My brother reduced his tenant's rent and made her sleep with him as compensation.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

I'm at a loss as to what your appeal to ridicule has to do with what you quoted.

"Hey you're gonna get evicted if you don't sleep with me".

Boom. Coercion.

Only a crazy person would read that story and make that unjustified assumption. Its meant for you to feel sorry for her, and you are being manipultated. Again, if it were an 18 year old man, and a woman landlord, I doubt most of you would cry rape.

[Wells]

While that is a correct statement, no where in the original post does it say that the 18 year old is receiving that message.

Its a logical inference to make. Women don't often agree to sleep with their land lords to save a couple bucks when they don't need to. Especially ones that from all evidence come from good backgrounds.

Except the little detail that it says no where that the landlord would evict her if she declined sex. It only says, if she declined sex she would have to pay full rent...like every other tenant (and herself) is already doing.

Again, what the law cares about is what a reasonable person could fear here. And when your landlord comes up to you and says "hey I hear money is tight, wanna fuck?" a reasonable person could fear repercussions for declining.

[Deleted]

Too many people in here justifying what that asshole did.

[Wells]

Only a crazy person would read that story and make that unjustified assumption. Its meant for you to feel sorry for her, and you are being manipultated. Again, if it were an 18 year old man, and a woman landlord, I doubt most of you would cry rape.

Oh I see you're still whining about people making assumptions and then turning around and making assumptions.

Keep on being hypocritical dude.

[semaphore]

1. Isn't equal, by way of being on a lease.
2. Isn't forced. Being 18, poor, and ignorant isn't an excuse for coercion.

Irrelevant to anything I said.

3. Lack of Evidence to conclude Coercion.

Missing the point. My argument is that she could reasonably have felt coerced because the landlord is a) scum and b) has the power to make life difficult for her. You have provided precisely no logic whatsoever for saying why this is wrong.

Basically a lack of evidence trumps anything you'd like to infer. Which then turns your inference into an assumption.

Basically you don't have any counter argument against the logic I used, so you just pretend it's an assumption.

[Deleted]

Pretty much. Given the nature of the relationship she can reasonably expect retaliation from a landlord approaching her in this manner.

Look at it this way. You're at your job and you boss suggests you do something random a certain way like "don't wear that shirt again". Do you do it? Most likely, since he has authority over you. Now that's coercive but hardly worth getting our knickers in a bunch over but you get the picture. People with authority over us via the nature of our relationship with them can and will use that relationship to coerce us. The law does not often take kindly to this, especially when you start getting into things like physical intimacy and housing. Nor should it, as a primary focus of the law is to watch out for the weak and powerless.

So you're assuming that if she refused and paid the normal way he would for example kick her out anyway for a bullshit reason?

Missing the point. My argument is that she could reasonably have felt coerced because the landlord is a) scum and b) has the power to make life difficult for her. You have provided precisely no logic whatsoever for saying why this is wrong.

Feeling coerced means absolutely nothing. If I'm out of money and the only job I can find is a fucking crappy one, I might feel forced to take that job anyway. Is the employer coercing me by offering the job? Absolutely not.

The only one coercing here is mother nature by requiring us humans to seek shelter from the elements.

[semaphore]

So you're assuming that if she refused and paid the normal way he would for example kick her out anyway for a bullshit reason?

The mere possibility that he would do this is constitutes coercion.

[Jokerfiend]

Too many people in here justifying what that asshole did.

I'm not agreeing with what this guy did, though, people are trying to say he coerced her into Sex.

The evidence doesn't point to such actions, and people are arguing against it. From the evidence, I conclude that the Roommate is a prostitute. People disagree, thus the discussion.

[Wells]

So you're assuming that if she refused and paid the normal way he would for example kick her out anyway for a bullshit reason?

I think it a reasonable fear for her to have. Which is what the law cares about here.

[Ragedaug]

I apologize if I'm appearing snide. That is not my intent.

The point was that it was immoral and illegal for the landlord to make the offer, because by being in a position of power, an offer like that could reasonably have made the tenant felt coerced to comply. Hence why in sexual assault laws, consent is not given when the request is made by someone in a position of power.

I know where you are going with that, and I really don't mean to split hairs..because I also believe what the landlord did was immoral. I just feel you are getting close to a "thought police" line when you make the leap you did about her feeling coerced. I think there's a good chance a female in her position would feel coerced, but I think it also depends on the nature of the man making the proposition and the relationship they already have in place.

I'm kinda torn, because from a purely legalistic view we are making assumptions from data not provided..though I really do understand the point you are making and would agree that common sense dictates there is some validity behind it.

The mere possibility that he would do this is constitutes coercion.

See..this is where you lose me. You have me on board with the statement I responded to a minute ago, then you say something like "the mere possibility that a man could do something constitutes a crime"

No. Just no. You need more then the mere possibility to prosecute. You need a heck of a lot more.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

Oh I see you're still whining about people making assumptions and then turning around and making assumptions.

