Deceitful Arab Rapist Sabbar Kashur

Rape by deception

What on earth is going on in Israel?  Every time a man lies to a woman for sex, he ends up in jail.

First it was the guy who told a woman his semen was holy and could cure sickness.  Remember Nissim Aharon?  He landed himself in the slammer for telling porkies.  And now, according to the Jerusalem Post, we have a guy who was convicted of rape because, after shagging him, the woman found out he was an Arab, not Jew.


It seems to be true.  According to the report, Sabbar Kashur, an Israeli Arab, met the woman in the street.  He denies saying he was a Jew, though it hardly seems relevant.  The couple immediately got a room and got stuck into the old rumpy-pumpy after which Sabbar wandered off about his business, which was a pretty impressive feat of pulling by Sabbar, or else his instant girlfriend was dealing with a whole heap of pent-up neediness.


All sides agree that the woman had sex with him voluntarily, but was later horrified to discover that he was an Arab  — as you would be after you’ve had sex with a complete stranger you just met at the side of the street.  An Israeli court decided that this deception constituted rape, and duly sentenced him to 18 months in jail.

Rape by deception is what they found him guilty of.

Come on.  What’s this all about?  I’m not making this up, but I’ll probably be attacked anyway by the usual posse accusing me of being anti-Israeli.  Of course, that’s nonsense, since this man is Israeli as well, and luckily, I’m in very good company in thinking this is horseshit: most of the Israeli public seem to feel the same, apart from the demented biblical extremists.

If everyone was jailed for using deception to bed someone, the whole world would be in prison.

Anyone who lied about their wealth, their age or  their family could be a rapist.  Anyone who had cosmetic surgery.  Anyone who said I Love You when all they wanted was a bit of leg-over.

Rapists, the whole lot of them.

What kind of nonsense is this?


In other news ..

If a woman or a man feel they’ve been raped , regardless of the facts, they have been raped.

It’s all about what you think.  Not about what actually happened.  It doesn’t matter if you picked somebody up in the street and screwed them.  It doesn’t matter if you enjoyed the fuck out of it until you found out they were an Arab.  You received wrong information and therefore you were raped.

Someone must go to jail because you don’t feel good about the person you screwed.willingly

107 thoughts on “Deceitful Arab Rapist Sabbar Kashur

  1. Surely BOCK you are aware of the prerogative applicable to the female? They can change their minds you know; before or after remains an irrelevance.
    It is I believe a universally understood fact of life.
    And as he was just a feckin’ Arab anyway wouldn’t she have noticed that he wasn’t circumcised? Seems strange to me only from that perspective.
    As to the law as it is applied to races not of the chosen of God, I wouldn’t even try to explain it.

  2. Maybe she was just disappointed with his performance. Sounds like a bit of a wham, bam, thank you mam..
    That’ll teach any selfish male lover!!
    “after which Sabbar wandered off about his business”.. What! No cuddling up afterwards.. no wonder she was annoyed. No cuddles, jail, simple as.

  3. It has also been suggested — unkindly, obviously — that the lady might have been streetwalking and only made the complaint after the police expressed an interest in her daily exercise routine.

  4. Unstranger re: “you are aware of the prerogative applicable to the female? They can change their minds you know; before or after remains an irrelevance.” Don’t be ridiculous, how can you change your mind after the deed has been done? What’s done is done, no point crying over a small weener.

  5. What’s post facto mean – after the fact?
    Sur a case would have to be brought about after the fact.. unless it was an attempted rape case, but that’d still be a post facto charge too wouldn’t it.. All crime is post facto isn’t it?

    They don’t seem like to like them Arabs having at it with their women.. hookers or not.

  6. Oh right.. yeah.

    Jeez an awful lot of Irish men would be locked up under these laws. Including some high ranking politicians.. hmm who else.. garda shicilonis.. US government reps.. Jeez everyone would be. Of the male persuasion I mean. Women have no need to proclaim love to get a shag.

    Mightn’t be a bad thing. If you’re a bastard, off to the slammer with ya.

  7. Bock, have you ever in your life had a woman tell you they love you to get you in the sack? I don’t think so.. unless you’re fricken Dirk Diggler or something.

  8. Well it could have been wealth too.. men in general seem to have to try impress women with that more so than women feel the need. I guess I’m saying women have it easier in terms of getting laid, they don’t need to lie, if they have a big pair of knockers and a tight rear end that is and don’t look like the back of a bus.

  9. True, but that wasn’t the point of the post.

    Everybody engages in deception, in one form or another.

  10. Even people who lool like ” back of bus ” get laid…….the any ol sock/shoe theory.
    Basically all initial sex is based on a lie, The majority of people hold back the farting, lying, lazy, cheating, boring
    general weirdness and uninspired stuff until much later.
    Not everyone is into “post sex snuggling ” either, A walk isn’t an offense.
    All of the above applies to both men and women.

