Re: Are transsexuals obligated to tell partners? GWEN ARAUJO case

Laurey wrote:
> "vivo per lei" <KA1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1123475981.554390.53460@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> > Challenge to Laurey:
> >
> > I challenge you to bring a precedent in which a person has been
> > convicted as a "rapist" for the SOLE reason of lying about something
> > the sex-partner considered "vital" to know before consenting.
>
> "1996 -- For at least the fifth time in News of the Weird's nine years, a
> girl or young woman has been convicted of dressing as a male for the purpose
> of improving her chances of dating another girl or young woman. A
> 17-year-old girl was convicted in Kingsport, Tenn., in September of three
> counts of sexual assault by fraud against another 17-year-old girl."
>
> http://www.newsoftheweird.com/cgi-bin/search/newsweird.cgi?query=Tennessee&num=1

Didn't I tell you guys that she was going to keep her rants about the
Tennessee cases, because she has failed and will continue to fail at
proving her false accusation against Gwen.


The poster cannot comprehend written English:


"...dressing as a male for *the purpose of improving her chances* of
dating another girl or young woman..."


Saying that Gwen was was dressing as female for the purpose of
improving her chances with guys is egomaniatic and retarded. Gwen was
dressing in a way in which she was expressing her true self and it is
not her fault that as a result guys found her more attractive. Whether
people think she was something false for being herself, doesn't changes
the fact. The cases this fool brings are akin to "Guy dresses in
female clothes for the purpose of raping women in a bathroom," for
example.


"What IF'S" don't change the fact that the SOBS were completely aware
that what they consented to was to a sexual act with Gwen out of their
own desire at that particular time. This guys obviously liked exotic,
masculine looking women. Or what others call "a pretty guy in drag."
Look at Gwen masculine facial appereance, look at her brow-bossing and
very square jaw, specially for a girl 19 years old without significant
exposure to Androgens
http://www.horizonsfoundation.org/news/releases/images/gwen.jpg.
They wanted Gwen's ass, they sought it and the victim provided it!
There is absolutely no way of knowing what would they have done if they
knew of Gwen's genitalia, and with all the male on male sex that goes
on today it is not beyond a reasonable doubt that they could have
consented to Gwen's sexual favors so long as nobody found out and their
"reputation" was at stake.


Since Laurey can't bring a single case that proves her nonsense, now
she's saying that it is "too rare," like if it is somehow an excuse for
her failure to provide a single example of a case in which a person was
prosecuted as a "rapist" for lying to a sexually responsible adult with
whom they had mutual sex with. Makes you wonder what success she would
have in a state like California, slandering Gwen in a courtroom.


She keeps making a fool of herself by proposing that for example: "If
you tell somebody you love them when you don't, and they have sex with
you because they thought you loved them: that is somehow "rape!"


The poster HAS FAILED and will continue to fail at proving her case,
because the law DOES NOT acknowledge the "You fooled me into being
attracted to you, reason I consented to sex" or "You fooled me into
thinking you were in love with me, reason I consented to sex"
arguments. That is childish and ridiculous.
This is a perfect illustration of what Laurey is doing now:
http://nanne.canalblog.com/images/984_tete_dans_le_cul2.jpg

I leave it at that.

.

Relevant Pages