For some people, yes. For others, no. Where on earth does this idea come from that everyone is motivated by an identical parental response to change behaviour, or that "one size fits all"? Is the main aim that she changes how she acts in future, or that you feel righteous? I'd say the first. If she didn't need punishment to truly change, then punishment isn't needed, end of story (a court punishes, thank god parents aren't courts and don't have to deter others by example and fixed rules.) Like I said, hammer and "looks like a nail", if one knows to punish, it still may not be best.

@anongoodnurse - See also footnote 59 page 224 of your own source: Canadian Supreme Court case R v Hutchinson 2014 - wilful deception about contraception which had been a condition for sex: scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/13511/index.do "On appeal, the majority upheld the conviction on the basis that condom protection was an “essential feature” of the sexual activity, and therefore the complainant did not consent to the 'sexual activity in question' ... Held: The appeal should be dismissed.“. So both UK and Canada at least.

See link. I don't think a more specific citation than the UK's public prosecutors' guide and the explicit statement of one of the higher ranking judges in the country, is needed. It would apply equally to both genders because the offence (crime) isnt defined by gender or body parts. It's defined purely as deceit as to the nature of the sexual act - its intended nature, intentions upon participating in it, or conditions which one party knew untruthful. A possible situation that a condom would be worn, but in fact wasn't, was enough to get a valid extradition case in R. v Assange. So yes.

In English law, it's rape. See Crown Prosecution Service guidance to sexual consent, which explains it very well: cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/rape_and_sexual_offences/consent (sections "conclusive presumptions" and more so "conditional consent"). Asssange's case pivoted on this point and the web link quotes the President of the Queens Bench, a high level judge indeed.