  11. That’s true Norma, You mightn’t be into a snuggle afterwards, depends on the fellow I suppose.
    Sometimes you just need a chunkey monkey’s pair of balls bouncing off your ass.. and then adios.

    It’s true too that any ole sea hag can get laid.. most men aren’t fussy. Jesus even Mary Harney gets some I’d say.

  12. It looks wrong from my small perspective. I don’t have too many feelings about it though. He won’t be locked up too long I would think. There’s worse things. Women/Children being rape by the dozen everyday in places like South Africa.

    It might be the best thing to happen to this chap. I don’t know him or what purpose it might serve his life.

  13. No it’s definitely not right. They’re all off their rocker anyways out there. It’s not too shocking.
    Chosen people my arse.

  14. Don’t know if you are asking me what i think ?
    I think you know what i think……and you don’t want me drifting off topic !
    FME. Now let me think…………I’ll carefully choose my words ! No chunky monkeys and bouncing balls would not be my cause celebre.
    Most men i know are fussy about where they place their acoutrements, as are most women i know, i don’t see any difference.
    Women have just as much drive to get laid as men, They just generally play a different game.

  15. I think that’s true Norma, that women have just as much drive to get laid. Very true.
    Most men you know are fussy about where they place their acoutrements? I find any ole orifice will do them. I’m usually fussy myself, but the beer goggles take effect sometimes.

  16. FME. Thats grand if thats what you find, But do you accept that their is a world beyond what you have found ?
    ” They’re all off their rockers anyways out there ”
    Broad untrue statement, based on what ?
    ” You might’nt be into a snuggle afterward ”
    You have no earthly idea what i’m into, you are ” assuming ” again
    ” It might be the best thing to happen to this chap ”
    How the fuck can being thrown into jail for having consensual sex with someone be a best thing to happen ? The sentence was apparantly handed down on the word of an Israeli Jewish woman against an Israeli Arab man who denied he decieved her with his ethnicity.
    Israeli Arabs living in the state of Israel do not have the same and equal rights to Israeli Jews in work,education,housing etc etc, But you think it might be the ” best thing to happen to the chap ” Will he learn not to shag outside his ethnicity or what ? Seriously what are you thinking ?
    You posted sometime back that you ” did’nt drink ” Whats with the ” beer goggles ” are you wearing them now ?

  17. The evidence was that the man claimed to be a Jew. No corroborating testimony was produced to support the woman’s assertion. Obviously, this would be utterly irrelevant in any rational discussion, but even within the demented criteria of this case, the man should not have been convicted. There were only two witnesses and their evidence was of equal weight.

    On the face of it, the courts decided the word of an Arab was of less value.

    I think Israeli public opinion is outraged by this case and we haven’t heard the last of it.

  18. Bock. I stand corrected on the evidence, The fact that this was alloted Police, Court and Media time is ludicrous.
    What if he had said he was Catholic, Hindu, Zoaraster, maybe Scientologist, Would there have been a case ?
    somehow i doubt it.
    Did the woman in question give evidence that she asked him his religion/ethnicity before engaging in consensul sex ?
    Just can’t get though how anyone could think it might be the ” best thing ” to happen to him.

  19. Did the man deny he’d pretended to be a Jew ? If he didn’t then he’s as good as
    admitting he did. Whether or not “deceitful rape ” is rape or not, that’s another matter.

  20. The man denied pretending to be a Jew.

    Suppose he claimed to be ten years younger.

    Would that make him a rapist?

  21. No, No , No, No and again No.

    When you think of the people whose lives have been destroyed,
    I honestly feel like banging my head against the wall
    What kind of a crazy messed up place are we
    Ah fuck I just don’t know what to say anymore.

  22. Norma, you go against something I say, I agree with you, you take it again and disagree and say I’m assuming something.
    Comment 3, I say “What! No cuddling up afterwards.. no wonder she was annoyed. No cuddles, jail, simple as.” I’m kidding there by the way.

    Comment 15 you say -” Not everyone is into “post sex snuggling ” either,”

    I then say, ” That’s true Norma, You mightn’t be into a snuggle afterwards, depends on the fellow I suppose.
    Sometimes you just need a chunkey monkey’s pair of balls bouncing off your ass.. and then adios.”

    Then when I agree, you come back and say “You have no earthly idea what i’m into, you are ” assuming ” again”.. Jesus. I don’t care if you’re into snuggling, swinging, orgies, bondage, swinging from the rafters.. whatever floats your boat. I said “You” meaning, one, a person. You mightn’t be into snuggling.

    I don’t have major feelings about this event. I’m being honest. I said it’s wrong. There is someone off their rocker over there isn’t there? It’s just sheer insanity with the ethnic divide, the starvation/deprevation inflicted on the’s takes quite a few people to keep it enforced doesn’t it.

