Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

Trans people in UK could face rape charges if they don't reveal gender history

13567…32

Comments

  • #62
    uck51js9zml2yt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,253 ✭✭✭✭uck51js9zml2yt


    wakka12 wrote: »
    Unless the man stated that he's not comfortable sleeping with trans women then I don't see why she should be obligated state her birth gender.

    How often does this statement come up In general conversation between a man and woman.
    The other person has the right to know.many would not sleep with someone who is TG if they knew.


  • #63
    Armchair Andy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,846 ✭✭✭Armchair Andy


    wakka12 wrote: »
    Unless the man stated that he's not comfortable sleeping with trans women then I don't see why she should be obligated state her birth gender.

    So now a man needs to specifically ask before any hanky panky? Are you for real?


  • #64
    HiJacques
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 314 ✭✭HiJacques


    Nicolas Cage wrote: »
    It's dishonest, but it shouldn't be considered rape. If anything, it trivialises rape.

    True.

    I'm not familiar with much of this subject but it already seems that rape covers a lot of offences, which vary in severity.

    If this becomes an offence not defined as rape then perhaps it's an opportunity the refine others and protect the seriousness of the aggressive offence of rape.


  • #65
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,232 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Grayditch wrote: »
    Actually, I just realised forcing people from a legal standpoint to reveal, might have some standing in two situations...

    One is Religion. Some churches won't allow it, despite how you define the person you slept with. It's also law in some countries, but that won't apply to here.

    Secondly and more importantly, you can't donate blood if you are a man and have ever slept with a man (as defined by the blood donor, I would presume this could include trans people, I personally wouldn't, but I don't know, maybe someone could clear this up). Taking away someone's ability to give blood and honestly, is wrong, I guess. Especially people with rare blood types who donate regularly. Something to think about. Maybe a change in the clinics is in order.

    It's extremely complex.

    Very different situations - the idea here is that a person must be forced to legally disclose their sex at birth and to be forced to legally out themselves to partners or potential partners or even one night stands.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • #66
    Grayditch
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,347 ✭✭✭✭Grayditch


    I mean if it came down to sueing someone, I guess they could on those grounds. But still not rape.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 14,242 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    Very different situations - the idea here is that a person must be forced to legally disclose their sex at birth and to be forced to legally out themselves to partners or potential partners or even one night stands.
    Except that no legal expert is actually putting their name to that notion. Nor has the CPS substantiated it.

    This is really more clickbait than anything else.


  • #68
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,232 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »
    Except that no legal expert is actually putting their name to that notion. Nor has the CPS substantiated it.

    This is really more clickbait than anything else.

    They have though

    http://whittlings.blogspot.ie/2013/04/chris-wilson-convicted-because-of-his.html

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • #69
    kowloon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 13,820 ✭✭✭✭kowloon


    _Whimsical_ wrote: »
    I agree, your genitalia doesn't define you as a person and I am happy we live in a country where you can love and marry anyone you chose. However that's the whole crux of this issue : choice! You are entitled to choose.

    Then why does everyone keep calling me a dick?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcYppAs6ZdI


  • #70
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 14,242 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    They have though

    http://whittlings.blogspot.ie/2013/04/chris-wilson-convicted-because-of-his.html
    No, none of the English cases have involved convictions for rape.

    There have been convictions for the lesser offences of indecent assault and of obtaining sexual intimacy by fraud, and only in circumstances where the other party to the act was actively deceived, i.e. by active lying.

    In circumstances where an individual simply omits to mention that they are transgender, there is no deception, and therefore consent is not vitiated. It certainly is not rape, and it is a great exaggeration to claim it is.

    Source: Expanding Liability for Sexual Fraud Through the Concept of 'Active Deception': A Flawed Approach – Journal of Criminal Law 80 (28)


  • #71
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,232 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »
    No, none of the English cases have involved convictions for rape.

    That's not what I said at all though.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Advertisement
  • #72
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 14,242 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    That's not what I said at all though.

    I said:
    No legal expert is actually putting their name to that notion. Nor has the CPS substantiated it.

    You replied: "They have though"

    That isn't true. No legal expert nor the CPS is substantiating the exaggerated claim made in the OP.


  • #73
    HardenendMan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 583 ✭✭✭HardenendMan


    Jesus...calling it a rape is ridiculous and a terrible label for the circumstances.

    It is fair to say that a lot of people would be angry at someone who didn't disclose gender history. I know I'd be pi55ed....but crying rape... OTT


  • #74
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,945 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    Yes

    For trans people they can be scared of disclosing (because of potential violence, social reactions etc) and scared of non disclosing (because of potential violence, social reactions etc) but forcing them to out themselves is putting them in danger.


