I cheer this law being passed, due to the fact that every woman who lies about her sexual past, is unfaithful, or 'forgets' her pill is now instantly a rapist.
Oh wait, that won't ever happen, ever, because no DA would ever file charges.
"My past shouldn't matter! I chose you!" Is EXACTLY THE FUCKING SAME as "I have a seven figure job, and vacation in the Bahamas."
I don't know if it was just the shitty author's misinformation...
But according to the author this bill only says "HIS" or "HE". So basically a woman can lie but a man can't. (Unless male pronouns are used universally when it comes to drafting bills. I'm not sure, I'm not a lawyer.)
To all the guys angry about this. This is like being angry at children who only want chocolate for dinner. If you understand AF/BB you know that this is the legal manifestation of that. They want BB to be firmly identified as BB. If you are a full redpill man this law would never effect you anyway as you would be above lying to whores, steadily increasing your SMV, and wouldn't be dating desperate ham planets. Let the proles deal with this mess.
hope you dont mind, but this was very good point and I addressed it via twitter with the Democrat who introduced the bill, Troy Singleton. So what you ask? Well, he's actually replying to me! As is Titus Pierce, candidate for Gov. It would be interesting if he gets swarmed with redpill, questions as I borrowed yours. They can be reached @Troy4NJ7 and @pierceforgov
The bill defines it as "an act of sexual penetration to which a person has given consent because the actor has misrepresented the purpose of the act or has represented he is someone he is not."
Nope, only says "he" you shitlord, not she. Case dismissed!
It also says "act of penetration" and calls the male the "actor" and the other participant the "person." It's pretty damn clear this only applies to men.
We all know women are not active during sex. Men date women just to "use" them for sex, remember? As we all know, women don't engage in sex. It's merely something they give to men.
Also, after you get divorced raped, you can then have her charged because all the sex you had with her was under false pretenses, seeing as how you NEVER would have bothered had you known that she was hiding her true nature as being the kind that would turn on you.
Yeah, the lack of gender neutrality presents a constitutional issue. I doubt this will pass. Clearly it would open a giant can of worms. The law beast is happy to have more victims, but this would open up a giant can of worms:
Women who pretend to be rich; plenty of guys target rich girls;
Women who wear make-up, get cosmetic surgery to look younger;
Women who lie about STDs, marital status, children.
I don't know about your jurisdiction but technically my understanding is that it technically isn't, at least not in the UK.
Its a crime to cause grievous bodily harm via the mechanism of transmission of an STD (R v Dica) but you have to actually demonstrate harm. There's no specific duty to disclose, but you are liable if harm is done.
Unless someone else knows better, that's what i was taught when i did criminal law.
Read a story on relationships or some bullshit about a girl in the US who had a friend who was sleeping around with herpes so I think it could be different in each state.
Then immediately move to women who use all the tricks to make their social media photos look model tier when you see them in real life and they're 6/10's.
I work with a gross cave-troll of a girl who is 6' and just shy of 300 lbs. I found her on facebook, and thought - "woah what the fuck? I'd tap that if I was drunk."
Angles to hide the chins, closed mouth smile to hide the mish-mash teeth, tits pushed up, no body shots so you can't see her lunch lady arms. In any body shots, she's wearing drapey stuff to cover any rolls, and big scarves to cover the chins...conveniently splayed open at the chest to expose giant fat-tits.
I dont know about your legislative environment, but in the UK that wouldnt fly due to existing law.
One you are passed a certain point in the process you are considered to be your chosen gender from a legal perspective and ergo there will be no deception.
Fun tidbit, it also becomes a criminal offense to disclose that they are a transsexual. As if somehow the right to deceive ought to be protected in law, so long as its the right demographic doing the deception
I could go on and on. There's nothing women don't do when it comes to deception.
Looks are a big part of genetic / biological selection. Women have denied that ability and natural right to men.
What women are saying is that they want the sole right to deceive. It's okay for them, but not for you. They are asserting the primacy of their right to unfettered biological selection, and the relative non-importance of men's. Not that we needed any more proof that modern feminism is nothing more than a superiority movement / power-grab: But oh look, here's another example.
Let's hope this sword cuts both ways.
I'm looking forward to men bringing 1000's of rape-by-deception cases to trial. "Your honor, I thought she had pale skin, a big round ass, a nice straight nose, firm tits and no grey hair. I'd like our marriage annulled. And I'd like to charge her with rape by deception."
A month ago my friend hooked up with this girl who said she went to our college. He found out later that she actually went to the local community college. That's deception.
I hope this is the issue the first man files a "rape by deception" case about. "Your Honor, when I agreed to plow her relentlessly from behind, I did it under the assumption that there would be a nice pristine pale colored asshole facing up at me. Instead, Its now turned into this brown garble of a monstrosity and that just won't do! I've been decieved!"
I read about some guy who was suspicious that his kids looked nothing like him or his wife, and realised when he saw some old pictures of her, just how much plastic surgery she'd had. A woman looks at a man, she has a pretty good idea about what genes for appearance their potential kids will inherit. It's getting increasingly hard for man to do the same with a woman.
You nailed it. Feminism is nothing more than a means of maximizing the feminine imperative. Specifically, it's meant to provide low SMV women with access to high SMV males.
The problem here is that Feminism dictates that women are always the victim. You'll never see this used effectively to a man's benefit, because you never punish the victim.
It's funny because if women had a shred of logic in them, they'd push men to better themselves. That would increase the supply of attractive men, wherein they could fulfill the demand of low-value women.
But oh wait, they only want the TOP men, and if all men are attractive, then by a woman's sensibilities, NONE of them are attractive because they'd all be the same.
It's a paradox for women, and men ultimately pay the price.
As the saying goes, "Women want a winner; they don't want to win."
Most women do not care how a man goes about getting his successes, they only care that he is successful.
On top of that, because attraction can't be negotiated, they could never possibly be attracted to men that they have to teach how to be men. And quite frankly, it's a waste of time for women to build a man into a winner, if she can already find men who are winners to some extent.
Also, most women already have a fairly set laundry list of men they are attracted to and are available in their vicinity. If she openly declares that she is attracted to one of those guys, she will scare off most of her orbiters.
With all this in mind, it's very easy to see why the top tier men get their pick of the litter, and why betas continue to fall into a deeper decline.
"I would not have consented to sex with my wife I had known she had committed adultery with her tennis instructor the previous day. I can prove she lied because I asked her about it, and she denied it. Her friend, Jane corroborated her story that they had spent the day together, when in reality she was having sex with her instructor.
I feel great harm and like I have been raped."
I have to say, this concept gives me a justice boner.
If this is true, and DA's will sign off on it, then I'm all for it.
"I was caused great psychological harm, and felt like I was raped. I would not have consented to sex if I had known she lied about her promiscuous past."
In France, it is also illegal for a man to get a DNA paternity test, (i.e., feminists oppose paternity test and has called it an "anti-feminist application of science.")
France
Paternity testing is regulated by the state and only allowed in certain cases:
Without a court order the express consent of the person must be obtained in writing before the carrying out of the examination, after the person has been duly informed of its nature and its purpose.
With a court order (if consent could not be obtained)
This is partially due to the official desire to "preserve the peace" within French families, with the French government citing psychologists who state that fatherhood is determined by society, rather than biology. French men often circumvent these laws by sending samples of DNA to foreign laboratories, but risk prosecution if caught. The maximum penalty for carrying out secret paternity testing is one year in prison and a €15,000 fine.
It's a preservation of fatherhood, but you obviously don't understand this.
You have to go to court to test your paternity, which of course you will do if the woman wants you to pay child support for a kid that's not yours. The court will obviously order the test.
And on the other hand, others can't just come and say "hello, you're not the father after all" and ruin your relationship with your son or daughter, who should be the most important things to you at any point in life since you considered them yours.
What this law prevents are "peace of mind" tests, which can do lots of harm to a family. But again, suspicion already harms a lot so you'd prob end up facing court at some point and get the test.
The implications go well beyond all your TRP mindset "that kid's not mine I don't want to raise it or pay for it, I need the money to spin plates", they much more go toward cases where you raised kids as your own for years and don't want that bitch to take them away from you.
That's not just blue pill, that's full out feminist double-think. You can be gullible enough to believe fatherhood is socially determined, but how can you reconcile that with going after biological fathers for child support? The fact this is the consensus in the field of psychology is one of the many proofs it cannot possibly be categorized as a science.
The hamster spouts whatever is convenient at the time, until they're backed into a corner. At which point you'll get some variant of "Wow, stop being a shitlord"
The line alone tells you all you need to know about society. It's pathetic. Every first world country is taking the same path as Rome, and we all know what happened there. History literally repeats itself. Have fun scavenging while hiding from bandits because you thought you were invincible, i'll be sipping an iced tea on the beaches of Thailand.
There's a time when you need to slow the fuck down and stop pushing "progressivness and tolerance", everything was great at one point but the hamster keeps trying to be relevant, keeps trying to spin that fucking wheel at lightspeed and pushing more and more until everything crashes and burns and it will ofcourse be the men to rebuild because it was their fault
In the past three to four decades, psychology - or just social "science" in general - have been taken over by social justice warriors. They use their so-called "science" (which is not really) to push and enforce their social justice agendas.
have you seen the norwegian videos linked in the side bar? every time the reporter challenged one of the "scientists'" beliefs they answered "that is not interesting." because apparently that's how science works now. there's evidence that you're wrong? well, let's not look at that evidence because it's really not interesting.
Why would a man ever go near a slut? What's in it for him? It's like the law just wants to rape men to pieces. Aren't men supposed to have all the power? If that's the case why are men so massively disadvantaged legally? Doesn't make any sense.
Someone told you men have all the power? Some men do. But those at the top are certainly not looking out for those at the bottom. There is no male "hivemind" sure as their isnt a female one. Just people with power keeping themselves in power. Nothing drives female voters like making them feel like both victims and gods gift to humanity.
I doubt the law is actually enforced, given the lax attitude of the french to extramaritals. It sounds like some feelgood bullshit someone just put there.
This is because of the sheer amount of affairs. Think of it as being able to sow your wild oats truly if you are alpha and go after married girls, without having to pay for it.