    I never said I don’t drink. In terms of saying it might be the best thing that happened to him..I still said it’s wrong, but I believe everything happens for a reason basically, that’s all and that even the bad events in our lives we learn from. It’s wrong, it’s wrong, it’s wrong though. I’m in agreement with you.

  23. I dug a little deeper and apparantly ” Rape by deception ” is a crime in Israel.
    In this particular case there were 3 Judges presiding, Tzvi Segal one of the Judges stated ” Its not a classical rape by force ”
    She went on to say.
    ” The courtis obliged to protect public interest from sophisticated smooth tongued criminals who can decieve innocent victims at an unbearable price, The sancity of their bodies and souls ” She went on but i’ll leave it there.
    However, in 2008 an Israeli Jew called Zvi Sleiman was sentenced to 10 yrs for pretending to be a snr official in the Ministry of Housing in order to lure women to his bed.
    The Supreme Court overturned his appeal with a ruling that ” A conviction for rape should be imposed anytime a person does not tell the truth regarding critical matters to a REASONABLE woman, and as a result of MISINTERPRETATION she has sexual relations with him ”
    So what to deduce ?
    FME All i have to say to your last comment is, When Thomas Edison was referred to as a genius, he responded with ” A genius is a talented person who does their homework “………….hope for us all !

  24. Its obviously very much a ” critical matter ” that in 10 mins a man must be assured that the woman is ” reasonable ”
    I wonder if thats on Israeli driving licences or identity cards ” This is one whole lotta reasonabe woman ”
    Even more interesting is that the Supreme Court of Israel take the view that sexual relations are ” critical matters ” but life of their neighbours, not so critical.
    Would that work in Irish pubs,” The reasonable womens corner ” ?

  25. Now i’m wondering does this Law of ” Sexual Deception ” Also apply to women in Israel ?

  26. The deception apparently relates to the form of protection used. The woman realised when he withdrew, instead of wearing a johnny he had a towel wrapped round the head.

  27. I find this case and judgement unbelievable . Merov Mor’s defence of the judgement is utterly unbelievable. It was not about race or ethnicity? Then what was it about? For Israel it seems “words mean what I want them to mean” . Although the case does highlight the nonsense that the conflict in that part of the world is. She thought he was a Jew because there is no difference between Jewish and Palestinian Israelis.

  28. You dont have to go that far from home. A taxi driver in Mallow got 8 years for rape during the week. From the way it was reported (I’m assuming the newspaper report reflected reality, possibly not the safest assumption when its the Examiner) there didn’t appear to be any actual evidence, just her word versus his. She and a few of her mates went back to his place for a party, and they ended up sleeping there, she on a couch. She said she woke up with him raping her, he denied it. Police said no evidence of physical force.

    There’s a lesson here for the lads, if you havent got it yet: Be very nice to a lady in the aftermath of a sexual encounter. One complaint from an unhappy girl post coitus is as good as a conviction. Its not quite as scary as the episode in Israel (or the law in Israel!), but its a disgrace nonetheless. Is there any other scenario in Irish life where someone can get convicted for a serious offence without any actual evidence other than the owrd of the accuser?

  29. I think the Israeli case is different because the complainant acknowledged that sex was consensual. The rape accusation arose solely because the man wasn’t a Jew.

  30. Its different, but there’s a common theme: The laws and justice systems of many western countries including our own seem to place men firmly in the wrong as a default, in matters to do with sex and the family, even when this flies in the face of the most basic tenets of those systems, like the requirement for evidence to secure a conviction. This rape by deception law in Israel seems to be taking this to a whole new level though.

  31. unstranger what a fucking loser you are. I guess you have problems getting it up which leads to your bitter little outburst.

  32. The feminist interpretation, as I understand it, is that if a person uses deception in order to convince another to have sex with them, then it is rape – the argument being that consent obtained through lies is not consent at all.

    (The definition of rape, of course, is sex without consent. Hence we have statutory rape, for example; we assume anyone under the age of 18 cannot give consent, which is a discussion for another day.)

    Personally, I would be of the opinion that if both parties consent, and there is no coercion on either side to consent – as we see here – then the feminist interpretation is overly broad, and does not apply. Lying to someone for the express purpose of obtaining sex is coercion, and it has been found to fall within the definition of rape according to the interpretation above – but we must distinguish that from the more common and benign case, that of lying to someone to make oneself appear more appealing as a sexual partner.

    This distinction can essentially differentiate between the two cases mentioned above. In the first instance, the man used coercion (by telling women that his semen could heal them) to convince them to have sex with him. In the second instance, if the man lied (it’s not clear he did), simply telling the woman that he was a Jew was not likely on its own to convince her to have sex with him. There was no coercion there.