    Nobody is forcing them to have sex though, are they? Why should they be entitled to make someone else suffer for their own sexual gratification?

    Sex without consent, informed consent, regardless of the gender or sex of the perpetrator, could absolutely leave them open to being charged with rape. If they don't want to leave themselves open to prosecution, then the best advice is to have consideration for the person they would want to have sex with, and allow them the right to informed consent without putting those people at risk for their own sexual gratification.

    Never ceases to amaze me why someone would want to have sex with someone whom they fear would put their personal safety at risk. In that scenario, the parties aren't just responsible for their own personal safety, but they are responsible for the personal safety of the people they would want to have sex with too!


  • #75
    stoplooklisten
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,492 ✭✭✭stoplooklisten


    It should be disclosed, there is a lot of talk about being true to themselves and being themselves, respecting personal boundaries, yet justifying deceit and decepetion of another person.


  • #76
    Jimmy Garlic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,331 ✭✭✭Jimmy Garlic


    HardenendMan wrote: »
    Jesus...calling it a rape is ridiculous and a terrible label for the circumstances.

    It is fair to say that a lot of people would be angry at someone who didn't disclose gender history. I know I'd be pi55ed....but crying rape... OTT

    It would be deception. It could cause a lot of psychological damage to some people who when they find out may be of the opinion that they had homosexual sex with someone against their will. Is it grounds to sue? absolutely. Rape? possibly considering that most people wouldn't consent to sex if they were aware that someone is transsexual.


  • #77
    noaddedsugar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 316 ✭✭noaddedsugar


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    Nobody is forcing them to have sex though, are they? Why should they be entitled to make someone else suffer for their own sexual gratification?

    Sex without consent, informed consent, regardless of the gender or sex of the perpetrator, could absolutely leave them open to being charged with rape. If they don't want to leave themselves open to prosecution, then the best advice is to have consideration for the person they would want to have sex with, and allow them the right to informed consent without putting those people at risk for their own sexual gratification.

    Never ceases to amaze me why someone would want to have sex with someone whom they fear would put their personal safety at risk. In that scenario, the parties aren't just responsible for their own personal safety, but they are responsible for the personal safety of the people they would want to have sex with too!

    This kind of sums up how I feel about it. It's very dramatic to talk about 'forcing' people to out themselves. They have a choice, be honest and show some respect for the person you want to be intimate with or abstain.


  • #78
    05eaftqbrs9jlh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,104 ✭✭✭05eaftqbrs9jlh


    noaddedsugar wrote:
    This kind of sums up how I feel about it. It's very dramatic to talk about 'forcing' people to out themselves. They have a choice, be honest and show some respect for the person you want to be intimate with or abstain.
    But if they're allowed to be ashamed about it and hide it, surely I have the right to be bothered by it and not want to have sex with them. Why is it so shameful if I should just accept it?


  • #79
    ceadaoin.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,716 ✭✭✭ceadaoin.


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    Yes

    For trans people they can be scared of disclosing (because of potential violence, social reactions etc) and scared of non disclosing (because of potential violence, social reactions etc) but forcing them to out themselves is putting them in danger.

    So the feelings of the partner don't come into the equation then?


  • #80
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,232 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    noaddedsugar wrote: »
    This kind of sums up how I feel about it. It's very dramatic to talk about 'forcing' people to out themselves. They have a choice, be honest and show some respect for the person you want to be intimate with or abstain.

    It's not at all dramatic. That is what this comes down to. Legally forcing someone to out themselves.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • #81
    MadDog76
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭MadDog76


    wakka12 wrote: »
    Why is that? What about our pasts exactly is morally wrong not to disclose to partners? If I was homeless in the past would it be morally wrong not to tell them? If Im an orphan would it be? If I have some kind of severe mental health issue that isn't immediately apparent is it wrong not to? You see theres nowhere you can draw the line. People should just disclose what information they desire to or feel comfortable sharing.

    If you're about to enter into an intimate relationship with someone and you have a "severe mental health issue" then yes, you should inform that person ........ obviously.

    Likewise, a man who "transitions" and now identifies/dresses as a woman should absolutely inform the (presumably straight) man he (she?) is about to have sex with .......... it's a violation otherwise.


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    ceadaoin.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,716 ✭✭✭ceadaoin.


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    It's not at all dramatic. That is what this comes down to. Legally forcing someone to out themselves.

    It's dramatic to say that every single trans person would be in danger as a result. The vast majority of people would not commit violence like that and those that are so inclined are more likely to do so if they find out after sexual contact has occurred. All the more reason to disclose beforehand surely and stay safe?


