Woman in Canada meets man on Internet dating site– a self-described bachelor looking for a long term relationship. They fall in ‘love’, hit the sack and now she’s crying rape:
In the moment, the sex felt consensual — welcomed even. In retrospect though, Minki Basu believes she was violated, her consent allegedly negated by a deception so “morally reprehensible” that each instance of intercourse with Kaz Akbar “constitutes a separate sexual assault.
After five months into a relationship, Minki Basu found out that “Kam Ali” was really Kaz Akbar–a married man with children who had deceived her. She then went on a vengeance spree; according to court documents Basu went to sites where she openly exposed Akbar, in turn putting her at the receiving end of a civil suit by Akbar. Now she is counter-suing on the grounds that he threatened to release a secret sex video. She’s also alleging rape. The case is dizzying to say the least but in the midst of this complicated war in court, the paramount debate is: What constitutes sexual assault?
According to one Toronto based Clinical Psychologist and University Lecturer:
“To me, this is almost an insult to those who have been sexually assaulted,” said Dr. Oren Amitay, adding that deception “happens all the time” in the mating game. “She was used, she was lied to — and so was about 90-something percent of the female population.”
Ms. Basu’s trauma is “quite different” and is more about a “feeling of ‘I was lied to. I was made a fool of.”
Amitay hit the nail on the head. The sad case of Minzi represents a woman being deceived. That’s terrible, but to call it rape is to do a serious disservice to women who have experienced the trauma of rape, and has wider implications concerning the status of women. Feminist advocates have long fought to eradicate female stereotypes about being ruled by emotions and being incapable of leadership and objective thought,which sadly enough bares implications for the progress of women in the workplace. What Minzi’s argument promotes is an exoneratation from responsibility in the process of decision-making. Women and men make mistakes alike and can get duped but to expect the court/state to intervene is ludicrous.
Minzi asks in the National Post articled linked to above:
if a person has stolen my emotions, my trust, my soul, everything … that is not a crime? How is that justified?
A moral crime perhaps, but legally call it rape? Minzi needs to get her head out of the sand. There are no limits to how far one can take this argument to negate consent…..
Legal experts are already asking, if the “Kam Ali Lies” are deemed to constitute fraud and negate consent, then what other deceptions could undo consent? Lying about age? Employment? Assets? Religion?
They ultimately ask: Should the court wade into the fray of love and heartbreak, or is this murky territory better left to the domain of “caveat amator” and “lover beware”?
Lying, cheating, deception is nothing new in relationships, but the internet makes it easier for a ‘mate’ to indulge in an affair and construct a glowing fake identity. It’s up to individuals to do their homework, get to know their partner and his or her significant others. Minzi’s argument is reminiscent of the typical leftist ideology of self entitlement: don’t take responsibility when you mess up, someone will pay for it if you scream loud enough.