    Of course, there’s a broad spectrum of situations in between little white lies and coercing another person to perform acts against their will, and you could spend days debating the merits of individual cases. In this case, I would suggest that the courts have seriously erred given the facts on hand.

    Something that truly bothered me here though – Unstranger’s comment: “Surely BOCK you are aware of the prerogative applicable to the female? They can change their minds you know; before or after remains an irrelevance.” Was this for comedic value? Or are you honestly implying that women are universally fickle and malicious when it comes to sex?

    (As an aside: the incidence of false rape accusations is not known with any accuracy in the western world, as far as I’m aware. It’s believed to be a very, very low number in comparison with the incidence of actual rape. Considering that the conviction rate for rape is pretty low anyway, and the usual treatment of victims in trial tends to range from indifference to open hostility (‘she was asking for it’ etc), it can’t really be called a successful means of revenge.)

  33. Sex Education 101
    If you have sex with a stranger, ten minutes after meeting him or her – he or she might not be a Jew (or anything else you presumed he / she might be)!! [The Israeli case].
    If you have sex with someone while they’re asleep or unconscious – you might be charged with rape because they can’t consent to sex with you if they’re asleep or unconscious. [The mallow case].
    Therefore, don’t have sex after 10 minutes of meeting someone and don’t have sex with sleeping people.
    If you do, it’s your own fault, so cop on and don’t complain about what happens next!

  34. Sounds like this “lady” was a lady of the night, and upon her questioning by the police, realised the game was up, so to speak…

  35. Máiréad, my point with the Mallow case was that there was no evidence that she was asleep. If she was asleep, that’s rape, no question. But we only have her word for that. Which was enough for the courts it seems. As I said , its always possible that the reporter didnt give a very thorough account of the trial, but thats how it read to me.

  36. Come off it Claire, that guy who said his semen could heal didnt “coerce” anyone, he conned them.

  37. I read a few articles on the Mallow case, EssoDee, and it sounds like there was evidence.
    Maybe the one you read was a synopsis? Did it say that there was no evidence?
    I really don’t think he would be convicted without evidence, if he was, that sounds very suspect.

    The Israeli lady agreed to have sex, so how could that be rape? The whole point is consent, or lack of it. Mind you, if it is the law of the land that if you misrepresent yourself for sex then that’s an offense, well lads watch out.

  38. Mairéad I hope that I am misreading your comments. You can not possible believe this bizarre and utterly ridiculous law can have any justification in logic? If taken to it’s conclusion there will be a lot of very lonely Israeli women. The definition of “rape” by their courts is utter nonsense.

  39. Máiréad, the only mention of evidence in the piece, which was a sizeable enough article, was that the Gardaí gave evidence that there were no signs of physical force. I hope it was just bad journalism. I’d like to read those other articles, if you can refer me to them I’d appreciate it.

  40. Sorry, EssoDee, I can’t remember where I might have read it, but I think I recall evidence given by other people in the house at the time?

  41. “The feminist interpretation, as I understand it, is that if a person uses deception in order to convince another to have sex with them, then it is rape – the argument being that consent obtained through lies is not consent at all.”
    What a load of cock and bull. The feminist interpretation? Which feminist said that I wonder? Do they even have sex? ‘Consent obtained through lies is not consent at all’ – Consent is consent, no matter what lies are told. It makes women out to be complete eegits.. ‘he lied to me your honour, he told me I’d have multiple screaming orgasms, but it was over before I even got my knickers off, I feel I was mislead and it’s criminal’ Gimme a break.

  42. Mind you, if it is the law of the land that if you misrepresent yourself for sex then that’s an offense, well lads watch out.

    Girls watch out too, surely?

    Sounds like this “lady” was a lady of the night, and upon her questioning by the police, realised the game was up, so to speak…

    Are you assuming that she was a whore because she slept with this guy so soon after meeting?

  43. Indications are that The Lady in question admired the mans motorbike, A conversation ensued, Then within 10 mins or so they ” retired ” to an empty building and had sex, Then man exited and possibly roared off into the day/night on his bike.
    The fact that Israel strongly promotes itself as a strong democratic state, Claiming such democracy in the midst of lack of same in region ( not my opinion ) while sustaining such an obviously archaic law is ……….I just have no word for it.
    A prominent Israeli Jewish Lawyer was asked, ” Would the same sentence have been handed down to an Israeli Jewish man, having lied to an Israeli Arab woman ? ” His opinion was ” No it would not ”
    Am i safe then to think this is further display of apartheid ?
    Relationships between Israeli Jews and Israeli Arabs or Palestinians are fiercly discouraged in Israel.