Well there's a reason why I see Ashley Madison posters everywhere in the metro, people in France have so many affairs (le cinq à sept), society would explode with they did a mass paternity test.
I don't mind to be honest, I've got a father ready for when a plate gets pregnant and I'm not him.
Just read that article. The woman who wrote it is scum.
"The actor Jude Law recently found himself in just this position, and unhesitatingly and ungallantly demanded a DNA test."
Ungallant? I'd call it smart. If this woman will open her legs for one man, even a rich, handsome superstar like Jude Law, she might do it for anyone. If Law had taken it for granted that the kid was his without even checking, I'd call him a damn fool. Hell, a man of his wealth should be especially careful.
Using the word "Ungallant" here is a shaming tactic.
In this context, it's not so much being used to shame Jude Law personally as it is to further cement the idea that anyone demanding a paternity test should be ashamed of themselves.
Fuck ashamed. Better demand a paternity test from the get go than be like those poor bastards who discover decades down the line that their kids aren't actually theirs. Of course, bitches like the woman who wrote that article would prefer it if men simple accepted what was dropped on their laps. We always hear that women don't owe men sex. Well, I say men don't owe women a father figure for some other guy's brat.
I can't imagine that the French government would let you off the hook for that, when they specifically outlaw it in the first place.
It's kind of like those occasional cases where the guy records the consensual sex he had, and uses it as evidence against the rape charge, it only nets him into more trouble because he has a Y chromosome.
Can't find a decent link in english. Even wikipedia is incorrect
Without a court order the express consent of the person must be obtained in writing before the carrying out of the examination, after the person has been duly informed of its nature and its purpose
Even with the consent of both party you still need an injunction from a judge.
Here a few one in french:
From the justice department
If you want to contest paternity you just need to start a procedure. The judge will then allow the paternity test to be done. It's a lot more paperwork than most countries but if you want one you will get one.
This is partially due to the official desire to "preserve the peace" within French families, with the French government citing psychologists who state that fatherhood is determined by society, rather than biology
Edit: Checked a bit more the main reason come from a 1994 law about bioethics when people were afraid of what you could do with a dna test (eugenics and so on). By extension paternity test fall under that category. Retarded law from an old generation.
How does this even work? If you refuse to pay on grounds of not being the father, they take you to court. If the burden of proof is on the mother/state, it's ok then? If the burden of proof is on the alleged father, then... guilty because... feminism?
Setting aside how absolutely ridiculous that seems. What happens when anyone can claim someone is the father, and (as you say) the burden of (dis-)proof is on the alleged father, but he cannot request the paternity test.
There is a monty python sketch in there somewhere.
edit2: To answer my own question. It seems that a getting the paternity test without consent through court order would be fine. Isn't this how it works everywhere else in the world? You can't go around asking for paternity tests because you feel like it. Celebrities would then be harassed like hell. You have to have a pretty good reason. It's not even feminism then, just solely based on concern for the child.
That's what a lot of "FEMINAZISZZZZZ" hysterical people here miss.
Even though I posted that it is a BS law, after reading your post. I'd say this is more sensible.
Though I suppose a wealthy Frenchmen, for instance, probably can reasonably get a court order. Probably citing suspicion and says he'd never be able to act in a truly fatherly way unless he knows for certain. Depending on how the case is presented, her objection can add to the case.
In wolf hierarchy, the beta and omega wolves always challenge the alpha, but they always learn very quickly that it's like battling uphill as a fat guy. Putin is not a guy you want to challenge.
I was kidding, but in BP land, it's a pretty big deal. Society doesn't want a good president, they want a good looking president. Putin is a genius and I'm jealous he isn't our president. Manlet's are generally RP as shit from the discrimination and bullying in adolescence. That's why Putin is such an all around alpha male. The former prime minister of Singapore was RP as shit, too. Singapore was headed in a really good direction.
That's not even the logical equivalent of this. The male equivalent would be charging women for rape if you had sex with them and later found out they were: wearing make up, had on a push bra, had on high heels, had breast implants or any cosmetic surgery, lied about their age, etc.
You're right, but that isn't what I was going for. I was complaining that we can't get protection from something that would legitimately be a crime, but apparently a guy is now sexually assaulting a woman by living with his parents.
"On the one hand, we want law enforcement to have the law on their side in order to go after sexual predators who try to lure victims into sexual situations through deceit,"
Surely this fair and balanced justice system will also punish women who lie about their age or partner count, women who wear makeup, and women who have had plastic surgery, as those are all forms of sexual deceit.
..the bill would make "sexual assault by fraud" a punishable offense. The bill defines it as "an act of sexual penetration to which a person has given consent because the actor has misrepresented the purpose of the act or has represented he is someone he is not."
It won't pass a court of appeals or the Supreme Court. This kind of law violates the first amendment and gives too broad a definition to rape. It would be seen as a dangerous precedent to eventually make lying illegal.
California's about to pass a law where a woman can ask guys at her job how much money they make and, if she doesn't like the answer, the government can step in and force the employer to raise the woman's salary. I just heard the author of the bill, Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara), talking about it on the radio. Pay in California will no longer be at the discretion of the employer but instead it will be as ordered by the government.
"It would prohibit retaliation against employees who discuss or ask about pay at work. It would allow employees to challenge pay discrimination based on wages paid to other workers at different worksites of the same employer. For example, a female grocery store clerk who works at a store could challenge higher wages being made by male grocery store clerks at a store owned by the same employer just a few miles away. Employees could challenge pay discrimination based on wages paid to those doing substantially similar work. For example, a female housekeeper who cleans rooms in a hotel could challenge the higher wages being paid to a male janitor who cleans the lobby and banquet halls. It would require employers to show that differences in wages are due to factors other than gender, that the factor is job-related and reasonable, and that these factors - rather than discrimination - account for the difference in pay. For example, if a male chef is making more money than a female chef because he works weekend shifts, the employer would have to show that the weekend shifts are busier and require more work and account for the difference in wages. In addition, the employer would have to prove that the weekend shift position was open to all chefs, and that the employer hired the male chef because he was the most qualified or willing to work the shifts. In 2013, a woman in California working full-time made a median 84 cents to every dollar a man earned, according to the Equal Rights Advocates, co- sponsors of the bill. The gap is significantly greater for women of color. Latinas in California make only 44 cents for every dollar a white man makes, the most significant Latina wage gap in the nation. African-American women are only paid 64 cents on the dollar. As a group, women who are employed full-time in California lose approximately $33.6 billion every year due to the wage gap."
"Women will have sex if you show them you have a big home" is surely no less morally contemptible. I want a law that compensates me with huge stacks of $$$s when i discover she wasn't into my beautiful soul, but just wanted my money.
It's unfortunate that this law will not pass; it would be hilarious to every person who wears makeup.
"It's wrong every single time, and in a lot of cases illegal what they're doing. In some way, sometime, it's going to catch up." You got that right fatso, but youve got the wrong gender in mind - this sub is now over 100k with less men than ever getting married.
What about high heels, pushup bras, (the corset that this bitch obviously needs), colored contact lenses, makeup as a whole, or altering their hair color? Does all of that shit count as deception? I mean, fuck ... women should be required to carry photographic evidence of how big their mother is, so that we know what we're getting into.
"Whether it's as simple as . . . they slip off their wedding ring and then they engage in a relationship with someone, but the man or woman has no idea that the person they are with is married,"
Watch out, lovers who lie! Sexual assault by deception could become a criminal offense
Jesus Fucking Christ. Has this place become the National Enquirer? There is absolutely 0 chance that such a law could ever get passed. This is just the media fearmongering and you fucking idiots believed it.
As someone from New Jersey, such a law is not outside the scope of possibility for this state.
Hell, if the state could tax us every time we wiped our asses they would. The only thing more repulsive and infuriating than the smug face on the fat bitch pictured in that article, is the State that is empowering her.
Seriously. Fuck the state of NJ. I can't wait to get out of this shit hole.
Everything feminists have pushed for or ever will push for is in service of hypergamy. Every single thing. It's not about "equality", its about female supremacy.
"...back when she was falling madly in love, Lewis, a labor and delivery nurse, knew nothing about Jordan's nefarious ways. When she was handing over $5,000 for a phony security clearance, she had no clue that she was just Jordan's
Woman Moron scorned.
This whole narrative of withdrawing consent after the fact makes my skill crawl.
I will start yelling rape whenever I've discovered a woman was giving the wrong impression of her self now. And then I will earn money from it. Because I was raped. And then I can relax and work less because I have free money. Because I was raped. Raped I tell you.
I have bad flatulence. If I hold it in when I meet a woman and she goes home with me, I denied her the choice whether or not to consent to sex with a farter.
For the good of women everywhere, I must fart everywhere I go. Constantly. It's the law.
The beauty of this law is that women who lie about anything will be charged with rape as well. The author clearly dodges that idea by only pointing out examples of men lying. Its a one sided article.
We can only wish but no; the wording of the law is very gender specific in male perps and female victims. It might stand a better chance before the SCOTUS if it wasn't gender specific but lets be real; pigs will fly and hell will freeze over before a woman is charged with rape for telling a man a lie before he fucks her. Female sexual strategy is all about lies. Makeup, a lie. Plastic surgery? lie. Push up bras? Lie. Hairdye and hair styling including extensions? Lie. Every woman I have ever fucked or paid close enough attention to lies as a primary sexual strategy. They lie about who they are, what they want and what they will/won't do as a basis to try and lock down men, period. They lie about partner count, education, work history, desire to have kids, being on the pill, not wanting more children, it is all a giant lie. Basically this law is making it illegal for men to adopt elements of female sexual strategy and use them to their own advantage as fair play.
No actually in the wording of the bill (in the first few paragraphs of the article), the one committing fraud is only referred to as "he/him" and the "penetrator", implying that this law will be solely used to go after men to continue to fill up privately operated prisons.
You can use this to deter women who lie to you too.
Also, another angle: the degenerates who have so little SMV that they have to lie are effectively eliminated in the competition.
Unless you're a PUA type whose SMV entirely depends on the words he says and the presence his words creates (without any backing), then this law shouldn't worry you. Despite the hysteria over it.
