Israeli Jewish woman says Arab man lied about his ethnicity - now he's in jail for rape

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I think it is fairly unsavory to misrepresent yourself in ANY way and have sex with someone under that representation.

This is *exactly* the same thing as two folks meeting in a bar, going home and having sex, then one of the two finding out their partner is mixed race.

Would you think rape charges were perfectly acceptable then?

I never said rape charges were acceptable--but there are many types of rape charges and these are for misrepresentation. It is NOT exactly the same as 'finding out' your partner is mixed race. Apparently he told her one thing and was another. It was not an oversight but a misrepresentation. She acted on the facts she had; he should have been truthful. I also said that - unlike not disclosing an STD, which I think is heinous - I don't see the long term harm done except being left older and wiser which is a good thing, so I don't think rape charges should stand. Basically, I would think they should stand if long term harm was done.
However, what if someone told you he was unmarried and that totally violated your moral code? Sleeping with someone outside your religion might as well. Interesting conversation. I think a wrong was done, but not at the level of rape charge/imprisonment.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:
However, what if someone told you he was unmarried and that totally violated your moral code? Sleeping with someone outside your religion might as well.

I think that once you decide to have sex in an abandoned building with a guy you've known for 20 minutes, you lose the right to argue about your moral code.

The other interesting aspect of this is that the guy has been under house arrest for two years. Given the choice of being trapped in the house with my wife after having been caught committing adultery and going to jail, I think I would welcome jail. I'm surprised his body parts are still all intact.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:...The other interesting aspect of this is that the guy has been under house arrest for two years. Given the choice of being trapped in the house with my wife after having been caught committing adultery and going to jail, I think I would welcome jail. I'm surprised his body parts are still all intact.

A major factor here was his Jewish nickname Dudu. He said that even his wife called him that, but I think she had another Jewish nickname for him: Schmuck!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:...The other interesting aspect of this is that the guy has been under house arrest for two years. Given the choice of being trapped in the house with my wife after having been caught committing adultery and going to jail, I think I would welcome jail. I'm surprised his body parts are still all intact.

A major factor here was his Jewish nickname Dudu. He said that even his wife called him that, but I think she had another Jewish nickname for him: Schmuck!

LOL! Excellent!

[Anonymous]

"Rape" is really the wrong word for this act, whatever it is. Sounds like what this man did was "lie".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Goes to show you really should know someone better before you have sex with him.

You should not be a racist, but also you should not be promiscuous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think it is fairly unsavory to misrepresent yourself in ANY way and have sex with someone under that representation.

This is *exactly* the same thing as two folks meeting in a bar, going home and having sex, then one of the two finding out their partner is mixed race.

Would you think rape charges were perfectly acceptable then?

I never said rape charges were acceptable--but there are many types of rape charges and these are for misrepresentation. It is NOT exactly the same as 'finding out' your partner is mixed race. Apparently he told her one thing and was another. It was not an oversight but a misrepresentation. She acted on the facts she had; he should have been truthful. I also said that - unlike not disclosing an STD, which I think is heinous - I don't see the long term harm done except being left older and wiser which is a good thing, so I don't think rape charges should stand. Basically, I would think they should stand if long term harm was done.
However, what if someone told you he was unmarried and that totally violated your moral code? Sleeping with someone outside your religion might as well. Interesting conversation. I think a wrong was done, but not at the level of rape charge/imprisonment.

These laws were put in place in many places for reasons, but I wish that the more common lies that men told would fall into this category like "I love you", "I would never leave you", and "I am not married". If that were true, many women would be able to prosecute more since lives can be shattered by this type of deception.
I wish that they used more sound reasonable logic with this case. It only emphasizes how racist some Jewish Israelis are. So many people criticize Mormons for a history of racism, but if you look closely at what the Torah/Old Testament say, things aren't much better. It is just that we aren't supposed to criticize Judaism, and it is fun to pick on Mormons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think it is fairly unsavory to misrepresent yourself in ANY way and have sex with someone under that representation.

This is *exactly* the same thing as two folks meeting in a bar, going home and having sex, then one of the two finding out their partner is mixed race.

Would you think rape charges were perfectly acceptable then?

I never said rape charges were acceptable--but there are many types of rape charges and these are for misrepresentation. It is NOT exactly the same as 'finding out' your partner is mixed race. Apparently he told her one thing and was another. It was not an oversight but a misrepresentation. She acted on the facts she had; he should have been truthful. I also said that - unlike not disclosing an STD, which I think is heinous - I don't see the long term harm done except being left older and wiser which is a good thing, so I don't think rape charges should stand. Basically, I would think they should stand if long term harm was done.
However, what if someone told you he was unmarried and that totally violated your moral code? Sleeping with someone outside your religion might as well. Interesting conversation. I think a wrong was done, but not at the level of rape charge/imprisonment.

These laws were put in place in many places for reasons, but I wish that the more common lies that men told would fall into this category like "I love you", "I would never leave you", and "I am not married". If that were true, many women would be able to prosecute more since lives can be shattered by this type of deception.
I wish that they used more sound reasonable logic with this case. It only emphasizes how racist some Jewish Israelis are. So many people criticize Mormons for a history of racism, but if you look closely at what the Torah/Old Testament say, things aren't much better. It is just that we aren't supposed to criticize Judaism, and it is fun to pick on Mormons.