  44. From what ensued, I think she may very well have had the morals of Mother Theresa—Bock has written a good piece about her financial activities.
    Would it make more sense if he was a gigalo and she paid for the ride, only to discover later that he was a ‘dirty arab’? I’m not defending the lady in question in any way, what happened was a complete mind-fuck. Ridiculous.

  45. It does’nt matter and its really of no consequence that they met and did the deed in 10 mins in a disused building, Maybe they were very decisive and horney, Thats hardly illegal.
    She claimed she believed he was ” Ajewish man looking for a serious relationship ” Now that is comedy, But still of no consequence, But she hardly then falls into the definition of the Israeli Supreme Courts definition of a ” reasonable woman ” Is there not a loophole then that it would not be ” illegal ” to decieve an ” unreasonable woman ” ?
    I wonder though, How did she even find out he was an Arab, She must have still been interested and suitably impressed to continue searching ?

  46. Oh, I know Norma. Two grown-ups had consensual sex. What came next is utterly ridiculous.

  47. That woman in the clip above is clearly off her fricken rocker.. “if you received wrong information, consent is nullified and it’s rape”. Jesus, I’m embarassed to be a woman listening to that tripe. If you consent you consent. How can consent be nullified if you were told a lie? I’m trying to think of something comparable, I consented to go on a holiday, or go out to dinner.. the place or the meal was shite.. I was mislead, so I didn’t really consent then.. it’s taken back. If you consented, you always consented, it can’t be changed willy nilly and it doesn’t change the fact just because you’re disappointed.

    Irate I don’t think they’d care if this woman was a nymphomaniac, prostitute.. she was disappointed and mislead therefore she couldn’t have chosen willingly to have at it with a dirty Arab, who would do that? It’s unspeakable.

  48. UNstranger — my apologies. The site was down and I was unable to dwal with comments for most of the day.

    Shellshock — As a newcomer, you are obviously unaware of the site rules. Personal abuse is absolutely unacceptable here. One more instance of that and you will be banned permanently.

  49. Handing down the verdict, Tzvi Segal, one of three judges on the case, acknowledged that sex had been consensual but said that although not ‘a classical rape by force,’ the woman would not have consented if she had not believed Mr Kashur was Jewish. The sex therefore was obtained under false pretences, the judges said. ‘If she hadn’t thought the accused was a Jewish bachelor interested in a serious romantic relationship, she would not have cooperated,’ they added. The court ruled that Mr Kashur should receive a jail term and rejected the option of a six-month community service order.

  50. Christ, where would that leave me now? If I went off with a girl in Limerick in my youth, only to be told the next day “Gwayyyy, you haandicap” and said slag to report me for being from another part of Limerick, same thing, in a way

  51. Had a Jewish man pretended to be a Muslim in order to have sex with a Muslim woman, what do you think the verdict of an Israeli court would have been?

    Answers on a postcard please.

  52. Jesus..Muslim, Jew, Christian, Pagan, Harry Krishner.. who cares as long as he could get it up.
    Much wants more I say.. Greedy so and so. “A serious relationship”… if she wanted that she should have waited till the second date at least.

  53. Whoops – Norma’s already made that point – good on you ma’am.

    The discouragement, to the point of making it illegal, of sexual relationships between ‘races’ is a characteristic of apartheid / racist regimes. Polluting the blood, and all that baloney.

  54. Strangely, or perhaps not, this thread hasn’t been swamped by the usual bunch of cyber-loudmouths. I wonder why?

  55. haha Val.. I do.. but I’m sorry I’m already taken.. me and my rampant rabbit are in a serious relationship.

  56. I tell ya, I’d never cheat on my rampant rabbit.. it’s my trusty friend that never fails to perform. :)
    That Israeli woman clearly didn’t have one. Imagine it failed to get her off, could the inventor do time in Jail.

  57. Of course, for all you know, since this is the internet, I might not be a man. Maybe I already have my own rabbit.

  58. Bock comment 64. That might be because your site was down for a while, A rash of those comments might be lying in wait ! And there was I thinking it was just me and ” big brother ” was onto me.
    That judgement makes a mockery of the Law which is the recourse for real and suffering people who have endured the act of Rape, It invites cynicism and comedy in an area it just does’nt belong.

  59. Bock, I’ve seen you. You’re a fine strappin lad.. you’re definitely not, not a man.
    I’d recommend going with the ‘full size rear entry”. or ‘porta muff’.. like a porta john.. take it with you wherever you go. You’ll have a permanent smile on your face.

  60. @EssoDee It is possible to make the argument that the women in the case of the holy semen were defrauded rather than raped, and if they were made to do something other than have sex with the man in question, I’m sure he would have been charged with fraud. The addition of sex muddies the waters somewhat.

    The court called it rape, based on the interpretation I outlined earlier. They could just as easily have convicted on fraud instead, but we don’t know their exact line of reasoning.