Obviously not promising anything (which has the effect on you being mysterious) will help you too; law is about word play.
Another thing: lie about your earnings; say you earn less. DAs will be hard pressed to sell to the jury that a woman has a right to sue a man for rape because he said he earns less than she expected him to earn.
Of course some of you here have a confirmation bias as far as pussy pass goes. (Not to say it doesn't exist.) So for those lot, this message will go unheard.
What fascinates me about this is how blatantly it underscores the transactional nature of relationships wired into people. Once you get past the spinning wheels what she says essentially amounts to this: "I made a trade, and the product was not as advertised".
Remember: Always know what you're offering. Know your price. And know when to walk away from a deal that's bound to go sour.
what fascinates me is that 'feminism', which is supposed to be the banner all this exists under, is all about 'strong independent woman'.
How does it reflect on your personal strength or independence when you need a LAW to discourage people from lying to you because you were too stupid to figure it out yourself? or do your own 'independent' analysis?
i doubt it will ever pass, but hopefully it does. another brilliant law that the N.england area could use to add to it's collection
I had an ex-girlfriend threaten to sue me over the housework she did while we were dating, and her fucking me. She sad that I owed her a dollar amount for the year that I fucked her while she lived with me rent free ... She never went through with it, but I was fucking champing at the goddamn bit to hear her say that shit out loud to a judge.
"And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat."
Genesis 3:6
King James Version
Article summary: land whale gets swindled online by a guy who tells her he is a british secret agent, she believes it and gives him money. She then gets on dateline and NJ assemblyman to introduce that can be used against practically any man that has ever had sex with a woman.
Seriously click the link and look at her. She thinks a British secret service agent fell in love with her, and now you could go to jail because of it.
Don't forget she gave him $5k for "security clearance". This is simply a case of natural selection. She is too stupid to reproduce, system working as intended.
Well, I think theres an easy method we could use to make the job a lot better and easier for everyone of course.
Maybe, we could be assigned, oh, I dont know, how about say a star shape with a colour that would be sewn to all our clothes? or maybe even a semi-permanent tattoo?
That way someone could easily determine what we "really" are by a, of course, impartial tribunal with annual reviews... that could asses us guys and weed out those pesky liars and bullshitters...
Black Star: Know liar as to his monthly income or actually rented a car for a date.
Red Star: Usually a low wage employee with only a high school education.
Gold Star: High Income, has a great shoe collection, takes holidays outside of the country and has assets over 200,000
Blue Star: Will pay for all dates, has a mid-size car and some assets.
There surely is a good list of colours and stars that could help defenceless women sort out who is who. We need to make life safe, safe and easy for everyone... everyone being those who are not male, because, hey, thats what society is all about...
High heels. Makeup. Push up bras. Spanx. Women are in disguise practically all day every day to exaggerate physical assets. But if a guy exaggerated his income? That's dishonest.
Lewis. The 37-year-old suburban-mom-turned-activist is the inspiration behind a bill in New Jersey that would make sexual assault by deception a crime.
She is Lucky that she ia having sex... So why everytime I see this kind of news it's a fat SJW with a lot of free time ?
The whole article assumes a man lying to or duping a woman. Surely the same happens when men are the dupee and women the duper. Only a guess but I'd expect the statistics to be pretty even male/female, but the the context would be different. That is, a woman probably wouldn't show her potential victim a photo of her house. I'll leave it to you to imagine analogous situations where the man was duped. I'm upvoting the OP so this gets needed attention, not because I agree with the proposed legislation.
Only a guess but I'd expect the statistics to be pretty even male/female
Ah... no. You shower and head out. She puts on incredible amounts of makeup, tightening things, enhancing things, firming things. You don't lie about anything. She always lies about her n-count.
Women deceive much more than men when it comes to dating. Hell they even managed to collectively keep AF/BB a secret for centuries. They promise the earth and deliver nothing.
The writers of this law have been very careful to allow all this to continue.
They don't have freedom of speech in France. Shit, in most of Europe you can still go to jail for denying the holocaust. It's still pretty fucked up that there are places on this planet where saying the wrong thing can get you jailed. Regardless of its validity, you should be allowed to say literally anything unless you are creating a direct danger ala screaming "fire" in a crowded theater - anything less is an authoritarian nightmare.
So it's going to be illegal to wear make-up, push-up bras, high heels, corsets, dye your hair, get a boob job, put on perfume, visit a tanning salon, etc., etc., etc.
He told her was a secret agent man and she totally bought it! And gave him $5000 for a "security clearance".
Pretty sure I know what went on there. He was half her weight, therefore the fat-goggles went on and she was ready to believe anything to get some non-neckbeard D.
Lesson learned: Be attractive. Don't be unattractive. Otherwise terrible things will happen to you in the sexual marketplace.
It's kind of shocking how readily the article admits that women will sleep with somebody for material gain.
Oh I lied about having a beach home? Well, you slept with me to get to my beach home, so who's more in the wrong here? And on that note, how many beach homes do you own?
A man that uses "tricks" to make a woman believe his SMV is higher that it actually is, is no different from a woman using "tricks" to have men believe her SMV is higher than it actually is.
Women judge SMV based on social status but men base it on the looks.
So a man telling a woman that he earns more than he actually does, is like a woman using push bra, lipstick, shaving her legs and armpits or having fake breasts. It is also deception.
But if rape is sex without the victim's consent - as many courts, state statutes and scholars say it is - then sex-by-deception ought to be rape, because as courts have held for a hundred years in virtually every area of the law outside of rape, a consent procured through deception is no consent at all."
Wait a second. So you mean that if you consent to marrying a woman (by saying "yes I do") only because she fraudulently made you believe that she had been a decent girl in the past, that marriage is null and void?
We already have an awful set of laws on the book. The reason nobody reacts is that these laws are applied very sparingly. Blue pill men, even when informed about how easily they can get fucked by the courts will still burry their heads in the sand, thinking "this would never happen to me!"
I think you're right, this probably wouldn't be the catalyst to pop the bubble, and I certainly don't think it's my job to help Blue Pill men.
Nobody helped me. I had to want to change.
And I'm not a sadist that likes to see people hurting either, but I do love being proven right, and this law would certainly do that.
I also realize it's centered more towards MGTOW, rather than TRP, and as I said I don't really think it's a good idea, but sometimes the only way for people to learn is to be beaten over the side of the head with a truth stick.
Next law: men are required to disclose a copy of their pay stubs, bank records and last years tax returns before engaging in sex.
But don't get the wrong idea: women never get with men for their money... They just want what's best for the children. They need a good provider, you see.
I've looked, but I can't find it. I read a great essay online a few months ago, but I lost it now.
It was about some of the changes being considered at universities in the USA, particularly California. Some want the college's definition of sexual assault changed (which, to me, sounds like a pre-cursor to changing the legal definition). It's a weaker standard, so you could get expelled or thrown off campus, but not arrested (yet).
The most alarming change re-defines "consent" to include a mutual agreement on WHY two people have sex. The example given: suppose a man just broke-up with a LTR and wants to go out for a casual fling, or a ONS. He goes to party and meets a woman. They end up in bed, but she thinks it's the possible start of a LTR for herself. Neither is drunk, under duress, underage, and both are voluntarily having sex under the stricter "Yes Means Yes" criteria. Despite all this, IT COULD STILL BE SEXUAL ASSAULT under the new definition of consent.
I'm not sure whether this law will pass or not, but it doesn't even hold up to basic scrutiny. How can people hear about this law and possibly think it's a good idea?
The reason shit like this might pass is because mangina white knights think, "Oh, I would never lie to m'lady. Surely this will protect all the fair maidens from those assholes who just want sex. I'm a nice guy, so this will never affect me."
But it's always these same bluepill faggots that get fucked over by these types of laws. These men are weak and women can tell, so they go after these men with the very laws that they supported. Feminists throw white knights under the bus all the time. All these manginas doing 'chore play' spouting "happy wife, happy life" are the types of people who get divorce raped or live in sexless marriages.
Meanwhile she'll go fuck Chad in the back of his 'Porsche' that turns out to be Pontiac Sunfire and she won't give a shit.
well I think it's not so much about what they say it is, but rather another method to give women less accountabilty sure I took part in a gangbang honey but they said they are music producers
This would never actually be a law. This is just ridiculous. This has to be a parody of a proposal that SJWs would put forward, not an actual thing. If this does gain traction and becomes a law, I'm leaving the country--literally and actually leaving the country. This can't be real.
I can't help but notice the obvious. It is very clear in the language that this is about men lying to women for sex, but doesn't cover women lying to men for sex, money, marriage, children, rape, status, work, etc.
This article is over the top and stupid. No one actually subscribes to the idea she is proposing. I didn't see a single comment supporting this from both men or women. Just ignore.
It won't pass and if it does it won't be enforceable.
For one thing it will work both ways. Like another poster said if they lie about being on the pill then that would be rape because that is lying to get sex.
And they have to prove you lied. At that point it's her word against yours. She says you claimed to make X amount of money. You say you never even had such a conversation.
That said, if you are doing it right you aren't giving her any specifics about yourself anyway. By the time she knows anything about you she's probably already slept with you.
The only guys this will affect are BP dudes who are lying to get sex.
If a RP shows up in court looking sharp with muscles and good looks and oozing confidence and a frumpy bitch like the one pictured on this article shows up who do you think they will believe?
They'll think she jumped your bone and when you didn't want to take it further she started making shit up.
The only thing this law will do is cost the government even more money and put more men in prison thus reducing tax revenue.
How does anyone get convicted of any of this shit? Is someone making written statements somewhere? Or is it just he said she said?
Pretty soon dating will be like talking to the police. Plead the 5th (yes I know this example wasnt in the US).
Or better yet, make your money without women and then just visit se asia, brazil, eastern europe for professionals. This kind of bs is getting scarry and old.
It's like women are so helpless they can't be allowed to live. If a woman feeeeeelss wronged in any way, big daddy gov't comes in to save the fucking day. Fucking nanny state if I've ever seen it.
Holy shit... it's classified as sexual assault even though the bitch was willing and consensual at the time? Lol. I can see that law working out well for everyone. Hate to say it 'Murica but that shit is a fucking joke.