And could this be used in divorce if a woman really married a man for his money?

[Anonymous]

This case sounds like something you would read about during apartheid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This case sounds like something you would read about during apartheid.

I don't agree. You are assuming she is racist. Maybe she is just upset that she was not given the facts--lied to. I agree that it does not quite rise to "rape", and she sounds like she has questionable judgment. However, this guy sounds like a tool as well and the issue is he lied. She did not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This case sounds like something you would read about during apartheid.

I don't agree. You are assuming she is racist. Maybe she is just upset that she was not given the facts--lied to. I agree that it does not quite rise to "rape", and she sounds like she has questionable judgment. However, this guy sounds like a tool as well and the issue is he lied. She did not.

I am too much of a liberal, but I don't make decisions about who I would marry based on race or ethnicity. I am too conservative to sleep with someone I am not engaged to or married to, so go figure, I don't get this woman at all.
That said, she is a racist in my book if she says that she would have had nothing to do with him had she known he was an Arab or Palestinian or non-Jew.
I sometimes wonder how she would have reacted if he were a Russian non-Jew (white) who she thought was Jewish, then found out he was not. I doubt the reaction would have been the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This case sounds like something you would read about during apartheid.

I don't agree. You are assuming she is racist. Maybe she is just upset that she was not given the facts--lied to. I agree that it does not quite rise to "rape", and she sounds like she has questionable judgment. However, this guy sounds like a tool as well and the issue is he lied. She did not.

I am too much of a liberal, but I don't make decisions about who I would marry based on race or ethnicity. I am too conservative to sleep with someone I am not engaged to or married to, so go figure, I don't get this woman at all.
That said, she is a racist in my book if she says that she would have had nothing to do with him had she known he was an Arab or Palestinian or non-Jew.
I sometimes wonder how she would have reacted if he were a Russian non-Jew (white) who she thought was Jewish, then found out he was not. I doubt the reaction would have been the same.

I'm not sure that's racism. It might be a prejudice. To deny that there are deep political divides is foolish. It would be like a Greek and a Turk. There is a centuries old enmity that no doubt factors into the mating/relationship decisions of MANY people on both sides based on facts like, "Your grandfather killed my grandfather in 19>>> whatever". I am not sure if wanting to know if the person you are sleeping with is a historical and current partner in a deeply divided/troubled r-ship is racism or something else.
I am sure there are many cross-relationships as well. I'm presuming people knew the reality though before jumping in and made informed decisions.

[Anonymous]

Again, the court stressed that he was convicted bc he lied about being single when he was actually married - not because he lied about his religion.

If it is illegal to lie to get someone to have sex with you, it is illegal. We dont know how often this law is enforced against Jews as well.

Additionally, many religions, including judaism, prohibit intermarriage/sexual relations with those of other religions. Not due to prejudice or racism, but bc religious law prohibits it and to preserve the religion.

If someone is prohibited from eating pork and someone lies and says its chicken, if fraud is a crime, should they not be prosecuted for that? How is this any different?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I'm not sure that's racism. It might be a prejudice. To deny that there are deep political divides is foolish. It would be like a Greek and a Turk. [b]There is a centuries old enmity that no doubt factors into the mating/relationship decisions of MANY people on both sides based on facts like, "Your grandfather killed my grandfather in 19>>> whatever". I am not sure if wanting to know if the person you are sleeping with is a historical and current partner in a deeply divided/troubled r-ship is racism or something else. [/b]
I am sure there are many cross-relationships as well. I'm presuming people knew the reality though before jumping in and made informed decisions.

It's important to differentiate between a citizen of Israel and someone from the Occupied Territories. Sometimes people in the United States get this mixed up. This guy did not have to deal with check points in the West Bank; He wasn't a member of Hamas in Gaza. He is a citizen of Israel. That means his family stayed in the country during the 1948 war and are officially Israelis. They are not suicide bombers or sending rockets into Jewish communities. They went to school, worked and paid taxes. However, they are not treated equally by the Israeli government and legal system.

In the United States, citizenship is supposed to provide you certain protections regardless of your race and ethnicity. In the United States, a Western Christian woman who had a quickie with a Muslim Arab man who did not reveal his ethnicity might be upset but no one would take her charge of rape seriously. Furthermore if she had a quickie with an American Indian man or a light-skinned Black man who didn't disclose their race and she got upset about it, we would laugh our asses off.

Lastly, it's important to understand that this claim that there is "centuries-old enmity" is false. The enmity has dated back to the early to mid-1900s. Historically, while Jews and Christians weren't treated equally in Muslim countries, they received certain protections within society. There was nothing like the Spanish Inquisition, the Christian-endorsed pogroms in Russia and Eastern Europe and the Holocaust under the Nazis. "Centuries-old enmity" is a better description of European Christian prejudice against Jews.

This guy was obviously a sleaze. That doesn't mean that he shouldn't receive equal protection under the law.

[Anonymous]

I read of precedents involving a guy who claimed to be a government agent who could get benefits for the women he seduced and a guy who claimed to be a neurosurgeon. I assume both were Jews and neither became an international cause. Personally, I think the law sucks, but it seems like it's our reaction, not the law, which is driven by race.

Note that I am not claiming that discrimination does not exist in Israel. Driving while Arab may be as risky in Israel as driving while Black is here. All I am saying is that we are making a fuss over an issue we are not really clear about.