  • #83
    kowloon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 13,820 ✭✭✭✭kowloon


    Raging_Ninja wrote: »
    Well the CPS is willing to prosecute somebody for rape when there is CCTV evidence proving the contrary, so it wouldn't surprise me.

    What case is this?


  • #84
    MadDog76
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭MadDog76


    Galwayguy35 wrote: »
    I wouldn't be one bit happy if I had sex with someone I assumed was a woman and then was told otherwise, obviously I'm talking post op in this scenario.

    I don't see why I should feel like I'm wrong for thinking this.

    You're not wrong ..........


  • #85
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,232 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    Nobody is forcing them to have sex though, are they? Why should they be entitled to make someone else suffer for their own sexual gratification?
    Why are you assuming that everyone who has sex with a trans person suffers? and that they are deliberately made to suffer? - thats a very warped way of thinking about trans people
    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    Sex without consent, informed consent, regardless of the gender or sex of the perpetrator, could absolutely leave them open to being charged with rape. If they don't want to leave themselves open to prosecution, then the best advice is to have consideration for the person they would want to have sex with, and allow them the right to informed consent without putting those people at risk for their own sexual gratification.
    There is risk on both sides here. You seem determined that only one side is at risk though. I agree. Consideration and honesty but you know what because of the way that society often treats people so violently trans people are often afraid to disclose and afraid not to disclose. I have no idea what "informed disclosure" even is. Should women who are infertile be legally enforced to disclose this because their potential partner might want children.
    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    Never ceases to amaze me why someone would want to have sex with someone whom they fear would put their personal safety at risk. In that scenario, the parties aren't just responsible for their own personal safety, but they are responsible for the personal safety of the people they would want to have sex with too!
    Very reductive and dismissive attitude and completely oversimplifying things. What about a trans person who discloses and gets beaten up by family of the person.

    Ultimately this is a moral issue and there is no reason the law should be legally forcing trans people to out themselves.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • #86
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,232 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    ceadaoin. wrote: »
    It's dramatic to say that every single trans person would be in danger as a result. The vast majority of people would not commit violence like that and those that are so inclined are more likely to do so if they find out after sexual contact has occurred. All the more reason to disclose beforehand surely and stay safe?

    I never said that. But yes you are putting trans people in danger by legally forcing them to out themselves.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • #87
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 14,242 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    Legally forcing someone to out themselves.
    Nobody is being forced.

    the people who were prosecuted (for lesser offences) in the UK, positively lied about their backgrounds.

    It's legal to omit to tell someone you're a transexual. It does not affect consent.

    To actively lie about your past and is where liability has arisen, although not for rape.

    There is passive deception and active deception, and the former has no potential for criminal liability.

    So if you're a transexual, you can go about your life seducing allcomers and never mentioning your status. But if you start telling lies about being born with a nine-inch micky, you're potentially going to end up in trouble.


  • #88
    Jimmy Garlic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,331 ✭✭✭Jimmy Garlic


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    It's not at all dramatic. That is what this comes down to. Legally forcing someone to out themselves.


    Misrepresenting yourself in such a manner in order to obtain consent for sex is deception. Using force, fear or fraud to obtain sex is rape.


  • #89
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,232 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »
    Nobody is being forced.

    That's true but many posters here argue they should be.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • #90
    ceadaoin.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,716 ✭✭✭ceadaoin.


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    I never said that. But yes you are putting trans people in danger by legally forcing them to out themselves.

    But not disclosing beforehand and then the partner finding out afterwards puts them in more danger. Its ****ty but that's the reality.

    It's not like they'll have to take out a full page ad informing people of their trans status. Just tell any potential sexual partners. Some will be fine with it, some won't and will move on. Obviously they can't be forced to do so and in most cases it probably won't matter. Most people won't sue them or attack them, that's hyperbole.

    And yes if you are infertile then that absolutely is something you should be upfront about when starting a relationship, especially if you are at an age where a partner might want children/marriage


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,232 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    ceadaoin. wrote: »
    But not disclosing beforehand and then the partner finding out afterwards puts them in more danger. Its ****ty but that's the reality.

    Now you're the one making assumptions about all partners of trans people
    ceadaoin. wrote: »
    It's not like they'll have to take out a full page ad informing people of their trans status.
    It can be effectively like that for some. They out themselves and their partner outs them to the whole town/village
    ceadaoin. wrote: »
    And yes if you are infertile then that absolutely is something you should be upfront about when starting a relationship, especially if you are at an age where a partner might want children/marriage
    Well then why not force that to be legally disclosed upfront?

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement