I was re-reading a post of mine on the old laws which protected marriage.
Reading about seduction law again, I wondered what type of legal standard would be fair.(This would apply to both parties by the way, and would only cover verbal deception for clarity, so a woman, for example, lying about her N count too).
The feminists will bring in rape-by-fraud, I disagree with the use of the word ‘rape’ which I believe throws a lot of people off and disrespects real rape victims, but this isn’t a new concept as the manosphere appears to naively believe (honestly guys look it up, crack a spine once in a while). This concept of misrepresentation has existed for most of time, in seduction laws. That Patriarchy you all think you love protects its daughters (the most common direction of victim).
I was contemplating the legal form of deception, and how this crosses over into other criminal law.
The standards are/will become a reasonable Burden of Proof, although you wouldn’t know it from the pick-up artists’ lachrymose response. Where else are these standards upheld? Why did the feminists choose “by fraud”?
It comes down to misrepresentation, and I believe I have come up with a reasonable thought experiment, a test for unfair deception.
Apply it to a bank. I call it the Bank Standard.
If you said the same or similar things with the key terms switched out, to a bank manager, would it constitute fraud?
This avoids all the issues I can think of, that scared men complained about.
Fake compliment? Doesn’t matter.
Fake claim to a hobby? Nobody cares.
Fake laugh? Whatever.
Fake claim to favourites she shared? Nah.
Fake name? Fraud.
Fake age? Fraud.
Fake health report? (i.e. STDs, already illegal, including where you claim you’re clean from ignorance) Fraud.
I will marry you if you ___? (and they proceed to Welsh on it) Fraud. So much fraud. [marriage is ‘freely entered’, i.e. never conditional on either party]
Fake job or income figure? Fraud.
Fake religion? Fraud.
Fake hair colour? So?
Fake tan? Pfft.
Fake Rolex? Meh.
Note, none of the fraud conclusion examples are required of a man. That’s an excuse. You don’t need to give out certain information e.g. religion, income or age. You can refuse to answer. Most men don’t give fake information, because they have a little thing called a conscience. Or they know eventually it’ll be discovered and they don’t want to be a nomad for the sake of a few mediocre lays.
Why are the Fraud examples so bad? They materially affect judgement when provided in a way that the others do not. For example, a Muslim claiming to be Jewish to get a Christian girl into bed, and promising he’ll marry her. (I have seen them try to do this, it’s to explain the circumcision away). Fraud laws prevent people without a conscience preying on the innocent.
This would also, naturally, apply to women. It protects the truthful against abusive liars, preying on trust (marriage and relationships are ALL about the trust).
“I’m not a feminist” > These pictures suggest that was a lie.
“I’ve only slept with 5 men.” > Here is a list over ten.
“I’m 32.” > Closer to 42.
Let’s hold adults to adult standards.
If anybody can think of problems with this thought experiment, please tell me. We can tweak. We can rebuild.