"I couldn't have committed these crimes because I am gender fluid and was a man when it happened, today I am a female victim of male headmate patriarchy!"
So, if I girl "requires" me to take her to dinner before I ever think about getting into her pants, would that qualify. She's scamming me out of a Chipotle burrito, just so I could even have to privilege to initiate.
The bill defines it as "an act of sexual penetration to which a person has given consent because the actor has misrepresented the purpose of the act or has represented he is someone he is not."
I like how "he" is built right into the language of the law. Classy.
"The purpose of this act is to spooge on your tits and I am indeed Superman!" RAPE!!
Considering that no official ruling has been made regarding the definition of who is or isn't Jewish (as no party has had a large enough political influence to pass such a law), and that over half the population of Israel is Arab-Jews belonging to various Sephardi sects, I would love to see what your source is. Not calling bullshit or anything, just want to read for myself.
If this shit ever exists in the US I am going to pack things up and go live a cold solo life in the wilderness of Alaska. I'd rather get fucked by a bear than by uncle sam.
You should be doing that anyway. Camping in Alaska makes for a great story to tell and it teaches you a lot of things relevant to the subject of this sub.
I actually did do that, for 2 weeks, and it was great. Would go back no questions asked. I just wish there were more women there (1:15 ratio it felt like) and that the ones there weren't all 4s...
I just wish there were more women there (1:15 ratio it felt like) and that the ones there weren't all 4s...
I wonder. Would taking one's would-be LTR camping to Alaska be a good way for figuring out their fitness for a true LTR? Or any other situation where one's forced to always keep on their toes and the margin of error is slim.
Seems like a potential method for figuring out a girl's propensity for bullshit, I wager.
So, this would acknowledge that women seek wealth as a sexual strategy.
I suggest that padded bras, all forms of cosmetic surgery, all forms of hair augmentation, including coloring, extensions, etc., makeup, telling an age younger than her actual one, any form of "tummy" control, and pretty much anything a woman does that presents herself as better looking than without these accessories, would all be forms of rape.
divorcedbp 8y ago
I cheer this law being passed, due to the fact that every woman who lies about her sexual past, is unfaithful, or 'forgets' her pill is now instantly a rapist.
Oh wait, that won't ever happen, ever, because no DA would ever file charges.
"My past shouldn't matter! I chose you!" Is EXACTLY THE FUCKING SAME as "I have a seven figure job, and vacation in the Bahamas."
BannedBandit 8y ago
Stop gilding. The money is going to the cultural marxism fundraiser.
MajorMid 8y ago
I don't know if it was just the shitty author's misinformation...
But according to the author this bill only says "HIS" or "HE". So basically a woman can lie but a man can't. (Unless male pronouns are used universally when it comes to drafting bills. I'm not sure, I'm not a lawyer.)
A_DERPING_ULTRALISK 8y ago
Too bad the law says an act of penetration must occur by the perpetrating party.
This law is literally written to be exclusively applicable to men only.
OneRedYear 8y ago
To all the guys angry about this. This is like being angry at children who only want chocolate for dinner. If you understand AF/BB you know that this is the legal manifestation of that. They want BB to be firmly identified as BB. If you are a full redpill man this law would never effect you anyway as you would be above lying to whores, steadily increasing your SMV, and wouldn't be dating desperate ham planets. Let the proles deal with this mess.
Moneyley 8y ago
hope you dont mind, but this was very good point and I addressed it via twitter with the Democrat who introduced the bill, Troy Singleton. So what you ask? Well, he's actually replying to me! As is Titus Pierce, candidate for Gov. It would be interesting if he gets swarmed with redpill, questions as I borrowed yours. They can be reached @Troy4NJ7 and @pierceforgov
Dark-Ulfberht 8y ago
More signs of the impending collapse. I love it.
I can't wait to be a warlord.
RedBigMan 8y ago
You're not lying... $20,000.00 is still technically a 7 figure job, you just dont tell her which figures fall on which side of the decimal point.
[deleted]
moose_war 8y ago
Nope, only says "he" you shitlord, not she. Case dismissed!
Triglycerine 8y ago
Perpetrator and penetrator sound awfully similar. Coincidence? I THINK NOT. /s
ioncloud9 8y ago
It also says "act of penetration" and calls the male the "actor" and the other participant the "person." It's pretty damn clear this only applies to men.
moose_war 8y ago
We all know women are not active during sex. Men date women just to "use" them for sex, remember? As we all know, women don't engage in sex. It's merely something they give to men.
SamFisherSpy 8y ago
Pay attention guys this needs to be signal boosted BIG TIME. Who's responsible for this law?
anonlymouse 8y ago
Also makes it clear feminists don't consider men to be people.
[deleted]
Grompher 8y ago
The one time that he/she is not used?
[deleted] 8y ago
[--removed--]
moose_war 8y ago
le seigneur de la merde! J'accuse!!!
[deleted]
monsieurhire2 8y ago
Also, after you get divorced raped, you can then have her charged because all the sex you had with her was under false pretenses, seeing as how you NEVER would have bothered had you known that she was hiding her true nature as being the kind that would turn on you.
Yeah, the lack of gender neutrality presents a constitutional issue. I doubt this will pass. Clearly it would open a giant can of worms. The law beast is happy to have more victims, but this would open up a giant can of worms:
What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
rebuildingMyself 8y ago
I think it's already a crime to lie about STDs
Transmigratory 8y ago
If so, with this legislation, people can be sued for two crimes for the price of one.
Shaft-of-Patriarchy 8y ago
I don't know about your jurisdiction but technically my understanding is that it technically isn't, at least not in the UK.
Its a crime to cause grievous bodily harm via the mechanism of transmission of an STD (R v Dica) but you have to actually demonstrate harm. There's no specific duty to disclose, but you are liable if harm is done.
Unless someone else knows better, that's what i was taught when i did criminal law.
THCanadian17 8y ago
Read a story on relationships or some bullshit about a girl in the US who had a friend who was sleeping around with herpes so I think it could be different in each state.
[deleted] 8y ago
Fuck that, lets start with women who lie about their age and weight.
[deleted]
[deleted]
foldpak111 8y ago
Then immediately move to women who use all the tricks to make their social media photos look model tier when you see them in real life and they're 6/10's.
TehFuggernaut 8y ago
I work with a gross cave-troll of a girl who is 6' and just shy of 300 lbs. I found her on facebook, and thought - "woah what the fuck? I'd tap that if I was drunk."
Angles to hide the chins, closed mouth smile to hide the mish-mash teeth, tits pushed up, no body shots so you can't see her lunch lady arms. In any body shots, she's wearing drapey stuff to cover any rolls, and big scarves to cover the chins...conveniently splayed open at the chest to expose giant fat-tits.
....fuckin' people man.
[deleted] 8y ago
[deleted]
davemee 8y ago
Are you really deceived by a woman wearing high-heels? Really?
roteroktober 8y ago
Makes her look taller and her butt look better than it actually is
[deleted]
Doctor_Mayhem 8y ago
As Matt Forney pointed out, trannies could be prosecuted under this shit.
aazav 8y ago
Any tranny that represents themselves as the gender they were not born as should be prosecuted for identity fraud.
They are representing themselves as the gender they aren't.
Surgery, hormones, playing dress up and pretending does not make you the gender you didn't come out of the box as.
Edit: words
Shaft-of-Patriarchy 8y ago
I dont know about your legislative environment, but in the UK that wouldnt fly due to existing law.
One you are passed a certain point in the process you are considered to be your chosen gender from a legal perspective and ergo there will be no deception.
Fun tidbit, it also becomes a criminal offense to disclose that they are a transsexual. As if somehow the right to deceive ought to be protected in law, so long as its the right demographic doing the deception
recon_johnny 8y ago
Gender is a social construct, man. Don't you know shit anymore?
gg_s 8y ago
You forgot to tell him to educate himself.
PotatosAreDelicious 8y ago
Well not really, you can get your gender on your ID changed.
Obviously this is something that should be talked about prior to pursuing someone though.
getomc 8y ago
Isn't that kind of like asking someone if they're a cop before selling them drugs?
[deleted]
[deleted]
ioncloud9 8y ago
I'll take every dating site ever for $1000 Alex.
BlackHeart89 8y ago
Body type: Curvy
Reality: 5'0 230 lbs
Obio1 8y ago
Makeup. Padded bras. Botox. Dyed hair. Eyebrow tattoos. Boob jobs. Injected fillers. High heel shoes. Elastic girdles. Bleached assholes. Chemical peels. False nails. Facelifts. Fake name-brand handbags. Padded underwear. Push-up bras. Eyelid surgery. Liposuction. Colored contact lenses. Silicon injections for larger buttocks. False eyelashes. Tummy tucks. Skin whitening. Labial surgery. Fake/costume jewelry. Hair extensions. Nose jobs.
I could go on and on. There's nothing women don't do when it comes to deception.
Looks are a big part of genetic / biological selection. Women have denied that ability and natural right to men.
What women are saying is that they want the sole right to deceive. It's okay for them, but not for you. They are asserting the primacy of their right to unfettered biological selection, and the relative non-importance of men's. Not that we needed any more proof that modern feminism is nothing more than a superiority movement / power-grab: But oh look, here's another example.
Let's hope this sword cuts both ways.
I'm looking forward to men bringing 1000's of rape-by-deception cases to trial. "Your honor, I thought she had pale skin, a big round ass, a nice straight nose, firm tits and no grey hair. I'd like our marriage annulled. And I'd like to charge her with rape by deception."
Halfjor 8y ago
A month ago my friend hooked up with this girl who said she went to our college. He found out later that she actually went to the local community college. That's deception.
I guess he's a brave rape survivor now.
What a fucking joke of a law.
jamesford32 8y ago
You're right, as said so many times before feminism is not about equality but a womans sexual strategy. A chad for everyone indeed haha
ZackCross 8y ago
Well said.
I think every man in the world could sue it this were to pass, but if course nobody would care for the men who were cheated
Jaereth 8y ago
I hope this is the issue the first man files a "rape by deception" case about. "Your Honor, when I agreed to plow her relentlessly from behind, I did it under the assumption that there would be a nice pristine pale colored asshole facing up at me. Instead, Its now turned into this brown garble of a monstrosity and that just won't do! I've been decieved!"
