I said is much of a stretch. He wants people to be savagely punished for having casual sex.
I was asking about my position, not Dio’s. I was curious if it was only the outlandish penalty Dio advocated or if it was his position itself that made him worthy of such vehemence.
No I don’t. I have an intense desire to see fathers take responsibility for their children.
In that case, everybody is responsible. Those women share responsibility for not using prorection. Yes, it is their own fault. I do not hate men. I just want people to be accountable for their actions.
Because the mere possiblity of deception doesn’t outweigh the need to protect other children from sexual assault.
I disagree with your assertion about the exception wouldn’t apply all that often. To me, it is better to require adults to be certain that their sexual partner isn’t under the age of consent, than to allow adults to claim ignorance of age as a defense.
Maybe the thread is too far along to ask this, but does Dio think that no guys should sleep with women who are 21 but look like they are 16? Because I know several… does it seem right that a 21 year old who looks 28 should be able to have a one night stand but a 21 year old who looks 15 shouldn’t?
Just to clarify, then, you’re opposed to homicide being grouped into such subcategories that provide different consequences for the same action? So, it’s reasonable to assume that you find the notion of “manslaughter” ridiculous, right?
After all, it’s the action that counts, not the intent, correct?
And how does allowing the man described in the long-running scenario in this thread a defense of “I was deceived” affect protection of other children?
And what, exactly, do you consider “being certain”? State issued ID? A birth certificate? An edict from God?
So if someone deliberately infects one of your daughters with AIDS it’s A-OK and it’s her fault? That’s nice.
The man in the story had extended affairs with the women he infected, BTW. They thought they knew him and trusted him. I don’t have time to dig cites they were on the news magazine TV shows. He have HIV to multiple women, I think it was something like 7. There have been other cases in the news more recently.
What is so fricking complicated about this?
Nobody here is saying “hey, the guy says he thought she was over 18, let him go free”.
Most everybody here is saying something along the lines of “hell, any reasonable person, under these uncommon but not impossible, circumstances, including myself, would have been convinced she/he was over 18, therefore this guy (or gal) had no intent to sleep with a minor and, in fact, could not have reasonably know that he/she was doing so”.
Allowing such a defense is not open season on children for pedos, despite a few rabid posters thoughts to the contrary.
I suggested this many posts ago. No one listened 
Even a father who’s the victim of statutory rape by older woman who got pregnant as a result of her crime?
And the married woman has unprotected sex with her husband without knowing he picked up an STD while he was off commiting adultery? Is she had fault for trusting her husband not to cheat and infect her with an STD?
Okay, I’m going to try to mediate some of this.
I am not going to entirely agree with Dio by saying no fucking way it could ever happen. It is rare and yes, I have cousins who wore C cups in eighth grade and stood 5’10". Engaging them in a conversation all while dressed up at a wedding or funeral and you WOULD know they were 8th graders.
Yes, there is hypopituitaryism (sp?) like in the Law & Order episode someone mentioned. In those cases, AFAIC, those attracted to 27 year olds who look ten are sick and should be beaten. But there is hyPERpituitarism too, no?
I’m sure that Drain Bead was intelligent enough at her picture age to fool someone if she wanted a drink OR sex, but why are so many of you so judgemental? It seems like some of you supporting ignorance of agre AND sayIng there are so many of them around are expecting every single solitary female who looks old for their age to dress up and try to fool the world into sex and drinks. It sounds like the adolescent girls are guilty before proven innocent. Stop it. Every girl who CAN dress up to be older are not automatic sluts with an agenda.
Dio is correct about the law caring about actions and not thoughts, but I stand with changing these laws to reflect the age difference and if it was consensual or not. An 18 year old bangs a 15 year old girlfriend, no jail or sex offender list. A 45 year old gets fooled by a 15 year old, 25 to life.
No. I think they should steer clear if they don’t know for sure how old they are. I’m also not saying the law should be that they MUST steer clear. I’m saying the onus is on them if they guess and guess wrong.
I didn’t say it was ok, but if one of my daughters was to become infected in such a way as an adult, it would be their fault for not using protection, yes. That’s why I will make damn sure they know to use it.
Obviously they couldn’t have known him that well. They were morons.
How many fathers doing the whining became fathers via statutory rape?
Sure, if the father was a victim of statutory rape, he can be off the hook for child support. This is such a rare expection as to be rhetorically worthless, though.
How is this scenario analogous to anything being discussed in the thread?
If there was an “I was deceived” defense available, more predators would successfully sexually assault minors than would ever be saved by letting the poor victims of the all but imaginary overdeveloped 16 year old, lying Jezebel with the fake ID get away with a deferred judgment.
God would suffice.
Again, you, and many people in this thread, seem to think that if you can create some example, no matter how far fetched and out of touch with reality, where a poor victim of the deceitful underaged-but-looks-really-older-and-has-an-ID-so-I-couldn’t-have-ever-known-before-I-fucked-her is charged, then you win. It’s simply not true. I understand that not having a “I was deceived” defense could, in extremely rare circumstances, result in someone being treated wrongly by the criminal justice system. I also understand that not having the “He deserved it” defense could, in extremely rare circumstances, result in someone being treated wrongly by the criminal justice system. But in both cases, the benefitss of not officially allowing the defense outweigh the costs.