    @FME “What a load of cock and bull. The feminist interpretation? Which feminist said that I wonder? Do they even have sex? ‘Consent obtained through lies is not consent at all’ – Consent is consent, no matter what lies are told. It makes women out to be complete eegits.. ‘he lied to me your honour, he told me I’d have multiple screaming orgasms, but it was over before I even got my knickers off, I feel I was mislead and it’s criminal’ Gimme a break.”

    FME, I read extensively on feminism and that is the feminist interpretation, as I understand it. It’s certainly not the only one – some extreme feminists call any sex in which there is a power imbalance between the parties involved rape, even between consenting adults – but it would be the more common one I have encountered.

    Consider this scenario, a little closer to home: a priest tells a young boy that unless he has sex with him, he and his family are going to hell. The boy agrees, because he doesn’t want his family to go to hell. But consent is consent, no matter what lies are told, yes? By your estimation, if it were not for statutory rape, this would not be a crime.

    That’s an extreme example, but it does illustrate the point: consent obtained under duress is not consent at all. Some use force, some use lies, but the end result is the same – they coerce someone into an act that they would not normally agree to.

    I did note that there is a wide grey area there between coercion and little white lies, so I don’t particularly like the fact that you took a scenario that clearly falls into the ‘little white lie’ category and misconstrued my argument to mean I considered that coercion. I thought I was very clear that that was not my opinion, and I explained the line of reasoning behind both interpretations.

  61. I’m afraid that’s a false comparison, since a child is incapable of consenting to sex with an adult.

  62. And that it is, Mairead. I have the slang centre of my brain switched off for fear of people thinking that i’m speaking in tongues. My mistake.

  63. @Bock

    I did specify ‘if it were not for statutory rape’.

    Let’s modify the scenario a little. The priest in question is particularly disturbed but also careful, and waits for the boy to turn 18. The boy, even though he is now legally an adult, is still quite religious and fearful of hell. Is it now not rape because of his age? I would argue that we do not need to reference the statutory rape law in order to make a determination of rape; it is consent obtained under duress, and therefore not consent at all.

    Still, there’s the grey area I mentioned before. Some would argue that he was a consenting adult in the act regardless of what was said. That is not my opinion, of course, but it does make for interesting discussion.

  64. Claire, that’s a good example, there is a grey area between coercion and fraud/lies alright. I think the law should makes clearer distinctions between a guy who holds a knife to a girls throat and rapes her, and a guy who has sex with his girlfriend who is a few days shy of her seventeenth birthday. At present they are both rapists under the law, a bit unfair on the guy with the girlfriend.
    By the same token, the priest in your example is somewhere in the middle of the spectrum, between the guy with the knife, and FME’s example of the guy who promises a great time but fails to deliver. Maybe the law should reflect that. not an easy task I’d imagine.

    Thanks for those posts BTW, they got me thinking, and apologies for being dismissive in my previous post.

  65. Claire, I understand that’s your interpretration of the feminist view “that if a person uses deception in order to convince another to have sex with them, then it is rape – the argument being that consent obtained through lies is not consent at all.” But I think it’s a load of tripe.

    You’re the one muddying the waters unnecessarily with the comparison of child rape. There is clearly an imbalance of power being an adult and a child and the adult is under no illusion it’s wrong.

    It’s comparing vunerable children to grown adult women. The woman is this case was not coerced into having sex in any way. She consented. It’s not rape. The rest is irrelevant. Tough titty if she was disappointed after the fact. An example.. Lots of people enter into marriage with false expectations.. what are you going to do; sue every person that didn’t live up to what you hoped they would be.
    It’s terribly disappointing that the woman found out he was the wrong religion and there was no hope of a serious relationship..but that’s life. It doesn’t warrant every chancer and bullshitter being locked up.

    I think there’s less of a grey area between “coercion and little white lies” that you say. It’s these feminist arguments that complicate matters that aren’t complicated. Even if you’re told big big lies, there’s still no coercion if you consent. Coercion means to be force or compel someone in a certain way by use of pressure, threats, or intimidation. You’ve not been coerced in any way if you are happily fucking away to your hearts desire no matter what you find out later. Tough, is my opinion on that one. The woman might be less of an idiot next time. These laws are for idiot women.. The idiot woman law. My interpretation of some feminists, they’re idiots who believe their fellow woman is an idiot who can be duped at any moment and cannot consent because she’s a dope.

  66. There’s no question of coercion in this case.

    It’s about deception. Should people be held guilty of rape because they misrepresented themselves in some way?

    What if a woman claimed to be younger than she is in reality? Would she be guilty of rape?

    What if a man said he was a millionaire, when in fact he was flat broke?

    Suppose he impersonated a famous rock-star. Could some groupie accuse him of rape when it turns out he was only the roadie?