Ehcadroj 8y ago
All of that effort expended in the gym (like men have to) and they wouldn't require all of that deception.
choicemeats 8y ago
Heck, heavy squats alone would probably fix half those things.
[deleted]
jmg83 8y ago
I read about some guy who was suspicious that his kids looked nothing like him or his wife, and realised when he saw some old pictures of her, just how much plastic surgery she'd had. A woman looks at a man, she has a pretty good idea about what genes for appearance their potential kids will inherit. It's getting increasingly hard for man to do the same with a woman.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Cyralea 8y ago
You nailed it. Feminism is nothing more than a means of maximizing the feminine imperative. Specifically, it's meant to provide low SMV women with access to high SMV males.
The problem here is that Feminism dictates that women are always the victim. You'll never see this used effectively to a man's benefit, because you never punish the victim.
Invalidity 8y ago
It's funny because if women had a shred of logic in them, they'd push men to better themselves. That would increase the supply of attractive men, wherein they could fulfill the demand of low-value women.
But oh wait, they only want the TOP men, and if all men are attractive, then by a woman's sensibilities, NONE of them are attractive because they'd all be the same.
It's a paradox for women, and men ultimately pay the price.
jcrpta 8y ago
Ah, but that's not quite what they want, is it?
They want a man who's prepared to better himself - but only on condition he's doing it "for himself" (whatever that means).
If he's doing it to get laid, that's not on!
Invalidity 8y ago
As the saying goes, "Women want a winner; they don't want to win."
Most women do not care how a man goes about getting his successes, they only care that he is successful.
On top of that, because attraction can't be negotiated, they could never possibly be attracted to men that they have to teach how to be men. And quite frankly, it's a waste of time for women to build a man into a winner, if she can already find men who are winners to some extent.
Also, most women already have a fairly set laundry list of men they are attracted to and are available in their vicinity. If she openly declares that she is attracted to one of those guys, she will scare off most of her orbiters.
With all this in mind, it's very easy to see why the top tier men get their pick of the litter, and why betas continue to fall into a deeper decline.
Moneyley 8y ago
He just replied to your question via my tweet! "if as the bill states, the actions cause severe psychological harm, then yes."
divorcedbp 8y ago
"I would not have consented to sex with my wife I had known she had committed adultery with her tennis instructor the previous day. I can prove she lied because I asked her about it, and she denied it. Her friend, Jane corroborated her story that they had spent the day together, when in reality she was having sex with her instructor.
I feel great harm and like I have been raped."
I have to say, this concept gives me a justice boner.
divorcedbp 8y ago
If this is true, and DA's will sign off on it, then I'm all for it.
"I was caused great psychological harm, and felt like I was raped. I would not have consented to sex if I had known she lied about her promiscuous past."
Moneyley 8y ago
https://twitter.com/Troy4NJ7/status/603636987619311617
ktchong 8y ago
In France, it is also illegal for a man to get a DNA paternity test, (i.e., feminists oppose paternity test and has called it an "anti-feminist application of science.")
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_testing#France
Thanks goodness I do not live in that shit hole of a feminized country.
Transmigratory 8y ago
Quite bullshit to be honest... "antifeminist", dudes have a right to know if they're the father or not.
Triglycerine 8y ago
Medieval understanding of truth, much? This seems like a half-step away from decrying a scientific theory as heresy.
[deleted]
u-r-silly 8y ago
It's a preservation of fatherhood, but you obviously don't understand this.
You have to go to court to test your paternity, which of course you will do if the woman wants you to pay child support for a kid that's not yours. The court will obviously order the test.
And on the other hand, others can't just come and say "hello, you're not the father after all" and ruin your relationship with your son or daughter, who should be the most important things to you at any point in life since you considered them yours.
What this law prevents are "peace of mind" tests, which can do lots of harm to a family. But again, suspicion already harms a lot so you'd prob end up facing court at some point and get the test.
The implications go well beyond all your TRP mindset "that kid's not mine I don't want to raise it or pay for it, I need the money to spin plates", they much more go toward cases where you raised kids as your own for years and don't want that bitch to take them away from you.
aguy01 8y ago
And people continue swallowing that blue pill...
netgrey 8y ago
Try swapping a baby in the hospital and see if mothers are cool with society determining it and not biology.
roteroktober 8y ago
That happened not long ago and the hospital had to pay compensation to the families. It's openly hypocritical.
[deleted]
pilledwillingly 8y ago
So basically a woman can run up to you on the street, throw baby at you and go "Tag, you're it!"
zyk0s 8y ago
That's not just blue pill, that's full out feminist double-think. You can be gullible enough to believe fatherhood is socially determined, but how can you reconcile that with going after biological fathers for child support? The fact this is the consensus in the field of psychology is one of the many proofs it cannot possibly be categorized as a science.
Cyralea 8y ago
The hamster spouts whatever is convenient at the time, until they're backed into a corner. At which point you'll get some variant of "Wow, stop being a shitlord"
foldpak111 8y ago
The line alone tells you all you need to know about society. It's pathetic. Every first world country is taking the same path as Rome, and we all know what happened there. History literally repeats itself. Have fun scavenging while hiding from bandits because you thought you were invincible, i'll be sipping an iced tea on the beaches of Thailand.
calzenn 8y ago
Koh Chang is good for that :)
[deleted] 8y ago
There's a time when you need to slow the fuck down and stop pushing "progressivness and tolerance", everything was great at one point but the hamster keeps trying to be relevant, keeps trying to spin that fucking wheel at lightspeed and pushing more and more until everything crashes and burns and it will ofcourse be the men to rebuild because it was their fault
ktchong 8y ago
In the past three to four decades, psychology - or just social "science" in general - have been taken over by social justice warriors. They use their so-called "science" (which is not really) to push and enforce their social justice agendas.
frozen_strawberry 8y ago
have you seen the norwegian videos linked in the side bar? every time the reporter challenged one of the "scientists'" beliefs they answered "that is not interesting." because apparently that's how science works now. there's evidence that you're wrong? well, let's not look at that evidence because it's really not interesting.
[deleted] 8y ago
[deleted]
[deleted] 8y ago
Why would a man ever go near a slut? What's in it for him? It's like the law just wants to rape men to pieces. Aren't men supposed to have all the power? If that's the case why are men so massively disadvantaged legally? Doesn't make any sense.
jamesford32 8y ago
Someone told you men have all the power? Some men do. But those at the top are certainly not looking out for those at the bottom. There is no male "hivemind" sure as their isnt a female one. Just people with power keeping themselves in power. Nothing drives female voters like making them feel like both victims and gods gift to humanity.
Redpillc0re 8y ago
I doubt the law is actually enforced, given the lax attitude of the french to extramaritals. It sounds like some feelgood bullshit someone just put there.
redpillbanana 8y ago
Let’s look at some of the things that they are calling anti-feminist:
Sounds like I’m an anti-feminist.
[deleted]
rookiemistake111 8y ago
Good find. Would have never known, but Seriously WTF.
torodinson 8y ago
This is because of the sheer amount of affairs. Think of it as being able to sow your wild oats truly if you are alpha and go after married girls, without having to pay for it.
jamesford32 8y ago
Yep, be like eliminating child support completely.
MrEiffel 8y ago
Well there's a reason why I see Ashley Madison posters everywhere in the metro, people in France have so many affairs (le cinq à sept), society would explode with they did a mass paternity test.
I don't mind to be honest, I've got a father ready for when a plate gets pregnant and I'm not him.
cariboo_j 8y ago
How devilishly Machiavellian of you. Dark triad, even.
jmg83 8y ago
Just read that article. The woman who wrote it is scum.
Ungallant? I'd call it smart. If this woman will open her legs for one man, even a rich, handsome superstar like Jude Law, she might do it for anyone. If Law had taken it for granted that the kid was his without even checking, I'd call him a damn fool. Hell, a man of his wealth should be especially careful.
jcrpta 8y ago
Using the word "Ungallant" here is a shaming tactic.
In this context, it's not so much being used to shame Jude Law personally as it is to further cement the idea that anyone demanding a paternity test should be ashamed of themselves.
jmg83 8y ago
Fuck ashamed. Better demand a paternity test from the get go than be like those poor bastards who discover decades down the line that their kids aren't actually theirs. Of course, bitches like the woman who wrote that article would prefer it if men simple accepted what was dropped on their laps. We always hear that women don't owe men sex. Well, I say men don't owe women a father figure for some other guy's brat.
NakedAndBehindYou 8y ago
Still cheaper than paying child support for 18 years.
through_a_ways 8y ago
I can't imagine that the French government would let you off the hook for that, when they specifically outlaw it in the first place.
It's kind of like those occasional cases where the guy records the consensual sex he had, and uses it as evidence against the rape charge, it only nets him into more trouble because he has a Y chromosome.
Grompher 8y ago
Cheaper and I would do my 1 year. Waaaaayyy better than raising some bastard and looking like a fool.
2comment 8y ago
They don't admit unauthorized tests as evidence, so you're out both child support and 15 grand.
1independentmale 8y ago
Not if you leave the country upon seeing the test results.
Syberr 8y ago
do you really think that governments dont have treaties in place to confiscate money towards child support wherever a father is?
Lyraless 8y ago
Yeah le dank meme about french paternity test again.
Yes you need a court order. But if you ask you will get it, no exception. And if the mother refuse then you're assumed not to be the father.
Don't make the situation look worse than what it is.
[deleted] 8y ago
[deleted]
Lyraless 8y ago
Can't find a decent link in english. Even wikipedia is incorrect
Even with the consent of both party you still need an injunction from a judge.
Here a few one in french: From the justice department
French wiki
If you want to contest paternity you just need to start a procedure. The judge will then allow the paternity test to be done. It's a lot more paperwork than most countries but if you want one you will get one.
This is true but not for the paternity test. It's called "possession d’état" which mean that if you have raised a child as your own for more than 5 years (deadline) you're not allowed to deny paternity anymore.
