Geeklawyer had thought that feminism was a joke that after 25 years was confined to history and the odd nostalgic memory of decaying overweight women with sagging breasts and moustaches.
He was right (thanks abovethelaw).
Apparently a bunch of strapon wearing bull-dyke feminist law professors are asserting that lying to a woman in order to give her the pleasure of one’s Pork Sword is rape. American professors are a breed with less intellectual credentials than one would accept in the UK. Across the pond ‘Professor’ is merely a job title rather than, as it is here, a recognition of intellectual prowess.
No fuckin’ shit.
The lesbo’s here engage in the usual man hating ‘nod nod wink wink‘ crap about all men conspiring to do down rape accusations and subjugate women. Geeklawyer finds this tosh amusingly retro but thinks that perhaps we should let the 1980’s have their political outrage back. Yes?
Um and WTF! You really are a naughty misogynist bastard! As you well know I’m as hot as they come, cum in your Y fronts hot, a hot tamale you could say. Yet I’m a feminist. Pop that in your stereotype and smoke it!
You should also know I’m not the only hot feminist, you have been distracted by my pendulous boobed friends. Had you been looking you would have noticed the wide variety of womyn that call themselves feminist. Also note, womyn’s rights are by no means a given, how far they have come is just an indication that society is capable of change, it’s not an indication that the cause is won and now relegated to history, the insane or those wishing to relive an activist youth. Feminism is alive dear friend. Wishing for 50 percent of the population to have equal rights is not crazy or insane.
Also, if I were not so busy rubbing my firm young body (presently covered in oil) and nubile titties (also obviously covered in oil) against those of my similarly physiqued friends, I would be in your house all laced up spanking your very naughty misogynist bottom, HARD! Oh geeky I wouldn’t stop spanking until your cheeks were all flushed with remorse.
And Geeky my love, why if it’s illegal to trick someone out of their cash shouldn’t it be illegal to trick someone out of their panties? Also, if the only way a man can gain access to vagina is via trickery, he should be locked up anyway, as a blight and eyesore. You could say this law makes for an effective way of finding and disposing of losers, I’m for it.
Smash the patriarchy
“if it’s illegal to trick someone out of their cash shouldn’t it be illegal to trick someone out of their panties?”
You regard access to your vagina as a merchantable transaction then?
And if I bed a woman by telling her I’m a QC I get life for rape? because she is disappointed she didn’t a alpha male? Bollocks
Though fibbing really is bad and I sometimes try not to myself, I suspect they’re talking more along the lines of “my balls will go blue and I may die” or the old bogus marriage ceremony trick. I suspect you will be fine.
Re the vagina as a merchantable item; well it just is - whether via marriage or direct transaction or whatever else, it is, perhaps the law should reflect this? I just like the idea of disposing of the male dregs of society - you know, for fun.
I agree wholeheartedly with the feminists, and will stop lying to women to bed them the instant they reciprocate.
As soon as Wonderbra’s, tummy-sqashing panties, heels, hair-dye, make-up and perfume are no longer bought by women, I will stop lying.
Mostly.
The issue is complex. For the present, please assume that A ( a man) persuades B (a woman) into bed without recourse to any false statement of fact, thereby precluding a claim in misrepresentation (See also (infra)) or deceit (Derry v Peek [1889]. No criminal act of fraud is committed. Liability in criminal law does not, therefore, arise.
Intercourse takes place. It is, unfortunately, a crap shag. A has no remedy against B. There is no contract (No intention to enter legal relations and therefore no basis for implying terms as to satisfactory shagging.)
I have considered potential liability in Tort, and while I was much taken initially with the possibility of a claim under Rylands v Fletcher, I can see no prospect of success under this cause. An action in negligence foundered also for it is unlikely that a duty of care could be established (to provide a good shag).
Nor, as far as I can see, having perused Snell, does Equity come to our aid here.
It would, of course, have been entirely different if A had gone to bed with C ( a prostitute) for then, A may well be establish a claim under The Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 as amended. Of course, in that situation if B had been intemperate enough to suggest to C that he was a “godzilla in bed’ and proved to be, shall we say, prematurely inadequate - C would be able to bring a claim against B under the SGSA and, unless his statement, as opposed to his membrum virilis, was considered to be a ‘mere puff’ a possible cause of action for breach of an express term.
