Do feminists honestly believe they are free from responsibility while drunk? Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT | |
Forget what I said originally. I read past page 2 and the trolls dissapeared so I was able to actully read opinions without an essay after each one on how they are rapists. OT: After reading some of the stuff posted here I think I have a clearer idea of the issue. So the problem isn't just a women crying rape but when a sober man takes advantage of her because she was drunk. I still think she should share responsiblity for getting drunk and I am not too sure what to make of the guy. Is rape the right term for this? Yes it is rape but usaully when I hear rape I think of some guy grabbing a women, tearing her clothes off and forcing himself on her while she cry's and begs him to stop. Plus there are situations where someone who is sober does have sex with somebody who is drunk and can be convicted when they had no bad intentions. It just seems kind of unfair that someone can go out looking for some casual sex and then because of a stupid mistake be labelled the same as the description I just gave which springs to mind when I hear rapist. | |
The issue in this situation is that in most cases the supposed "rapist" would also be drunk (so, could easily have been "raped" themselves by the same definition). If a man were to say "I got drunk and took a girl home, so she must be a rapist", he'd get laughed at. So the argument pretty much comes down to "it was rape because I am a different gender and therefore must be treated differently". Which doesn't really sound like gender equality to me. =/ | |
Making mistakes is one thing, being raped is quite another. That does not mean that beign raped is your fault, or that you made some kind of mistake for being raped.
Agreed.
I'm sorry man, but this last part is making my blood boil. They were too drunk, and therefore they deserve to be raped? Sure, no one has a responsibility to take care of others (not legally anyway) but that does not fucking imply that it's ok to rape them, or that they "had it coming". This is the kind of attitudes woman have to face even when they try to press charges. | |
Im pretty sure it wasn't meant that a women deserved to get raped but that it was kinda their own fault. If they get really drunk, they don't "deserve" to get raped but they could end up in bed with someone. | |
You could start by showing an example that actually shows either a conviction of rape of a man who had sex with a conscious and willing if inebriated woman... or a feminist actually proposing that such a thing should be a crime. The law is pretty clear under the Dutch-Courage principal in that if you WILLINGLY put yourself into a state of intoxication then you are responsible for your actions while intoxicated. I don't see that precedent being broken any time soon. No feminist could remove female responsibility while drunk without excusing a man who drunkenly rapes a sober woman. However inebriated should be seen as very distinct from unconscious. There is no drunk-driving analogy as it is impossible to make any decision. If either a male or female up for it and regrets it again when sober then he or she only have themselves to blame for drinking so much. | |
So let me get this straight: you're arguing a drunk person is responsible for their actions if they get behind the wheel of a car and kill someone, but not if they have sex with someone they otherwise wouldn't if they were sober? I just want to clarify this here, because frankly, you can't argue they're responsible for their actions in one case but not the other. Either they are always responsible for their actions because they chose to get drunk, or they are never responsible while drunk. | |
to be fair B can be hard to tell if you don't know the person well because different people react to different drugs differently unless theres something overt (check the eyes) it can be hard to check for that sort of things, especially if your not 100% yourself. Just a moral grey area id like to point out. (not defending my actions, i don't really do the whole "hook up" thing) | |
If you can make a purchase- Then you can consent to sex- -when drunk It's a social practice, that has been around for as long as alchohol itself. Laudanum | |
I hate this argument. If you get drunk then its your fault what you consent to. You weren't raped, you were stupid enough to get that drunk when you knew this could happen. Its even worse when the victim (Of the court case) is just as drunk and they still claim rape. | |
Just a small correction. Can people please stop throwing around words they don't fully understand? Edit: I'm not saying I agree with your post, for the record. The word feminist just doesn't belong there. | |
I'm sorry gents, but if you can't take care of yourself when you party, you deserve to be taken to court. The girls around you weren't born to be your sex-toys, and if there's girls drinking, why sex them up in the first place? Gents, please prove that you're worth more than your penis. There's a brain in there. Use it. A sober guy that has sex with a non-sober woman is a rapist and deserves to be taken to court. As simple as that. You have a brain in there. Use it. Someone else having their defenses down is no excuse for a crime. Simple fact. Stealing from a drunken guy is still theft. Or would you suddenly argue that it's not so? :) I'm glad that actually civilized countries are finally starting to implement this. This entire topic is mostly guys making up nonsense to defend rapists, anyway. So many strawman arguments, all because people want rape to not be a crime. It's pathetic. So glad I'm living in a civilized country where stuff like this is frowned upon.