Edit: Checked a bit more the main reason come from a 1994 law about bioethics when people were afraid of what you could do with a dna test (eugenics and so on). By extension paternity test fall under that category. Retarded law from an old generation.
unsafeword 8y ago
Thanks, that answer really delivers. I'll point back here next time I hear the assertion about French paternity tests.
okamiueru 8y ago
How does this even work? If you refuse to pay on grounds of not being the father, they take you to court. If the burden of proof is on the mother/state, it's ok then? If the burden of proof is on the alleged father, then... guilty because... feminism?
[deleted] 8y ago
France's justice system presumes guilt. It is the duty of the accused to disprove the charges, not the other way around.
okamiueru 8y ago
Setting aside how absolutely ridiculous that seems. What happens when anyone can claim someone is the father, and (as you say) the burden of (dis-)proof is on the alleged father, but he cannot request the paternity test.
There is a monty python sketch in there somewhere.
edit: Wait.. Article IX here says otherwise: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_the_Rights_of_Man_and_of_the_Citizen
edit2: To answer my own question. It seems that a getting the paternity test without consent through court order would be fine. Isn't this how it works everywhere else in the world? You can't go around asking for paternity tests because you feel like it. Celebrities would then be harassed like hell. You have to have a pretty good reason. It's not even feminism then, just solely based on concern for the child.
Transmigratory 8y ago
That's what a lot of "FEMINAZISZZZZZ" hysterical people here miss.
Even though I posted that it is a BS law, after reading your post. I'd say this is more sensible.
Though I suppose a wealthy Frenchmen, for instance, probably can reasonably get a court order. Probably citing suspicion and says he'd never be able to act in a truly fatherly way unless he knows for certain. Depending on how the case is presented, her objection can add to the case.
foldpak111 8y ago
That's what happens when your president is a manlet
[deleted] 8y ago
[deleted]
foldpak111 8y ago
In wolf hierarchy, the beta and omega wolves always challenge the alpha, but they always learn very quickly that it's like battling uphill as a fat guy. Putin is not a guy you want to challenge.
through_a_ways 8y ago
apparently Hollande is only 5'7", lol. I thought you were referring to Sarkozy specifically.
What's up with European leaders being so short? Putin, Medvedev, Sarkozy, Hollande, Berlusconi...
yaardi 8y ago
Europe has 50 countries, so it's normal that several of those will have short presidents. David Cameron, for example, is a tall one.
Anyway, I think appearance (including being tall) is much more important in American politics than in Europe.
jmg83 8y ago
What does his height have to do with anything?
foldpak111 8y ago
I was kidding, but in BP land, it's a pretty big deal. Society doesn't want a good president, they want a good looking president. Putin is a genius and I'm jealous he isn't our president. Manlet's are generally RP as shit from the discrimination and bullying in adolescence. That's why Putin is such an all around alpha male. The former prime minister of Singapore was RP as shit, too. Singapore was headed in a really good direction.
pirateundies 8y ago
And yet women who commit paternity fraud continue skipping through the daisies.
moodyprism 8y ago
That's not even the logical equivalent of this. The male equivalent would be charging women for rape if you had sex with them and later found out they were: wearing make up, had on a push bra, had on high heels, had breast implants or any cosmetic surgery, lied about their age, etc.
pirateundies 8y ago
You're right, but that isn't what I was going for. I was complaining that we can't get protection from something that would legitimately be a crime, but apparently a guy is now sexually assaulting a woman by living with his parents.
Kaelteth 8y ago
...lied about the number of past partners she has had....
Kalepsis 8y ago
...was born a man and is now a post-op transgender...
[deleted] 8y ago
Surely this fair and balanced justice system will also punish women who lie about their age or partner count, women who wear makeup, and women who have had plastic surgery, as those are all forms of sexual deceit.
Of course.
KurrKurr 8y ago
So, what would be a purpose not punishable by law be? Digging for gold??
Fuck this!
rebuildingMyself 8y ago
You shouldn't ever tell a woman how much you make anyway. It's none of her fucking business
feminazis_stalk_me 8y ago
Absolutely.
"What do you do?" "I prefer not to say."
"How much do you make?" "I prefer not to discuss my finances."
[deleted]
NotUpToAnythingGood 8y ago
That law as proposed (as indicated in the article) violates the 14th amendment's equal protection clause.
I would think it's a potential payday for any guy prosecuted under it and gets a decent constitutional lawyer.
Squeezymypenisy 8y ago
It won't pass a court of appeals or the Supreme Court. This kind of law violates the first amendment and gives too broad a definition to rape. It would be seen as a dangerous precedent to eventually make lying illegal.
sweetleef 8y ago
It's impossible to enforce fairly - every sexual encounter is open to some sort of ex-post claim of some type of disappointment or misunderstanding.
But unfairness or unenforceability doesn't mean the politicians won't happily waste lives and resources on it - look at the "war on drugs".
SleepNowMyThrowaway 8y ago
Have you seen some of the shit that gets past the Supreme Court?
Never say never.
Newdist2 8y ago
We're one heart attack from the Supreme court ruling that the 2nd Amendment doesn't enshrine any right to keep and bear arms.
[deleted]
RS73 8y ago
California's about to pass a law where a woman can ask guys at her job how much money they make and, if she doesn't like the answer, the government can step in and force the employer to raise the woman's salary. I just heard the author of the bill, Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara), talking about it on the radio. Pay in California will no longer be at the discretion of the employer but instead it will be as ordered by the government.
https://www.edhat.com/site/tidbit.cfm?nid=153490
mbooter 8y ago
If you find out your wife lied about her sexual history then the marriage should be considered fraud.
If her partner count is 'just a number' then my salary is also 'just a number'
Redpillc0re 8y ago
"Women will have sex if you show them you have a big home" is surely no less morally contemptible. I want a law that compensates me with huge stacks of $$$s when i discover she wasn't into my beautiful soul, but just wanted my money.
It's unfortunate that this law will not pass; it would be hilarious to every person who wears makeup.
theproudbanana 8y ago
Soon to be ParISIS. First the anti dna test, now this. no wonder ISIS has such an easy time there.
Lashlarue123 8y ago
"It's wrong every single time, and in a lot of cases illegal what they're doing. In some way, sometime, it's going to catch up." You got that right fatso, but youve got the wrong gender in mind - this sub is now over 100k with less men than ever getting married.
Mouthpiece 8y ago
But think of this: a woman has to publicly admit that she only slept with a guy because she thought he had money.
That may be true, but almost no one would ever admit she's a whore.
blue_27 8y ago
What about high heels, pushup bras, (the corset that this bitch obviously needs), colored contact lenses, makeup as a whole, or altering their hair color? Does all of that shit count as deception? I mean, fuck ... women should be required to carry photographic evidence of how big their mother is, so that we know what we're getting into.
Lorska 8y ago
This is why a law like this won't happen. Married women cheat at a rate of almost twice as much as men on Tinder.
RPaccount1000 8y ago
So make-up, push-up, spanx, perfume, etc, should then also be rape...so 99% of women are rapists.
Boond0ck 8y ago
Yup, this shit is fucking laughable
JohnGalt316 8y ago
if you tell a girl you are a doctor and she assumes you make 180k but you only make 60k/year, are you a rapist?
[deleted]
TerriChris 8y ago
Just as long as the courts still use her word against the guy's word as evidence /s
CMidnight 8y ago
This would effectively make sex transactional.
ChocolateHead 8y ago
Jesus Fucking Christ. Has this place become the National Enquirer? There is absolutely 0 chance that such a law could ever get passed. This is just the media fearmongering and you fucking idiots believed it.
rockumsockumrobots 8y ago
As someone from New Jersey, such a law is not outside the scope of possibility for this state.
Hell, if the state could tax us every time we wiped our asses they would. The only thing more repulsive and infuriating than the smug face on the fat bitch pictured in that article, is the State that is empowering her.
Seriously. Fuck the state of NJ. I can't wait to get out of this shit hole.
scarletspider3 8y ago
It was only a matter of time before feminists pushed for a legally backed insurance policy for their hypergamy. This is why we need MRA.
isthatyourdaughter 8y ago
Everything feminists have pushed for or ever will push for is in service of hypergamy. Every single thing. It's not about "equality", its about female supremacy.
Dr_Red_97 8y ago
What the fuck is a side jawn?
windowstapedshut 8y ago
"...back when she was falling madly in love, Lewis, a labor and delivery nurse, knew nothing about Jordan's nefarious ways. When she was handing over $5,000 for a phony security clearance, she had no clue that she was just Jordan's
WomanMoron scorned.This whole narrative of withdrawing consent after the fact makes my skill crawl.
TheDay1Alpha 8y ago
So I guess highlights, hair extensions, fake lashes, push up bras, make up, high heels etc are not deception
[deleted] 8y ago
[--removed--]
Appleseed12333 8y ago
cultural marxism is the new economic marxism
denart4 8y ago
I mean, can it be that much worse for men? And we are only just in the beginning.
nodiggity9721 8y ago
Isn't it interesting that it's always whales that promote these kind of laws?
[deleted] 8y ago
How I Met Your Mother really isn't gonna stand the test of time now. Gonna have a very rapey feel about it.
RockOutRex 8y ago
I will start yelling rape whenever I've discovered a woman was giving the wrong impression of her self now. And then I will earn money from it. Because I was raped. And then I can relax and work less because I have free money. Because I was raped. Raped I tell you.
Archwinger Endorsed Contributor 8y ago
I have bad flatulence. If I hold it in when I meet a woman and she goes home with me, I denied her the choice whether or not to consent to sex with a farter.
For the good of women everywhere, I must fart everywhere I go. Constantly. It's the law.
thenarrrowpath 8y ago
The beauty of this law is that women who lie about anything will be charged with rape as well. The author clearly dodges that idea by only pointing out examples of men lying. Its a one sided article.
Tarnsman4Life 8y ago
We can only wish but no; the wording of the law is very gender specific in male perps and female victims. It might stand a better chance before the SCOTUS if it wasn't gender specific but lets be real; pigs will fly and hell will freeze over before a woman is charged with rape for telling a man a lie before he fucks her. Female sexual strategy is all about lies. Makeup, a lie. Plastic surgery? lie. Push up bras? Lie. Hairdye and hair styling including extensions? Lie. Every woman I have ever fucked or paid close enough attention to lies as a primary sexual strategy. They lie about who they are, what they want and what they will/won't do as a basis to try and lock down men, period. They lie about partner count, education, work history, desire to have kids, being on the pill, not wanting more children, it is all a giant lie. Basically this law is making it illegal for men to adopt elements of female sexual strategy and use them to their own advantage as fair play.
