No. Rape is not "I wouldn't have had sex with that person if I was better informed".
Where does that end? "He has an STD"? "He is unfaithful"? "He cheats at poker"? "He is a bad father"? "If I'd known that, I wouldn't have had sex, therefore it wasn't consensual".
>No. Rape is not "I wouldn't have had sex with that person if I was better informed".
I never said it was. I said that under some definitions that people use it is. Especially when it involves disclosing use of birth control (all cases I know of involve men lying, as that increases the biological risk of the woman, while the woman lying doesn't make the man more likely to get pregnant) and when it involves lying about having STDs.
I'm not saying which definition is right, only pointing out that some people (and I believe some legal systems) do use such definitions (and as such this influences other moral decisions they make).
I think that knowingly lying about STDs is morally wrong (and in some cases, for some STDs, it -is- a crime to do so).
"Disclosing use of birth control" All the cases you know of involve "men lying"? I'm having trouble wrapping my head around that. I just don't see 'putting or pretending to put on a condom and then sneaking it off unknowingly before intercourse' as being a common concern in sex/pregnancy. If I understand you correctly?
Either taking it off or lying about having a vasectomy. From my understanding, the legal problem is that in these cases the man exposed the woman to a vastly increased risk of pregnancy that she did not consent to. And such cases do appear to be rare and only in some countries. Far more common (though perhaps still rare) is meeting people who think that consent must be fully informed. I'm not saying I agree with such people, only that they exist and to them some actions are far more immoral because of the way they view things like consent.
I think that lying about having a vasectomy is seriously wrong, and probably (but I'm not a lawyer) you can get sued for this in some countries.
However, in which country is this considered rape? It's consensual sex between people of legal age, only that one of them is a lying, amoral bastard, and the act can lead to serious long-term consequences like an unwanted pregnancy. But rape? Seriously?
Also, while lying about safe sex is certainly a despicable and immoral act, it's still a private matter between two people. I don't see that it's morally right for a group of strangers to arbitrarily decide to publicly expose and shame unfaithful people, particularly since, in the context of this discussion, they cannot even know if anyone is lying about any vasectomies -- it's entirely possible the cheaters practice perfectly safe sex -- or has actually committed any act of infidelity!
>Also, while lying about safe sex is certainly a despicable and immoral act, it's still a private matter between two people.
Why is it automatically a private matter? Perhaps you think it should be a private matter, but someone else may think it shouldn't be, and thus the morality of something like cheating may be to them much worse than it is to you, thus morally justifying more extreme actions to be taken to expose cheating.
Also to note, something does not need to be legally considered a given crime for a person to morally consider it such. You may think them wrong, but their view is still consistent given their underlying values that you disagree with.
That a person may view this hack differently than you may not be the result of a different view on the morals of hacking or the right to privacy, but on something more nuanced like a difference in distinction between what counts as consent.
I stand corrected. I don't know why but the vasectomy route never crossed my mind. I can absolutely agree with your perspective there. And appreciate us having a civilized discussion about it.
What the... How can you conflate rape with infidelity? They are completely unrelated things! Rape is definitely a crime and an act of violence worthy of moral outrage. If you are forcing someone to have nonconsensual sex, that's terrible and totally unrelated to cheating. And you can have forced nonconsensual sex within a marriage. Seriously, rape is a completely different issue.
Exposing people to STDs is a problem which can also happen regardless of infidelity. Besides, are you saying if you practice safe sex while cheating then it's morally ok? Is it simply an issue of safe sex?
I'm not defending this position, so please don't pull out pitchforks or anything, just making an argument where this could be expanded into rape charges somewhere:
There are countries where having sex under false pretext is considered rape. For instance: saying that you are going to use a condom then removing it without the knowledge of your partner would be rape. One could argue that being in a marriage with the promise of monogamy, but failing to keep that promise, would mean that all instances of sex with your partner are then rape.
I repeat: I don't agree with this and I think that it belittles people that have actually experienced the horrors of forced rape. Perhaps there should be things protecting the victims of this situation, but calling it rape waters down the word and act. "Sexual Intercourse under False Pretenses" should have it's own set of laws and punishments around it if it should be punished, IMHO.
I hear what you're saying and I'm not pulling out any pitchforks, don't worry.
Having said that,
> For instance: saying that you are going to use a condom then removing it without the knowledge of your partner would be rape.
In which country is that rape? I think pretending to use a condom and secretly removing it is morally deplorable, and the mark of a terrible person, but it's insulting to actual rape victims to consider it rape.
> One could argue that being in a marriage with the promise of monogamy, but failing to keep that promise, would mean that all instances of sex with your partner are then rape
I can't think of any universe where this makes sense. It's an act of dishonesty, and a pretty serious one depending on your upbringing and personal convictions, but rape? Sorry, that sounds seriously fucked up to me. I wouldn't want to live in a place where being unfaithful is equated to being a rapist.
>There are countries where having sex under false pretext is considered rape.
Exactly. And I'm not saying that is right or wrong. That is why I said 'possibly', because it depends upon if you agree with such a definition or not and if the legal jurisdiction you live in operates with such a definition or not.
In exactly which countries is having sex with someone under the false pretense you're being faithful the same as rape? Note: not simply illegal or punishable by law, but actual rape. Otherwise I think this point is moot.
If there are such countries, I wouldn't want to live there.
PS: if we're talking about countries where adulterous women can be stoned to death, I think we can all agree that is horrible and the public shaming of Ashley Madison customers completely pales next to the crime against humanity that is mutilating or murdering people for being unfaithful or gay. I'd consider those countries completely beyond the scope of this discussion.
True, I remember reading about it in (extremely confusing) articles online. This is also a potentially politically motivated case, and I cannot find a concrete and convincing description of Swedish rape laws online.
Where does that end? "He has an STD"? "He is unfaithful"? "He cheats at poker"? "He is a bad father"? "If I'd known that, I wouldn't have had sex, therefore it wasn't consensual".
(edited for grammar)