  67. @FME

    I said I did not agree with the feminist interpretation. I stated clearly that I thought the courts had erred in convicting the man in question here for rape. It is not ‘my’ interpretation – do not refer to it as such.

    My comments were largely discussing why they might have come to that incorrect conclusion, and what the alternate conclusion might be. I offered the initial priest-and-child scenario to illustrate how someone may be coerced by lies – and I amended it later, to take out the child rape aspect.

    Your comment there is largely arguing as if I support the mainstream feminist interpretation, which suggests to me that I’m either not being wholly clear, or you’re misunderstanding me entirely. I repeat: I don’t particularly like the fact that you misconstrued my comments about the Arab man above to mean I considered it coercion, and his rape conviction justified. I thought I was very clear that that was not my opinion, and I explained the line of reasoning behind both interpretations. I mean, I’m entirely capable of discussing and describing both sides to an argument.

    Can we be clear on that point? I do not agree with the rape conviction of a man simply because the woman found out after the fact that he was an Arab. The facts as we know them right now clearly show that there was no coercion on either part and consent was freely given; hence, there was no rape, regardless of what else either may be guilty of. That the woman may have been a prostitute? Irrelevant. That they had casual sex? Irrelevant. Consent + lack of coercion = not a rape.

    If anything, I would think that this case illustrates a frightening kind of social stigma against Arabs. If we look at the train of logic here:

    -This is a woman who lives in a town that is 25% Arab, according to Google
    -She feels so revolted and betrayed by the thought of having sex with an Arab that she considers it rape
    -BUT she has sex with a man she has only just met and for all intents and purposes is a stranger to her.

    It doesn’t add up. If she were really that concerned about Arab men, she would not have sex with a man she has just met and about whom she knows very little because one in four men she encounters are Arab.

    So – the likeliest train of events here are as follows: woman meets man, has a good time, man leaves and all is well. Woman finds out later that man is an Arab. She had a good time, this is true, but the social stigma surrounding a Jewish woman sleeping with an Arab man is too much. She may face censure at the hands of her society if it becomes known that she, in fact, had a good time with an Arab. Woman avoids censure of society by accusing man of deceiving her.

    All in all, it’s a pretty rotten situation largely stemming from social prejudice.

  68. That’s a remarkably informative article, and I highly recommend everyone read it for some further insight into the mentality of the Israeli authorities.

    I can’t help but see some parallels there to the history of racism in America. It has the same smell of irrational moral panic.

  69. Laws banning Interracial marriage were enfoced in Nazi Germany, Sth Africa ( during apartheid ) and in individual US states from colonial times to 1967.
    Its something of a moot point debating Laws on Rape internationally because the bigger picture here say’s more about Israeli Law than it does about Rape.
    The tail that wag’s the dog an all that.

  70. Claire, to reiterate I dont think you support the feminist interpretation that you stated. I said I understand it’s “the feminist interpretation, as you understand it”. So I’m saying I don’t care for their interpretation.
    Lets be clear. Because I don’t agree with something that’s written, doesn’t mean I attribute those views to the author.

    For instance:
    “She feels so revolted and betrayed by the thought of having sex with an Arab that she considers it rape”.
    I might say..It’s not rape if she consents at the time, regardless of any subsequent information she receives . If he told her he was the second coming of the lord, and he turned out not to be, she’d just have to suck it up. I do not attribute any stated views to the author because I disagree with any statements put forward.

  71. No need to apologise Claire.. It can be difficult with the written word to establish intent.
    You could say something similar in person and if I said well that’s just ridiculous, you’d know by my tone it wasn’t being attributed to you. I was reading something recently that 70% of the written word is misinterpreted, we all do it. It’s hard to tell without tone and body language what a person is trying to convey.
    See myself and Norma above.. I’m agreeing with her, and having a laugh at the same time about having a good shag with no cuddles, it might look like I’m taking the proverbial piss though. Which I would never do.

  72. Really interesting discussion.
    My Mam was right – Don’t have sex with someone until you know his people!!
    Well, she never said those words exactly, it was more like “Behave yourself”, but I knew very well what she meant.

  73. @ FME. I genuinly have no problem ever with someone taking the piss, Trust me I have a cluck of kids and grandkids who take the piss out of me ad infinitum and i’m lovin it !
    My massive issue ( not a well or carefully chosen word ! ) is with ” Assumptions ” and all the deitrus perpetrated by that sort of thought process, To me ” Assumptions ” clog up the clearing process of my mind, I would prefer to be totally insulted than have anything ” assumed ” about me.
    Does that explain our little misunderstanding ?
    I certainly have been accused of having strange views, for example I believe it is more offensive in an intimate relationship to take your partner for granted than be unfaithful, That one has dragged me into massive debate in social gatherings ! But don’t misinterpret me, I’m in no way advocating unfaithfulness or dishonesty, because if the focus is on not taking ones partner for granted then i believe a sense of awareness will have room to grow toward more receptivness, communication and solidarity.
    Sorry if thats long winded, I was just trying to furnish you with an example, might also be a bit off topic so apologies to Bock !