Senorbubbz 8y ago
No actually in the wording of the bill (in the first few paragraphs of the article), the one committing fraud is only referred to as "he/him" and the "penetrator", implying that this law will be solely used to go after men to continue to fill up privately operated prisons.
Transmigratory 8y ago
You can use this to deter women who lie to you too.
Also, another angle: the degenerates who have so little SMV that they have to lie are effectively eliminated in the competition.
Unless you're a PUA type whose SMV entirely depends on the words he says and the presence his words creates (without any backing), then this law shouldn't worry you. Despite the hysteria over it. Obviously not promising anything (which has the effect on you being mysterious) will help you too; law is about word play.
Another thing: lie about your earnings; say you earn less. DAs will be hard pressed to sell to the jury that a woman has a right to sue a man for rape because he said he earns less than she expected him to earn.
Of course some of you here have a confirmation bias as far as pussy pass goes. (Not to say it doesn't exist.) So for those lot, this message will go unheard.
[deleted]
Triglycerine 8y ago
What fascinates me about this is how blatantly it underscores the transactional nature of relationships wired into people. Once you get past the spinning wheels what she says essentially amounts to this: "I made a trade, and the product was not as advertised".
Remember: Always know what you're offering. Know your price. And know when to walk away from a deal that's bound to go sour.
[deleted] 8y ago
what fascinates me is that 'feminism', which is supposed to be the banner all this exists under, is all about 'strong independent woman'.
How does it reflect on your personal strength or independence when you need a LAW to discourage people from lying to you because you were too stupid to figure it out yourself? or do your own 'independent' analysis?
i doubt it will ever pass, but hopefully it does. another brilliant law that the N.england area could use to add to it's collection
popthatpill 8y ago
Like everything else women say and do, "strong independent woman" is just a tactic: they don't actually believe it.
If the tactic works, they use it; if it doesn't, they discard it. There's no sincere belief or principle there.
sweetleef 8y ago
This law labels (or recognizes) all women as whores.
If you tell a whore you have the money to pay her, obtain her services, and then say "oops, sorry I'm broke", that would be a theft.
Whores don't put out for free.
blue_27 8y ago
I had an ex-girlfriend threaten to sue me over the housework she did while we were dating, and her fucking me. She sad that I owed her a dollar amount for the year that I fucked her while she lived with me rent free ... She never went through with it, but I was fucking champing at the goddamn bit to hear her say that shit out loud to a judge.
Nudity_Is_Freedom 8y ago
Pretty sure a year in my region is common-law. That's very short compared to average, but still. Careful :).
Noctis_Cloud 8y ago
No man would have to lie to that desperate ham-planet of a woman.
What a joke.
Shaft-of-Patriarchy 8y ago
Am i remembering the story wrong, but was it not Eve who ate the apple?
MiracleMatter 8y ago
Eyyy, someone paid attention in Sunday School.
"And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat." Genesis 3:6 King James Version
[deleted]
Boond0ck 8y ago
TL:DR?
This fat fucking ham got duped out of some money because she was so desperate to get laid.
End
wookieblaster69 8y ago
Article summary: land whale gets swindled online by a guy who tells her he is a british secret agent, she believes it and gives him money. She then gets on dateline and NJ assemblyman to introduce that can be used against practically any man that has ever had sex with a woman.
Seriously click the link and look at her. She thinks a British secret service agent fell in love with her, and now you could go to jail because of it.
xwm 8y ago
Don't forget she gave him $5k for "security clearance". This is simply a case of natural selection. She is too stupid to reproduce, system working as intended.
calzenn 8y ago
Well, I think theres an easy method we could use to make the job a lot better and easier for everyone of course.
Maybe, we could be assigned, oh, I dont know, how about say a star shape with a colour that would be sewn to all our clothes? or maybe even a semi-permanent tattoo?
That way someone could easily determine what we "really" are by a, of course, impartial tribunal with annual reviews... that could asses us guys and weed out those pesky liars and bullshitters...
Black Star: Know liar as to his monthly income or actually rented a car for a date.
Red Star: Usually a low wage employee with only a high school education.
Gold Star: High Income, has a great shoe collection, takes holidays outside of the country and has assets over 200,000
Blue Star: Will pay for all dates, has a mid-size car and some assets.
There surely is a good list of colours and stars that could help defenceless women sort out who is who. We need to make life safe, safe and easy for everyone... everyone being those who are not male, because, hey, thats what society is all about...
[deleted] 8y ago
Hey let's have separate water fountains and bus places too!
doublereignbeau 8y ago
Nein. Yellow star ist for das Juden.
rygar_the_red 8y ago
So wait... that chick paid five thousand dollars to have sex with that guy?
And she isn't being charged with soliciting prostitution?
themanbat 8y ago
High heels. Makeup. Push up bras. Spanx. Women are in disguise practically all day every day to exaggerate physical assets. But if a guy exaggerated his income? That's dishonest.
DalekJay 8y ago
Lewis. The 37-year-old suburban-mom-turned-activist is the inspiration behind a bill in New Jersey that would make sexual assault by deception a crime.
She is Lucky that she ia having sex... So why everytime I see this kind of news it's a fat SJW with a lot of free time ?
live52 8y ago
The whole article assumes a man lying to or duping a woman. Surely the same happens when men are the dupee and women the duper. Only a guess but I'd expect the statistics to be pretty even male/female, but the the context would be different. That is, a woman probably wouldn't show her potential victim a photo of her house. I'll leave it to you to imagine analogous situations where the man was duped. I'm upvoting the OP so this gets needed attention, not because I agree with the proposed legislation.
MattyAnon Admin 8y ago
Ah... no. You shower and head out. She puts on incredible amounts of makeup, tightening things, enhancing things, firming things. You don't lie about anything. She always lies about her n-count.
Women deceive much more than men when it comes to dating. Hell they even managed to collectively keep AF/BB a secret for centuries. They promise the earth and deliver nothing.
The writers of this law have been very careful to allow all this to continue.
VasiliyZaitzev 8y ago
Egad. How did the guy lie to that land whale? Did he tell her she was pretty?
CoolRunner 8y ago
1st amendment violation, won't make it to a vote I bet.
[deleted] 8y ago
They don't have freedom of speech in France. Shit, in most of Europe you can still go to jail for denying the holocaust. It's still pretty fucked up that there are places on this planet where saying the wrong thing can get you jailed. Regardless of its validity, you should be allowed to say literally anything unless you are creating a direct danger ala screaming "fire" in a crowded theater - anything less is an authoritarian nightmare.
Coffeebe 8y ago
I'm confused.
Is this happening in France or New Jersey?
[deleted] 8y ago
Well shit. Now I'm not sure either. I guess the article was in NJ, but I keep seeing France all over the thread.
[deleted] 8y ago
Looking overseas for a LTR is looking better and better. To hell with Western women.
oldkingkole 8y ago
meh, depends on what youre after/where you go
source: live in china
Triglycerine 8y ago
You don't even need to go far. Just get out of the Anglosphere and things already look way saner. Just don't get a French girl.
[deleted] 8y ago
I've always had a thing for attractive Indian women, but evidently they're ones to avoid as well.
[deleted]
Kalepsis 8y ago
Illegal to lie to your lover...
So it's going to be illegal to wear make-up, push-up bras, high heels, corsets, dye your hair, get a boob job, put on perfume, visit a tanning salon, etc., etc., etc.
Can't wait to flip that stupid idea on its face.
ben0wn4g3 8y ago
THE SIZE OF HER ARM!!!
So is this a man only crime...
blandboringusername 8y ago
He told her was a secret agent man and she totally bought it! And gave him $5000 for a "security clearance".
Pretty sure I know what went on there. He was half her weight, therefore the fat-goggles went on and she was ready to believe anything to get some non-neckbeard D.
Lesson learned: Be attractive. Don't be unattractive. Otherwise terrible things will happen to you in the sexual marketplace.
muddynips 8y ago
It's kind of shocking how readily the article admits that women will sleep with somebody for material gain.
Oh I lied about having a beach home? Well, you slept with me to get to my beach home, so who's more in the wrong here? And on that note, how many beach homes do you own?
FuriousMouse 8y ago
A man that uses "tricks" to make a woman believe his SMV is higher that it actually is, is no different from a woman using "tricks" to have men believe her SMV is higher than it actually is.
Women judge SMV based on social status but men base it on the looks.
So a man telling a woman that he earns more than he actually does, is like a woman using push bra, lipstick, shaving her legs and armpits or having fake breasts. It is also deception.
MattyAnon Admin 8y ago
... and lying about her n-count
exit_sandman 8y ago
Wait a second. So you mean that if you consent to marrying a woman (by saying "yes I do") only because she fraudulently made you believe that she had been a decent girl in the past, that marriage is null and void?
Guys, you might be onto something here.
DRMMR76 8y ago
Of course it's a fatty pushing this.
[deleted] 8y ago
[deleted]
zyk0s 8y ago
We already have an awful set of laws on the book. The reason nobody reacts is that these laws are applied very sparingly. Blue pill men, even when informed about how easily they can get fucked by the courts will still burry their heads in the sand, thinking "this would never happen to me!"
Ulfrum 8y ago
I think you're right, this probably wouldn't be the catalyst to pop the bubble, and I certainly don't think it's my job to help Blue Pill men.
Nobody helped me. I had to want to change.
And I'm not a sadist that likes to see people hurting either, but I do love being proven right, and this law would certainly do that.
I also realize it's centered more towards MGTOW, rather than TRP, and as I said I don't really think it's a good idea, but sometimes the only way for people to learn is to be beaten over the side of the head with a truth stick.
wile_E_coyote_genius 8y ago
Isn't wearing make-up deceptive?
malariasucks 8y ago
foundation of this bill is a bitter divorced woman:
oh great, I know this is going to get even worse, she has to be a bit off her rocker... and then....
so the woman is a dumb ass...
alritealritealrite 8y ago
Well then what the fuck is makeup? Is makeup not a lie?
cariboo_j 8y ago
Next law: men are required to disclose a copy of their pay stubs, bank records and last years tax returns before engaging in sex.