You hate this argument because you clearly hate logic. Somehow, I don't see you making this defense of theft. If someone makes a drunken guy sell their car, what happens? HMM. Right, the entire thing is void. A sale like that doesn't hold up in court. "Consent" while drunk is not consent. Deal with it. | |
A wife goes out drinking with friends and returns home to her sober husband, she instigates sex. The husband is now a rapist and deserves to be taken to court? | |
If someone drunk sells their car then it is sold. Not the buyers fault. If you are stupid enough to drink too much then you should learn to deal with the consequences. Nothing illogical about it.
Fixed it. | |
OP, something very important, not every girl who stands up and calls rape is a feminist or an opportunist looking to alleviate guilt through crying wolf so they don't feel like a slag. If you're so drunk that you can't remember something, it means so many things could have happened. It could have been a date rape drug, maybe they just drank too much. But just because they drank too much, does not mean they have no right to cry "rape". If you're drunk enough, you're in no fit state to make any decision, whether it's to drive home, to make a stupid 4am call to your ex or to have sex with somebody. Men and women alike can be taken advantage of by a more sober person during this period for a variety of reasons, sex being the most common. Besides, have you ever known a woman who was raped? I have. It's an incredibly traumatic experience that can destroy relationships, her confidence in not just men or relationships, but interacting with people or leaving their house. It can leave mental scars that take months or years to heal. That's not to say that every cry of rape is genuine, but it is incredibly ignorant and dangerous to just dismiss such cries from drunk girls by just saying "she was drunk, she knew what she was getting into". | |
I'm sorry, but if a drunken woman is convinced to willingly have sex with some creep that they'd never be interested in with a sober mind... that is not rape. That is a mistake. Men do it as well, sleep with women they'd be unlikely to consider if sober. A woman is just as vulnerable to being raped if drunk or sober, men are usually much bigger and stronger as well as generally having a greater capacity for sudden violence and threats. The element of alcohol in rape is mainly the Dutch-courage it gives to the (usually male) perpetrator, more likely to rape with more clouded judgement they can suppress their feelings of guilt and decency to serve their baser drives. As to passing out drunk, they should wake up if someone starts interfering with them. I can't believe many people very often get so drunk that they pass out so completely that they don't wake up even when someone takes off their clothes and has sex with them. Drop off into a sudden drunken sleep, yes, but if they are so deeply out that they don't rouse from this most intimate of unwanted touching then they are as likely to suffocate on their own tongue or vomit. This is NOT NORMAL! This is NOT SAFE! It would be GOOD if they were found by someone as most likely they are NOT a rapist but someone who might notice they aren't breathing and if they have any sense they'll call an ambulance if they won't rouse from being shaken or called to. Let me get this clear, NO ONE should get so drunk that they effectively go into a coma; that is so unconscious that they cannot be woken by any normal means. They need to go to the hospital and rehab after that if they cannot learn to moderate their drinking. And of course taking advantage of a person who is completely passed out is of course rape as how could they consent. | |
This is an impossible thing to argue on the internet because there will always be people who have been affected by it who will completely over-react, call everyone a rapist and ruin any chance for logic to enter play. I'm not trying to say that I blame them, I'm the same on certain other subjects, it just ruins debate. Well, here I go anyway. Rape is rape,when it is rape. Intoxication shouldn't matter unless a party is unconcious, incognizant, unable to speak, or has been forced/tricked into imbibing drugs/alchohol. What matters is consent, and you should not be able to retroactively remove that. Obviously, this makes things extremely difficult in the eyes of the law, but to me, it is what is right. | |
You do know that isn't how law works though, right? | |
Yes but the law isn't necessarily right. | |
Ok im sorry but your ruining the thread again. We already had two guys like you so please try and be civil. I don't know how to bold but this bit Nobody here wants rape to be legal. Nobody here is trying to defend rapists. People are saying that they don't think this should count as rape and it is being discussed. Or at least it was untill another person like you arrived to instantly declare everybody is wrong and they all want rape to be legal. | |
I think that if you're going to a party or a club with no intention to drink then you have to be the responsible one, the designated driver, the hold back hair guy etc. etc. It sucks but that's the decision I make when I choose not to drink (which is whenever I'm not with my brother at a party), I don't like alcohol or being drunk so I make those sacrifices.
