Nip and Tuck in Real Life

Submitted by Anonymous on Mon, 2008-08-25 17:16

Story here. Excerpt:

'A CELEBRITY plastic surgeon who allowed a patient to perform oral sex on him before he gave her a nose job is fighting to keep his medical licence.
...
Dr Mendelsohn, 50, admitted he did not attempt to stop a 22-year-old patient performing oral sex on him during an after-hours consultation in May 2005.
...
After the woman left the surgery, she asked her boyfriend to take her to the police, where she pressed sexual assault charges against the doctor.

The NSW Director of Public Prosecution later dropped the charges, on the basis there was no reasonable prospect of a conviction.'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

... she was setting herself up for a free nose job! Granted he should not have accepted her proposition, but she 1) should not have made it and 2) should then not have gone to the police to say she had been "assaulted".

Looks to me like she wanted two things from this: a free nose job and 15 minutes of fame. No one in this scenario is in the right but some of them are more in the wrong than others. And some of them, it seems to me, did some planning ahead of time, too.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Matt on Tue, 2008-08-26 16:15

This story criminalizes male sexuality in an entirely new and creative way.

Because, if I read the piece correctly, the young woman initiated the sexual act. That means she clearly consented to perform.

And then, because the doctor did not force her to stop, he is allegedly commiting a crime?

So, logically, if a man fails to refuse to have sex with a woman initiating the sex, he is guilty?

Of course, to refuse would be domestic violence. Hence, the man is going to be a criminal whether he says yes or no.

The perfect feminist legal concept - guilty whether you provide or withhold your penis from a woman.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Roy on Tue, 2008-08-26 16:46

manonthestreet

The more I read post like the above the more I am convinced that the USA is well on the way to being insane. Sadly I think the insanity can both get worse and continue for some time yet - may be indefinitely.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by trotter on Tue, 2008-08-26 17:12

Because, if I read the piece correctly, the young woman initiated the sexual act. That means she clearly consented to perform.

It seems to me the woman performed the sexual act and the doctor consented. She's the actor here.

Apparently, things are similar in Australia as they are here in the US. Feminist influenced society has taught women that they do whatever they want and get away with it. Women are hardly ever punished for their deeds. There's no disincentive to prevent other women from doing this.

Of course, to refuse would be domestic violence.

He would have to touch her to prevent her from fellating him so that would be considered "violence against women." At the very least he would be called, "not a man" for turning down sex.

The title of this entry is appropriate, it is a Catch-22. Like all men we're wrong no matter what we do.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Daringest on Fri, 2008-08-29 03:28