But don't get the wrong idea: women never get with men for their money... They just want what's best for the children. They need a good provider, you see.
OKJaded 8y ago
Holy shit. Saw the ham beast butter troll headlining the issue...
WeAreGlidingNow 8y ago
I've looked, but I can't find it. I read a great essay online a few months ago, but I lost it now.
It was about some of the changes being considered at universities in the USA, particularly California. Some want the college's definition of sexual assault changed (which, to me, sounds like a pre-cursor to changing the legal definition). It's a weaker standard, so you could get expelled or thrown off campus, but not arrested (yet).
The most alarming change re-defines "consent" to include a mutual agreement on WHY two people have sex. The example given: suppose a man just broke-up with a LTR and wants to go out for a casual fling, or a ONS. He goes to party and meets a woman. They end up in bed, but she thinks it's the possible start of a LTR for herself. Neither is drunk, under duress, underage, and both are voluntarily having sex under the stricter "Yes Means Yes" criteria. Despite all this, IT COULD STILL BE SEXUAL ASSAULT under the new definition of consent.
It's insane.
InscrutablePUA 8y ago
The comments section is great. Top comment currently:
"Any women who lie about being on birth control and gets pregnant should be charged with the same."
[deleted] 8y ago
Holy shit I'd lie just to get out of sex with her. That's still legal right?
MattyAnon Admin 8y ago
Ah... no.. you've deprived her of something that has monetary value. Therefore fraud. Therefore rape. Don't you know anything about gender politics??
_torn 8y ago
what kind of program is she on? her bicepts are bigger than muh thighs
rebuildingMyself 8y ago
Weighted burger wrappers yo
rockumsockumrobots 8y ago
I know man. Serious gains! I think she's on the eat whatever you want and sit on the couch all day program.
[deleted]
foldpak111 8y ago
Hope to get on her level one day
[deleted]
SleepNowMyThrowaway 8y ago
So.much.wrong.
First of all, GTFO of Jersey; I won't even drive through that fascist shit-hole.
Secondly, a woman with a name spelled Mischele should automatically be nexted.
Mischele, a fat single mom got pumped and dumped and somehow lost 5K, so let's criminalize whatever makes her feelbads?
That BMW was a rental?! RAPE!
This system cannot burn fast enough.
[deleted]
WardlyHasted 8y ago
I'm not sure whether this law will pass or not, but it doesn't even hold up to basic scrutiny. How can people hear about this law and possibly think it's a good idea?
The reason shit like this might pass is because mangina white knights think, "Oh, I would never lie to m'lady. Surely this will protect all the fair maidens from those assholes who just want sex. I'm a nice guy, so this will never affect me."
But it's always these same bluepill faggots that get fucked over by these types of laws. These men are weak and women can tell, so they go after these men with the very laws that they supported. Feminists throw white knights under the bus all the time. All these manginas doing 'chore play' spouting "happy wife, happy life" are the types of people who get divorce raped or live in sexless marriages.
Meanwhile she'll go fuck Chad in the back of his 'Porsche' that turns out to be Pontiac Sunfire and she won't give a shit.
thefisherman1961 8y ago
Boy, isn't that going to open a can of worms?
I was under the impression he made $24/hr, not $23.99 an hour. I never would have slept with him had I known this. Rape.
bitches_be_crazy86 8y ago
well I think it's not so much about what they say it is, but rather another method to give women less accountabilty sure I took part in a gangbang honey but they said they are music producers
bassivemalls 8y ago
This would never actually be a law. This is just ridiculous. This has to be a parody of a proposal that SJWs would put forward, not an actual thing. If this does gain traction and becomes a law, I'm leaving the country--literally and actually leaving the country. This can't be real.
CowardlyPetrov 8y ago
I can't help but notice the obvious. It is very clear in the language that this is about men lying to women for sex, but doesn't cover women lying to men for sex, money, marriage, children, rape, status, work, etc.
screamingATtrees 8y ago
Wasn't there a Japanese man who sued his wife because their kids turned out ugly because she had plastic surgery and never told him?
redpillcynic 8y ago
Holy shit, when landwhales and ham planets write the laws, men are fucked
deathsnuggle 8y ago
You have to find them attractive or that's attraction rape, punishable by death.
JanLul 8y ago
She was defrauded (because she has no intellect) which already is illegal.
tpsmc 8y ago
Red Pill Trolling level 11!
trp_que 8y ago
This article is over the top and stupid. No one actually subscribes to the idea she is proposing. I didn't see a single comment supporting this from both men or women. Just ignore.
JeanValjean197o 8y ago
It won't pass and if it does it won't be enforceable.
For one thing it will work both ways. Like another poster said if they lie about being on the pill then that would be rape because that is lying to get sex.
And they have to prove you lied. At that point it's her word against yours. She says you claimed to make X amount of money. You say you never even had such a conversation.
That said, if you are doing it right you aren't giving her any specifics about yourself anyway. By the time she knows anything about you she's probably already slept with you.
The only guys this will affect are BP dudes who are lying to get sex.
If a RP shows up in court looking sharp with muscles and good looks and oozing confidence and a frumpy bitch like the one pictured on this article shows up who do you think they will believe?
They'll think she jumped your bone and when you didn't want to take it further she started making shit up.
The only thing this law will do is cost the government even more money and put more men in prison thus reducing tax revenue.
I'm not worried about this at all.
warcroft 8y ago
Gee, chicks aren't shallow at all. "You're rich? Here, let me spread my legs for you. What? You lied? You're not rich!? RAPE!"
And its called 'Sexual Assault'? But its only sexual assault AFTER the chick finds out the guy lied about being rich?
pha111 8y ago
This will never pass. But I kind of want to see what NJ would be like if it did!
notmyusualreddit 8y ago
How does anyone get convicted of any of this shit? Is someone making written statements somewhere? Or is it just he said she said?
Pretty soon dating will be like talking to the police. Plead the 5th (yes I know this example wasnt in the US).
Or better yet, make your money without women and then just visit se asia, brazil, eastern europe for professionals. This kind of bs is getting scarry and old.
makethemsayayy 8y ago
It's like women are so helpless they can't be allowed to live. If a woman feeeeeelss wronged in any way, big daddy gov't comes in to save the fucking day. Fucking nanny state if I've ever seen it.
theBergmeister 8y ago
Ultimately, having a penis is rape in the minds of these people.
Hitleronormative 8y ago
But salary is just a number, right???
JamesK1973 8y ago
Never moving to New Jersey. Crazy fucks, one and all.
Reddit_SuckLeperCock 8y ago
Holy shit... it's classified as sexual assault even though the bitch was willing and consensual at the time? Lol. I can see that law working out well for everyone. Hate to say it 'Murica but that shit is a fucking joke.
tatebequert 8y ago
"I couldn't have committed these crimes because I am gender fluid and was a man when it happened, today I am a female victim of male headmate patriarchy!"
Candman91 8y ago
So, if I girl "requires" me to take her to dinner before I ever think about getting into her pants, would that qualify. She's scamming me out of a Chipotle burrito, just so I could even have to privilege to initiate.
StrikePrice 8y ago
The bill defines it as "an act of sexual penetration to which a person has given consent because the actor has misrepresented the purpose of the act or has represented he is someone he is not."
I like how "he" is built right into the language of the law. Classy.
"The purpose of this act is to spooge on your tits and I am indeed Superman!" RAPE!!
through_a_ways 8y ago
It already is rape in Israel. Arab had consensual sex with Jewish girl, failed to mention he was Arab and not Jewish.
Arrested.
Although to be realistic, that's probably got a lot more to do with Jews hating Muslims, than with feminism.
jm51 8y ago
iirc, they had sex within hours of meeting and he got a jail sentence.
doublereignbeau 8y ago
Considering that no official ruling has been made regarding the definition of who is or isn't Jewish (as no party has had a large enough political influence to pass such a law), and that over half the population of Israel is Arab-Jews belonging to various Sephardi sects, I would love to see what your source is. Not calling bullshit or anything, just want to read for myself.
[deleted] 8y ago
[deleted]
doublereignbeau 8y ago
Ouch. He was cited as married and lying about it. Never get married.
tedcase 8y ago
Does "I'm on the pill" count as rape now too?
mister_barfly75 8y ago
Spreading your legs because your period is 3 weeks late and you want hubby to think that the kid is his?
BarServer 8y ago
Or "It's okay for you to not use a condom, I'm tested." ?
THCanadian17 8y ago
Yet it is okay for women to lie about how many dicks have been in their mouths
The_BeardedGentleman 8y ago
If this shit ever exists in the US I am going to pack things up and go live a cold solo life in the wilderness of Alaska. I'd rather get fucked by a bear than by uncle sam.
Triglycerine 8y ago
You should be doing that anyway. Camping in Alaska makes for a great story to tell and it teaches you a lot of things relevant to the subject of this sub.
The_BeardedGentleman 8y ago
I actually did do that, for 2 weeks, and it was great. Would go back no questions asked. I just wish there were more women there (1:15 ratio it felt like) and that the ones there weren't all 4s...
Triglycerine 8y ago
That's glorious.
I wonder. Would taking one's would-be LTR camping to Alaska be a good way for figuring out their fitness for a true LTR? Or any other situation where one's forced to always keep on their toes and the margin of error is slim.
Seems like a potential method for figuring out a girl's propensity for bullshit, I wager.
[deleted] 8y ago
Only men can be convicted. Oh boy...
makethemsayayy 8y ago
Any man who could be charged with this needs to argue it's against the 14th amendment for "equal protection under the law".
[deleted] 8y ago
Barney Stinson will be pissed
the_red_scimitar 8y ago
So, this would acknowledge that women seek wealth as a sexual strategy.
I suggest that padded bras, all forms of cosmetic surgery, all forms of hair augmentation, including coloring, extensions, etc., makeup, telling an age younger than her actual one, any form of "tummy" control, and pretty much anything a woman does that presents herself as better looking than without these accessories, would all be forms of rape.
[deleted]