this is illegal and he should be punished
this is illegal and he should be punished
I'm sorry but what you just said doesn't make any sense.
The guy wants to have sex with her, so, he makes a deal that she can't deny, he's not forcing her physically, but mentally, if that makes any sense.
And that's coercing someone in my opinion. It's subtle, but still coercion.
I'm tired of trying to understand you.And I don't think I suck at debates and analysing arguments,nobody tried to strawman you,not willingly at least,I doubt anyone is able to go as crazy as you on this whole matter.It's just miscommunication between simple vocabulary and your ...whatever you got going on when you're analysing something.
She can deny it, is what you are either avoiding, not understanding, or exaggerating on purpose. Apparently she didn't like having sex with him, but would for a certain amount of money, and that amount is 60% of her rent.
---------- Post added 2012-12-28 at 02:31 AM ----------
what? What? The offer was too good? So if someone offered me 1million dollars for sex, they are essentially raping me because i wouldnt like it?
This right here, change 60% rent, for an (allotted price) of a weekly customer for sex. Change 60% to 100 dollars, and we have a prostitute. From the information given, there was no, "otherwise" I'm going to kick you out, statement made.
I'm not saying it didn't happen. Just "WITH THE INFORMATION GIVEN", this has not happened. It's basically a weekly payment for sex. To say otherwise, is blatantly making assumptions.
But isn't a 60% "discount" on anything a good offer?
I think it is.
She's 18.
I'm pretty sure 18s are easily influenced or more easily coerced than most people that are above their 20s and so on.
Even so, assuming she doesn't have much money and this was the only option, coercion it is, for me.
Holy shit, do you guys realise this topic has exploded into an argument that is literally going in circles? Someone argues it's immoral and illegal, then someone goes it's only immoral!, not illegal, then someone goes it's not either, then back to immoral and illegal.
geez. Just recognise everyone has very different opinions on morality, and regarding legalities, the OP's brother is in the clear. (Though for those of you thinking that she has other options, it's not black and white easy. Not everyone realises the full amount of options available to them until they're told, reality can be a real bitch sometimes.)
Edit: She's also just gone through a crisis, and at 18, has to take care of an 11 year old. A kid is an extreme handful. She's not in the clearest state of mind atm, I wonder how many of you saying that she can easily choose another option could actually think that clearly given the circumstances.
I think the story was pretty erotic and I doubt it's true. And if it was true it would not be against the law (at least in my country where I studied the law) because he didn't threaten to kick her out he only made an offer. Also to all these people acting like they know how the girl feels: You don't even know her! She may well be masturbating to this.
Don't assume women are all cute and innocent. Most are pretty tough and have "dark sides", too. To really judge the situation you'd need much more valid information.
See you are acting like this is a forced option. This woman isn't a victim, quit making her out to be one.
IF, I walk up to a a girl co-worker knowing she need 5k to get her car fixed, and say: So I will pay 60% of your rent, for so many months, if you let me fuck you in the ass while my wife eats you out. That is coercion? That is an offer for prostitution.
She made a trade agreement with buyers remorse. End of story.
The laws act differently than our morals, thanfully. If the man offered her ANY benefit she would otherwise not get from having sex with him, then he is at fault and is liable for any damages, emotional and financial, she suffered. If they then had sex and he lowered her rent, then it is sexual coercion, a form of rape. Understand that if her rent was the same before sex and lower after, and she did not want sex before the offer was made, then she was pressured to enter a situation she would otherwise avoid. If she did not want to have sex and did anyway because of his offer than it is coercion.
On the other hand: If the idea were hers. Then she is liable. It would more than likely fall under prostitiution laws from that point.
I see both of your points, but the laws have been interpreted to act differently than either of you are willing to acknowledge. The truth is there is not enough information in the original post for us to draw an accurate conclusion. Simply too much is left in interpretation and assumption. This is why there are so many IF's in this post. The OP simply wasn't clear enough on all the details.
Quite often, the difference between an idiot and a genius is simply a matter of success rate.
Sorry... but your brother is a cunt.
Who even does that? If his financial situation is good, just give it to her for free.
Since this is moving so friggin fast, let me get this out once again "Holy shit, do you guys realise this topic has exploded into an argument that is literally going in circles? Someone argues it's immoral and illegal, then someone goes it's only immoral!, not illegal, then someone goes it's not either, then back to immoral and illegal.".
W...T....F. Seriously just check the last, oh, 5 pages, and you have exactly what happened in the last 70.