I wasn't laughing when I read Kestryl's post. But to address your question, I think the double standard is based on the idea people tend to have that men are inherently less assailable, mentally or physically. It's not something they've thought out, they've just absorbed it. Also, the macho, unassailable male figure, masculine, tough, is so prevalent that anything to the contrary is hilarious to people.

I'll give you an example - one day, my cousin, his sister and their mum were telling me about a fire at the house of one of my cousin's ex-class mates. The fire burnt the house to the ground. The ex-classmate's mother and sister had to jump out from first floor windows and the ex-class mate had to break their fall and hurt his back in the process. The three telling me this story could not stop laughing because the ex-classmate is a short, soft spoken guy and the image of him breaking the two women's fall was hilarious to them. I was appalled.

Eh, the way I look at it, there's a difference between a violent rape and tricking some guy on the Internet 'cause you thought he wouldn't pay attention to you if you told him the truth about your age. Sure, it sucks for Danny, but it's still pretty funny and, these days, he laughs about it as much as I do.

I like this commentary to her story. I do not find it hilarious--more like disturbing.

First of all, Kestryl's description placed Cat at 19 when the story begins and describes them as being textually active for two years, placing her at 17 when this all began. If we are to elevate cyber-sex to the emotional/legal status of physical sex, then Danny in the post may be charged with pedophilia.

Secondly, it isn't rape because it wasn't non-consensual. He could have terminated the relationship/webicourse at any time of his choosing and only persisted because he was operating under false pretenses; hardly comparable to involuntary subjugation. We might be able to equate his plight with those of people who wake up with "beer googles" the morning after, horrified as to their taste in mate selection, or to those who feel betrayed or cheated on in a relationship because their perception did not match a more objective reality: deplorable behavior, perhaps, but most certainly not rape.

However, you do have a point in recognizing that those of more limited mental capacity are more vulnerable and prone to violence. People with mental disabilities suffer from a much higher rate of physical and sexual abuse, and I wonder, if the victim here had been mentally disabled, whether that would qualify as abuse (I think it might have a case). However, for someone of what we assume to be average capabilities, your defense of his inability to protect himself from mental subjugation struck me as an insult (or at least a condescension) to his intelligence and/or lack of judgment (however deserving it may have been). I read the story and felt sad for Danny - his trust was certainly and terribly violated - but it fails the definition of rape.

Anyways, just my $.02.

@WasaiWarrior - 

Date rape is a betrayal of trust and this was a betrayal of trust. The point is not whether or not he was raped; the point is that he was a victim and people are blaming him.

@Kestryl - 

"Eh, the way I look at it, there's a difference between a violent rape and tricking some guy on the Internet"

I know. I'm asking, WHY do people look at that differently?

Date rape is a better comparison . . . really the only difference between a date rape and being tricked as this man was is the difference between physical and mental assault. Both involve violation of trust and the subjugation of someone with less power to someone with more.

Rape is generally thought of as heinous because someone is abusing their superior physical power to gain what they normally wouldn't get. This is bad because someone abused their superior mental power to gain what they otherwise wouldn't get.

Or is mental manipulation okay because feminism has cast the man as evil aggressor and woman as perpetual victim, even when she is clearly the instigator?

@moritheil - 

I don't see how feminism has anything to do with it - if Danny had tricked Cat, if SHE had been the one to fly to see HIM, and if HE were the minor, people wouldn't be reacting any differently.

@Kestryl - 

Wouldn't they? I somehow tend to see more sympathy for the victim when guys trick girls than when girls trick guys. Maybe it's not feminism but some sort of concept that girls are supposed to be tricky? Or that, as jaded_maudlin suggested, guys aren't supposed to be as easily hurt?

@moritheil - 

Honestly? I think it'd be funnier to be if he were the minor - it seems more commonplace for women to lie about their age than men.

@Kestryl - 

Well, again, I don't see why some betrayals are funny and some betrayals aren't. I guess in this case it didn't really destroy his life or anything, so it isn't of great consequence, but if it had, would you still find it funny?

@moritheil - 

Oh, I feel bad for him sure. It's not funny that he got hurt - it's HOW that amuses me to no end.

@Kestryl - 

Broadly speaking, though, all elements of this story are quite possible in person (assuming she looked old enough.) So I look at the medium as largely irrelevant to the essential story.

@moritheil - 

But it's not, really. Because she not only lied about her age, but about vital constructs of her LIFE. Only a consummate liar could keep that going over years of face-to-face interaction, whereas it's easy to think through your answers in online chats.

@Kestryl - 

Right, but that just made it easier. It didn't change what was happening. It's possible that she personally couldn't have pulled it off otherwise, but that's a detail relevant to the actors involved, if you will.

@moritheil - 

I think you're using my post to read into the situation things that had nothing to with it, personally.

@Kestryl - 

I don't really see why you'd say that. A guy got tricked in a relationship he had invested himself in. The rest is just dressing. Fundamentally, you find that funny and I don't.

@moritheil - 

Ha, whatever you say.

@Kestryl - 

Well, those are the facts, no? Nothing you've said in your story contradicts them. Or will you say again that I have the facts wrong?

I mean it's very easy to say, "Ha, you've got it all wrong." Do I? If so, sure, I'll take your word for it. You're the one who was there. But if you're just reflexively saying this - because you often get dismissive when people start to disagree with you, no matter how politely - then I'll have to start wondering what could possibly bother you about this discussion of how people face this situation.

@moritheil - 

See, now, that was my way of saying that this conversation is kind of like running into a brick wall repeatedly for both of us, and there's no point in continuing it for another page of comments.

@Kestryl - 

I don't think so. I think we've run into an interesting facet of how you view your own reactions. Of course, since you're taking this angle, you probably don't think so

@moritheil - 

Ha! Aw, I love it when people start getting insulting. I've been just as polite in disagreeing with you; you and obviously see the situation entirely differently, and at this point there's nothing to be gained from further discussion of it, now is there? We've covered our points, and at this point it's only getting repetitive; if we don't see eye-to-eye now, we won't and there's no sense investing further time into it. Agree to disagree and all.

But thanks for tossing those backhanded insults in. Those are always fun.

@Kestryl - 

I'm not insulting you. Seriously. I'm trying to figure out what drives your reactions, because I find them a little strange.

But if you find my observations insulting, I apologize. It's not as though I have the right to ask you to examine yourself.

@moritheil - 

I fail to see what's strange about them; what I DO find strange is a comment banter session that's turned into psychoanalysis.

Man... that was a mouthful. Why are humans so averse to being scrutinized? What are we all afraid of?
This was, at the very least, thought provoking. Give me a bit to digest it.

Having given it some thought, I've come to the conclusion that I agree with jaded_maudlin. People find it amusing not because it is the normal reaction to have but because it is the conditioned one. Herd mentality, as it were. The concept of masculinity is far more insidious than people are willing to accept and it makes life for those of us who do not adhere to it, a living hell.