What type of non-consensual sex would not be rape?
Literally this entire scenario we're describing. It's the same reason why signing a contract that had invisible ink makes the contract unenforceable. Let's turn this around, why is willing exposing your partner to STDs without their knowledge not a violation of consent?
And if you’re saying cheating = non-consensual sex, and you presumably think non-consensual sex is a crime…
Legality != morality. I can think something is morally atrocious while still thinking it should be legal, or at least not punishable.
Short of very extreme examples (STDs, impersonation, Spycops) this is just lying. It’s still bad, but it’s nowhere near the same level of severity as rape.
Once again, you're trying to say that non-consensual must equal rape and that's just not the case.
Also consider the implications of re-criminalizing adultery. That doesn’t seem like a good route to pursue.
No one wants to re-criminalize adultery. Literally no one is bringing this up but you.
There’s just too big of a gap between something like this and rape to casually put them in the same group.
This is entirely a problem of your own imagining. Assault and murder are both crimes that involve bodily harm. But despite having a big gap in the outcomes, we can still put them in the same general classification. We don't need to pretend that assault doesn't involve bodily harm simply because murder is much worse. No one is trying to make a moral equivalence between cheating and more violent forms of non-consent.
If your partner lies to you about something in order to get sex, even just implicitely, then that is non-consensual by definition.
Imagine if your partner routinely went to to concerts and supermarkets without a mask during the covid pandemic and didn't think it was important enough to tell you. Now imagine if you both agreed to quarantine yourselves until further notice before they started doing this.
Now you understand why this relationship is non-consensual.
Wtf?! Cheating isn’t very nice, but to call it “non-consensual sex” is really, really fucked up.
It literally is. STD's between two monogamous people are extremely rare. But adding in a third person, even if Sarah used protection, opens up the risk to John who had no knowledge or consent of the situation. John is being implicitly lied to about the risks associated with his relationship with Sarah.
Who else reads books but imagines how you would react to the situation the characters are in so you create your own narrative line along with the author's until you're reading 4 different stories at once?
Most other instruments that exist around that level of popularity and price involve using your mouth which means you can't sing. Pianos are cool but not portable, although keyboards are kinda changing that. If you want to be a mediocre musician to meet people you play the guitar and sing.
But the wedge issue isn't an issue if you acknowledge that there are problems. MRAs only have that power because there's little acknowledgment of the problems young men face. This is actually a great example because I bring up these issues from a leftist perspective and you jacket me as a misogynist instead of addressing the problems at play.
Acknowledging that one group faces problems does not take away anything from other groups. It's actually the only thing that can end the issues for both. We can acknowledge that the LGBTQ+ community does not face the same problems as the African American community. But we can use intersectionality to reach an understanding and fight the common enemy of capitalism.
Literally this entire scenario we're describing. It's the same reason why signing a contract that had invisible ink makes the contract unenforceable. Let's turn this around, why is willing exposing your partner to STDs without their knowledge not a violation of consent?
Legality != morality. I can think something is morally atrocious while still thinking it should be legal, or at least not punishable.