  74. All clear, gotcha Norma.. I would hope I don’t assume anything about a person without them stating their view. Communication can be a bit of a minefield sometimes. Your example of relationships aptly demonstrating this.

  75. I wonder if we might agree that this law is utterly ridiculous? That the court was racist and prejudiced in this case? Admittedly had the “lady” involved brought such a matter to the attention of the courts in a neighbouring state she would have been stoned to death!

  76. Solution.. ride a plant of nettles. It’s more exciting and religion won’t come into it.

  77. A well known lady (term used loosely) in my neck of the woods was asked by a priest some years ago who the father of her soon-to be-born child was. Her reply was “If I told you I fell into a bunch of nettles, would you ask me which one stung me?”

  78. We have an update to this – the story was distorted far beyond actual reality.

    The relevant link is here:

    Long story short…

    “In a nutshell, the victim was in her 20s, and a longstanding victim of childhood sexual abuse at the hands of her father as well having worked as a prostitute and been addicted to drugs. None of which stopped the sexual abuse from her father. At the time of the rape she was living in a women’s shelter having finally escaped him.

    According to her testimony, the convicted man dragged her into a hallway, stripped her, and forcibly raped her, leaving her half naked and bleeding when an ambulance arrived. She was in the process of prosecuting this when, essentially, the prosecution threatened to try to tear her credibility to strips by painting her as an ‘unreliable witness’. This was based on her history of allegations of sexual abuse, her history of working as a prostitute, and some inconsistencies in her testimony (during which she was visibly distressed). This was their tactic in a plea-bargain to get the charge of rape dropped to the lesser charge of ‘rape by deception’. Which is an awful lot different to the way the story was originally painted.”

    Yeah. This only came out after the witness testimony was unclassified. That 18 months in prison seems pathetic now, considering virtually all the facts of this case were misrepresented.

  79. Pull the other leg.It sounds like an Israeli propaganda version to counter world condemnation for racism.Hey we are not bad!! actually we are too nice!…I believe nothing they say without hard evidence to support it

  80. …Ok, clearly you didn’t read the article.

    The initial reports presented the judiciary as being racist and more than a little stupid. The updated report paints them as heartless, despicable sociopaths. If I may quote the relevant part from the translated source:

    “The court appearance left B. severely traumatized. When the Defense learned that B. previously filed 14 complaints against her father and other men for sexual assault, it asked to cross-examine B. once again about the past complaints, while focusing on a number of them that didn’t result in an indictment and convictions due to contradictions in her story. The Defense planned to use B.’s past complaints to shatter her credibility. Wanting to avoid another traumatizing event, the Prosecution formulated a plea bargain with the Defense that reduced the charges to “rape by deception”. Essentially, using the threat of once again subjecting a vulnerable rape victim to a traumatizing interrogation, the Defense was able to reach a plea agreement with greatly reduced charges, which didn’t correspond with the facts of the incident.”

    Are you actually arguing that traumatising and demonising a rape victim who has already been abused repeatedly and severely, then convicting her rapist on a bullshit charge which means he will be out again soon enough to attack other victims, presents the Israeli authorities in a better light?

  81. Strangely, while the new information is horrifying, it doesn’t alter the underlying discussion. If anything, this makes the conviction even more obscene, although for entirely different reasons, in the sense that a more acceptable charge was concocted, whereby a man pretending to be a Jew could be convicted of rape.

    It’s a peculiar case in the sense that the protagonists are somehow outside it because it has raised issues of race that won’t go away, even after we hear new facts.

  82. Well, the debate over whether it’s right to convict a man of rape based solely on his race remains.

    I would set it aside from this case though. The facts apparently do not correspond to the charge, i.e. the man was not actually convicted of rape based solely on his race.

    Unfortunately, rape victims have to take what justice they can get. I feel for this woman; she’s obviously suffered a lot.

  83. I wouldn’t disagree with that, but the case would not have been reported in the west at all unless it carried something of broader interest? Without diminishing human suffering in any way, there are cases of violent attacks everywhere every day, and there are many such in Ireland. We can’t report them all.

  84. Well ok,but what I was saying was it could be an attempt to diminish sympathy for the Palestinian who was one way or the other convicted on a race law.And as for this woman well so many previous allegations made and it appears nobody seems to believe her.Well they know her better than we do so I wonder why.And the internet story is based on her statements and also who are the people putting her word out as ‘”fact”.I would still be of the opinion that its more than likely a damage limitation exercise.I find it difficult to picture Israel being lenient on a Palestinian,proof of this being that he has been now convicted on a racist law.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.