https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/man-tricked-woman-blindfolded-sex-loses-appeal-54940944

The Iowa Supreme Court upheld the felony conviction Friday of a man who tricked a woman into having sex with him by convincing her through social media that he was an old high school friend.

consent inherently requires knowledge of the identity of a sexual partner.

"The identity of a sexual partner is no mere collateral matter. Women, and men, must be free to decide, on their own terms, who their sexual partners will be," Chief Justice Mark Cady wrote for the majority, further concluding that Kelso-Christy's actions denied the woman "the freedom of choice that breathes life into our sexual abuse statutes."

I'm seeing some real problems here for typical (although sleazy) Tinder hook-up type behavior. What if he uses a fake name? (I sure as hell would if I was on Tinder.) What if he falsely claims to be a doctor? What if he falsely claims that he is not married? How far are we going on identity disclosure?

Don't even get me started on the convoluted reasoning that led to this being a burglary conviction.

Most of all how far are we going to go to protect people from their own bad sexual decisions? With felony convictions and ten year prison sentences no less?

Edit to include some other comments I made in a different sub on this topic, which I will not link or even name the sub to prevent brigading. Just for further discussion:

How about this fact pattern? A 15 year old girl lies to a 21 year old man, says that she is actually 18 and for proof shows him her older sister's driver's license. She is also using her older sister's name. Did she rape him? Fifteen year olds can be charged with rape and also tried as adults in almost every State. So, 20 years in prison? Sound good?

The court would not apply similar reasoning to the purchase of a used car. Which would be a lot easier to enforce legally than policing intimate relationships. Imagine if every used car purchase that turned out to be bad was theft by deception and carried a prison sentence? The criminal justice system was never designed for this. It's purpose is not to promote civility and courtesy and to shelter people from bad decisions. Especially bad romantic decisions. Somehow the court drifted from the concept that rape includes a forcible element or incapacity to consent to sex to a concept where we are going to ask if all things considered the consent given was fair. There is a difference between a crime and not being a very nice person. There is most definitely huge areas in which we expect that people have agency and are responsible for their own bad decisions. I strongly believe this should be one of them.

Seriously now? Do you really believe we as a society have some duty to protect all these precious little snowflakes from the predictable results of their own hopelessly stupid actions when a random first time sexual encounter that she actually consented to in real time turns out to be with a person who is maybe not so nice? We should convict him of a felony and throw him into prison for 10 years? Does the difference between going to prison or not depend on whether or not he bought her breakfast? Do you understand what a slippery slope this is once we throw forcible rape and inability to consent out the window and start looking at whether or not her freely given consent in real time considered sometime later was "fair"?

I think you are blaming the victim.

Yeah, fuck me. Nice try trying to shut the conversation down.