I wish there were more like you good sir. The world would be a less rapey place. (I'm being serious by the by, I like your views) | |
Jesus H. Christ. I'd post a rebuttal but I really can't think of a response to this misogynistic horseshit that wouldn't get me banned. | |
This is the worst sort of argument. Opposite sides creating strawman arguments about how their extreme opinion is better than the other extreme opinion who anybody not agreeing with them supports. Having imbibed one drink doesn't immediately render you incapable of defending yourself, there are sexual predators who trick lonesome women into drinking dangerous amounts of alcohol so they can then take advantage of them while unconcious, people should know by now the dangers or alcohol (in the same way they should know about the dangers of drugs, cigarettes, fast food, fireworks, guns, pollution, etc) and yet they don't, people do stupid things all the time while drunk and it is partly their fault. There is a lot of grey area in this argument. Don't pretend like it's a binary decision of what's right and what's wrong. The kind of men who take advantage of inebriated women, or even worse inebriate women so they can take advantage of them are criminals. They are the scum of the earth and should be locked up in prison by law. Nobody should be defending them because they are pathetic animals. There is a tiny, insignificant number of women who take advantage of the system that protects them to stick innocent men in jail for terrible alledged crimes for these women's twisted satisfaction. It is very wrong. It is an awful thing. If I could, I would drag them all to jail personally so they could rot behind bars and not infect the world with their disgusting presence. We don't live in a perfect world. Judges can't read people's minds. If we could know without facts that this guy was a rapist and this other girl was lying out of her teeth we might live in a happier world. But we can't. You should try to accept that and compromise your viewpoints so we could get along as people. | |
It hasn't suddenly become a derogatory word. It has been a derogatory word ever since Andrea Dworkin and Catherine MacKinnon stepped up and started implying that men can be easily turned into rapists. | |
Right. Someone who is borderline drunk consenting with someone else who also is borderline drunk isn't rape. Raping someone who is passed out from drink is rape. Also, what the fuck are you guys BITCHING about?! (Come join the gaming community! We're such an accepting bunch. But dont be a feminist, in fact try not to be a woman at all if you can help it. No I dont want to argue, I'm just fucked off with this crap.) | |
Well, for arguments sake, I'm going to assume you are a neurologist and that you understand the workings of the human brain functions fa better than your average Joe and that you happen to have written several papers on the subject of alcohol's effects on the human psyche and thought process. Then I'm guessing that somehow, you have made a breakthrough in your investigation and realized that humans under the heavy influence of alcohol still have perfect control over their decision making abilities. This contradicts absolutely everything that has ever been written and studied so far in the centuries of medical history. You are grimly flabbergasted, to say the least. Hurriedly you publish your well documented paper in order to alert the rest of the scientific community of the shocking truth. However, the doctors in power read your paper and decide that the humiliation to the sciences would be too terrible to bear and conclude that the best course of action is to destroy the paper and take away your accreditation. Now you spend your time on the Internet communities trying to warn people of the lies we are being fed day after day. I admire you for this. I realize the terrible mistake I have taken part in and I have decided to aid you in your cause to correct this abhorrent society. Thank you for your invaluable contribution to mankind. | |
Okay first thing, I actually agree with your point of view. Reckless endangerment is tantamount to self-infliction. In most situations where a persons foolishness causes harm to himself or others, that person should take, at least, part of the blame. Honestly, is caution such a taboo in this world? Is self indulgence the ultimate goal, even over self preservation? Personally I prefer the Vulcan philosophy of "live long and prosper". On the subject at hand however, things aren't so easily defined. While ideally I would say people should take precautions before leaving the house (heck, for some people, before getting out of bed) let alone "planning" a night out (ha, never happens). But that isn't a realistic expectation and such philosophy isn't admissible in a court of law. Anyway, I Strayed again, back on topic: When it comes to drink and consent, the laws in most modern, western countries is simply if your drunk, you can't consent which is a pointless law as most coital scenarios for young and old generations occur when intoxicated, not because of an inability to formulate thoughts or reason, but because they actively seek to loosen their inhibitions so they can more easily mingle with others (particularly of the opposite/attracted sex), which is usually done with the ultimate goal of seeking a potential relationship (either short tern or long term, most likely the former). That law damns people who willing or forcefully intoxicates another (spiking a drink, or just buying them more rounds or doubling/tripling their portions) and take advantage of them. But when it comes to mutual intoxication things get blurry... and not because of beer goggles. What are the factors that go into deciding who was most drunk, weeks after the incident (when most cases are held). Eyewitnesses maybe, but due to