Keep on being hypocritical dude.

The difference being, you making assumptions with no evidence, and many people in this thread literally saying they would feel differently if the gender roles were reversed.

[v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk]

So you're assuming that if she refused and paid the normal way he would for example kick her out anyway for a bullshit reason?

Feeling coerced means absolutely nothing. If I'm out of money and the only job I can find is a fucking crappy one, I might feel forced to take that job anyway. Is the employer coercing me by offering the job? Absolutely not.

The only one coercing here is mother nature by requiring us humans to seek shelter from the elements.

Except that isn't comparable. The employer isn't already in a position of power over you where your refusal to take the job could have backlash.

Also, what is worse? Work slavery or sex slavery? If one is worse, does it not stand that steps down would also see that particular side being worse?

[Ishimada]

I see it as very illegal in many places, and talking about morality... That's just wrong. Find her another place to stay. Please.

[GirlyKittyBoy]

The only fact is that this is prostitution, and most of the assumptions are that she was being coerced. And when we start arguing with these or any assumptions we start talking about a fictional girl (which let's face it, she probably is, but still >.>)

[Wells]

The difference being, you making assumptions with no evidence, and many people in this thread literally saying they would feel differently if the gender roles were reversed.

I'm not making assumptions with no evidence. My primary inference has been that she would be unable to pay rent without sleeping with him, which is supremely logical.

You on the other hand are frankly just pulling shit out of your ass when you say things like: "Again, if it were an 18 year old man, and a woman landlord, I doubt most of you would cry rape."

Feeling coerced means absolutely nothing. If I'm out of money and the only job I can find is a fucking crappy one, I might feel forced to take that job anyway. Is the employer coercing me by offering the job? Absolutely not.

The difference is in the eyes of the law there is reasonable coercion and there is unacceptable coercion. Having to pick up after your dog is reasonable coercion, having to sleep with your land lord to keep your apartment isn't.

Plus a prospective employer doesn't have direct power over you, a land lord does.

[Deleted]

Too many people in here justifying what that asshole did.

To many people here fail to understand what good intercourse is, when both parties are very fond of each other, so no one has leverage over the other. Almost to the point where it validates the idea of "Doesn't matter I had sex!".

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

I apologize if I'm appearing snide. That is not my intent.




I know where you are going with that, and I really don't mean to split hairs..because I also believe what the landlord did was immoral. I just feel you are getting close to a "thought police" line when you make the leap you did about her feeling coerced. I think there's a good chance a female in her position would feel coerced, but I think it also depends on the nature of the man making the proposition and the relationship they already have in place.

I'm kinda torn, because from a purely legalistic view we are making assumptions from data not provided..though I really do understand the point you are making and would agree that common sense dictates there is some validity behind it.

This is how I feel. There is no evidence provided saying he normally does violent things, or spiteful/vengeful things. There is no evidence saying he has or would, none. Just like there is none saying she may have done something similar in the past. None. Both of those things are unjustified to say, and base a judgement on. I know girls from college that specifically 'date" men that buy them things in exchange for sex. I have been offered sex for money from females. Does this mean I can assume this girl does this all the time? There is NO evidence saying she has a good background, and he has a bad one.

This is why the coercion argument is bullshit. This is why you can really only say they are both guilty of prostitution. To accuse a man of rape without real evidence is bullshit, and you should really feel bad about yourself.

[Wells]

No. Just no. You need more then the mere possibility to prosecute. You need a heck of a lot more.

See this is where you're wrong. Coercion can be implied if a court finds that the victim could reasonably extrapolate coercion.

Say I walk up to you and show you a gun on my hip. I don't pull it out, I don't even point it at anyone. I then ask for your wallet. Clearly I'm coercing you, any reasonable person would think so, but I never clearly or directly stated I would use force to obtain your wallet.

So if a court felt that the same logic was going on here, and they would, its coercion.

[v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk]

This is why the coercion argument is bullshit. This is why you can really only say they are both guilty of prostitution. To accuse a man of rape without real evidence is bullshit, and you should really feel bad about yourself.

Is anybody actually talking about doing something to the real person that doesn't involve gathering more information first?

Also, ignoring the points about why the argument isn't bullshit like they don't exist doesn't help you.

[Deleted]

I'm not agreeing with what this guy did, though, people are trying to say he coerced her into Sex.

The evidence doesn't point to such actions, and people are arguing against it. From the evidence, I conclude that the Roommate is a prostitute. People disagree, thus the discussion.

What she's doing is prostitution, and I can't judge how she feels about it, but from reading the OP she was reluctant at first but then agreed. Whether he coerced her into sex or not, he took advantage of the situation and even if she's willing, maybe at some point she'll look back at it and be ashamed of what she did and regret it. Normally I would say "hey it's your own fucking fault", but considering her situation it's understandable she did it. And people who take advantage of that are scum.