Saturday 29 June 2013

Some Consistency, Ladies, Please!

Undercover officers had sex without disclosing what they were? OUTRAGE!!! Sue, demonstrate, lobby!

Transexual people might be considered sex offenders if they had sex without disclosing what they were? OUTRAGE!!! Sue, demonstrate, lobby!

C'mon, ladies! Which is it? I know we are supposed to be notoriously unreliable and whimsical, changing our opinions at the drop of a hat, but this is ridiculous, no?

As WoaR points out, the bunfight is only just starting...

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

The definition of rape is to have unlawful sexual intercourse by force, fear, or fraud. If the Police officers formed a false identity purely to have sex with women then it could very well be rape through fraud. If the women were held down and savagely taken without their consent then it could be rape through force. If they were blackmailed into sex then it could be rape through fear. If however, the false identity was formed to allow intelligence gathering on anarchic groups and organisations, with any sexual contact being the result of mutual attraction between two people, then I fail to see how anyone, apart from the Guardian and other single issue, tunnel-visioned, rags, could consider it rape. It is assumed that the women concerned were only too willing to drop their drawers and the fact that the stated employments of the men were not actually true should not be a contributory factor to an accusation of rape or sexual assault.
"Gerremoff, I'm a world famous millionaire pop star." "Of course, darling."
"Gerremoff, I'm a world famous, Nobel Prize winning rocket scientist." "Wotever you say, Doc."
"Gerremoff, I'm a smelly, bearded, job seekers allowance claiming anarchist." "Why didn't you say so, lover?"
"I say, Madam, would you mind divesting yourself of your nether garments as I'm an undercover Police officer." "You raping bastard!"
Penseivat

JuliaM said...

Spot on!

Joshua said...

Neither case is a form of rape; both are morally objectionable, but the police case more so, in my view, because state-sanctioned infiltration of people's private lives to that extent is rather sinister.

Still, seeing leftists tying themselves in knots trying to justify their conflicting positions is quite amusing.

Anonymous said...

Wot Penseivat sed....innit.

Anonymous said...

What gets my goat is hearing and seeing all these lawyers huffing and puffing in outrage on their ever growing list of clients behalf. Behind the indignant stance we all know it's all about the money.

JuliaM said...

"...seeing leftists tying themselves in knots trying to justify their conflicting positions is quite amusing."

*passes large bag of popcorn*

"Behind the indignant stance we all know it's all about the money."

And advancement of a toxic political agenda...