the drunken atmosphere of a pub/club/party, reliable witnesses are rare. They could ask the Bartenders or bouncers too, but to most of them they just see is the mass of drunken people, not individuals. A rape kit won't prove anything if the defendant admits he did it, but was under the assumption it was consensual... here in lies the first dilemma for the man. He must prove that he had her/his consent, which she couldn't give because she was drunk, but he was drunk too and technically couldn't consent himself either. So they cancel each other out right? Neither party can prove/disprove consent as technically neither could give it and they also most likely can't determine the differences in either parties ability to think. The sad fact is, the courts fail to properly process many such cases and I'm sure many innocent people end up being convicted and put on record, while simultaneously many genuine victims end up getting their justice thrown in their face. This ignores the people who play the system for nefarious reasons, like condemning a person who is innocent but can't prove otherwise. However most cases end on some form of stalemate, with both parties leaving the courts with equal amounts of shame and humility. Usually in such scenarios both parties come to an understanding LONG before courts come into it, and it's mutually accepted that "it was just a crazy night". AS I said earlier, Ideally people should take precautions prior to a night out, rather then expecting the state imposed protections to keep them safe (which is a fucking retarded frame of mind). It could save them from unimaginable grief. I want to stress this point, so I left it for last: Both parties are subject to consequences for their actions. But one can NEVER blame a (potential) victim, as that is just wrong on so many levels. A victim of RAPE has already suffered and further persecution is cruel and deplorable and likely MORE damaging then the rape itself. (This is why court hearings on rape cases are so notoriously difficult for the victim, as a defendant needs his lawyer to reverse the accusations and make the victim out to be either in the wrong, mistaken or lying, for whatever reason comes up) Ideally, a true perpetrator will suffer under the law and justice but even if it's a false accusation and the courts see it as such, the individual takes a lesson from the ordeal and humbles his view on his life. The victim will either get justice for their ordeal, or closure at the least so they can move on. But Ideal scenarios are few and far between. On a side note: I learned a new word today: Myopia. Thanks for that. I actually was trying to describe something as such recently, but ended up going into a long winded description... this word would have saved me the bother. | |
So because a few people have extremist views it's suddenly okay to generalise an entire group? I'll have to spend some time in the Chamber of Understanding to figure this one out. | |
Rule of thumb: if it isn't totally clear whether or not someone is totally consenting, ask them. If you think they might be too drunk to make a proper decision, don't have sex with them. Saves a lot of hassle. | |
Reading the first couple of pages of this thread has been a depressing endeavour, filled with immoveable objects on either side spouting bile and venom at each other when their opinions are not automatically taken as fact by the other. Of course, this was not the case with every poster and thankfully, the debate levelled out after that, and decent points were finally made. However, I think the topic is to broad to accommodate discussion. Rape, the causes of rape and the individuals role within the crime are all based on situation. You can't wander through a room accusing every man whose ever had sex with a drunk woman of being a rapist, and you can't vilify every women who accuses a man of rape until you have the facts of the individual situation. That's why crimes are investigated by the police, and not a mob of angry, opinionated people. | |
The reason, it hurts. | |
To everyone who says having sex with some who drank alcohol is rape EVERYTIME. | |
Why is religion suddenly a derogatory word? As for the thread, oh you got me here. the main page showed the title as "do feminists honesty beleive they are free" and i was expecting a sexist comment, however once the full title was revealed i ended up agreeing. Being drunk or using other drugs should NEVER make your case better. in fact it should make your case worse. want to keep control - why dont you stop getting drunk then? | |
Yup and then when the remainder of the feminists get pissed off, understandably enough, because of this sweeping generalization and respond to it, those who made it feel vindicated regardless of what the response is. 'Look your getting angry at me simply because your a feminist and I'm a man, ergo you're a man-hating, hypocrite lesbian and you must be on the rag too!' | |
That is not what's being discussed really. | |
| Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT | |
HONK HONK!
OT: Riiiight. Well, let's just rewind a lil bit...
I'm going to use a real life example: I was at my friend's 18th, and was absolutely shitfaced. Girl starts making out with me, while she herself is relatively sober. Fair enough, you may be thinking. But by the points made by a certain (suspended)
*ahem* person here, I should therefore be able to decry a degree of lesser sexual assault (as it was tongue kissing, not actual sex) but hell no, I shouldn't. I went into that party to drink my body weight in fine lager and that's what I did. The consequences are mine and mine alone to bear. I damn well enjoyed it at the time.
To clear things, I am now dating said girl, but if it turned out I had a problem with her, I couldn't throw that night back in her face and call her a freaky mouth rapist.