I am confident, of course, that geeklawyer would agree that a good workman never blames his tool.
On that note, I appear to have used up the time allocated by the terms of my ASBO to matters legal for this weekend and shall return to the bar.
Have a good weekend.
I think the contract action faces the further difficulty that it is void for immorality.
Excellent moot question: assuming that is not an objection, in what circumstances would the client be able to obtain an order for specific performance?
PL…. there is the difficulty of supervision by the court?
Juxtajazz… you don’t by any chance know Max Mosley do you?
If Juxtajazz does, here’s hoping she doesn’t have any naughty pics…
I’m interested to know what your take on this new bill that’s being bandied about, regarding “extreme pornography” and the possession thereof. It’s my understanding this becomes law next week? And while you’re thinking about it, could you cast your eye over my last blog (just to make sure I won’t have the Bill knocking on my door, you understand!). Ta…
I think it mindless asinine and illogical. Nanny state neo-labourites pandering to sexual moralists and a desperate bid for a decent Daily Mail headline. I blogged about it nearly 3 years ago
It is worryingly vague and as I said before puts the CPS in my bedroom. Having seen some CPS lawyers this is not a pleasant prospect. I predict a Human Rights challenge followed by a long slow decline in its application.
BTW, having read your blog, you are indeed going to jail but fear not I will be thinking of you. Some commiseration I’m sure.
Oh… which bits should I remove if I don’t want to see the inside of Cell Block H? Or is it too little, too late?
I do not know Max. A quick wiki shows pictures of racing cars, so I assume he has an intellectual disability. Probably a friend of GL’s.
Juxta Jazz… Max Mosley, son of former fascist leader, Sir Oswald Mosley does indeed have a thing about motor ccars. He also rose to fame three weeks ago when the News of The World exposed his predilection for dressing up in ‘Nazi style’ uniforms and beating young women in striped prison outfits while shouting orders at them in German - and then… having his own buttocks caned by a dominatrix….
being British about it…. he had a cup of tea afterwards…
Le vice anglais….. !
Excellent nonsense.
My Dear Geek,
You are quite mistaken.No sane woman would believe that you are a QC.
No sane woman would get in to bed with me, so I hardly think it matters.
My Dear Geek,
Of course it matters. If the woman is not sane, then the OS will bring a case on her behalf.
What the hell does the Ordnance Survey have to do with it
Has Labour farmed out prosecutions to them now, since the barristers strike?
My Dear Geek,
OS=Official Solicitor
I don’t know if this modest contribution assists this debate - but…. GL - is there any point in getting into bed with a sane woman these days… unless you want to have children and lead a perfectly acceptable, sensible and moderate life feeding / schooling / bribing / cajoling / spoling. the Friday 13th nightmare sprog you have brought into the world who will, one day, end up as an investment banker or managing partner of a law firm.
OK… I had a bad hair day, today….
I’ll get my coat…
spoling… should have been ’spoiling’
[…] debate on a casual visit to Geeklawyer’s blog t’other night when one of the posters, in response to Geeklawyer’s intentionally provocative remarks posted as follows - rather well written, I thought!: “Also, if I were not so busy rubbing my firm young body […]
[…] Geeklawyer: Stupid cunts. Although this guy agrees with my argument (presumably), I don’t accept him as an ally. In […]
Does this work both ways? For instance if I was to bed someone for the immeasurable pleasure of fondling their massive breasts, only to then find out I was ‘tricked’ and viscously deceived by a wonder bra would this be rape?
What if I was to wake in the morning only to find out that the other party had fraudulently used make-up to make them look younger?
Of course Geeklawyer your disagreement with this is proof of the patriarchal conspiracy against all women
I should point out it is not just American nutjobs who think the same thing- Herring, at Christchurch, Oxford, thinks pretty much the same thing. Which is a shame, because he gives great lectures and takes tutorials whilst sat on a spacehopper.
I salute this article. Not just for its general content, but for bringing back a great phrase, namely “Pork Sword”. However, you could also have used Beef Bayonet or Spam Javelin and had the same effect.
And what do you think wearing make up and padded bras is?
If I wake up one morning with a toothless hag with two fried eggs next to me I dont go accusing her of rape