Do feminists honestly believe they are free from responsibility while drunk?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT
 

My favourite part of these threads are the people adamantly claiming that drunken sex is rape, if both participants are drunk. They honestly believe some sort or weird, mutual rape happened. Like both the guy and girl don't remember, so if they both regret it, MUTUAL RAPE.

It is entirely devoid of reason

Are you free from responsibility if a woman drives drunk too?
Nope.

But really, people who want sex specifically target women. If there wasn't such a law, you could just literally rape a woman whose had some or to many to drink and just claim it was consensual.

Much rather keep the law as is.

yogibbear:
Just to add some added confusion to this "consent" debate...

See, to me that's not confusing as it was consensual sex, end of story. Going by quite a few people posting on this thread you are a rapist though and should be placed on the sex offender register then sent to jail.

Prepare to have police come a callin'!

I don't think we're currently capable of, in the cases of Drunk sex vs. Date-rape, producing a fair or just system for dealing with it - Primarily because these cases normally rely on hearsay and one persons word over another and beyond that Evidence is usually fleeting at best or has long since become invalid.

Acrisius:

Sexual Harassment Panda:

generals3:

No, the solution is for people to grow a pair and be held accountable for their own actions. If you get wasted and do stupid things as a consequence it's your own damn fault. No one forces people to drink so the only one to blame is the one intoxicating him/herself.

If you don't want to "be taken advantage of" while intoxicated don't intoxicate yourself or have friends and ask them to keep an eye out.

Agreed.

We don't need already irresponsible drinkers viewing night-club staff as guardians and babysitters. Not only is it completely unworkable as a solution, it actively encourages further irresponsible drinking.

The basis of any serious solution should be personal responsibility. You don't have the right to drink yourself defenseless and expect that nothing bad will ever come of it, that's a ridiculous assumption that it's perfectly acceptable to call BS on.

If you're drinking you're supposed to be an adult. I'm not unsympathetic to anyone who has a bad experience, but I do expect you to know better...if you're old enough to drink, you're old enough to have some idea of what the world is like and what dangers there are.

Leave baseless idealism at the door when debating reality. As much as I'd like it to be different, there are definitely circumstances where the victim takes a share of the blame.

Honestly, if any of my friends got themselves shit-faced and ended up in this kind of situation. I'd share in their pain, but I'd also be mad and disappointed with them.

Amen, you hit the head on the nail perfectly. I don't see why the thread moved on past this post, I guess people don't understand common sense?

It's ok. I generally only get quoted on this forum when someone wants to tell me off, otherwise I go completely ignored. I've made my peace with it.

I think it speaks to the age of the community that everyone is willing to base their opinions on the tenuous assumption that getting unreasonably fucked up is perfectly appropriate, especially when our standards lean so heavily towards restraint, denial of urges and personal responsibility for choices and actions in regards to just about everything else you could think of.

Ragsnstitches:
snip

You're welcome.

I agree with you almost entirely as well. But I disagree with the uniformity of some of your claims. If judgement impairment, loosened inhibitions and possible memory loss are all in play, then there is ample room for the victims to share a sizable portion of the blame in certain cases...and not others. We have courts, juries and judges to ensure that each case is examined on it's own merits. We also teach potential jurors to take what is said with a grain of salt because people habitually lie to distort the truth...you throw in the idea that at least one party was impaired enough to not be a reliable witness to the events of their own life...and you have more than ample grounding for dismissing a case. Any good lawyer is gonna run with that.

This might not be perfect, but it's certainly preferable to a system wherein an accusation is automatically accepted as truth. And leads you nicely back to the obvious conclusion that if you want to be safe you have to accept personal responsibility for yourself and keep your wits about you. It's silly to be falling back on the idea that partaking in binge-drinking culture exempts you from this, it's a ridiculously puerile notion.

Daystar Clarion:

Durgiun:

Daystar Clarion:

*checks profile*

Okay. Now how many of those people are American?

Can you see where I'm going with this?

Gail Dines is British, if I'm not mistaken. Either that or she fakes an accent perfectly.

But yeah, I can see your point.

I understand where you're coming from. I too despise the man hating feminist, but lumping all feminists into the same group is what they do in regards to men.

We have to be better than that.

You think that's bad? The reason why I keep refering to them as 'feminists' is because the actual term I want to use wouldn't help the cause of the sane people fighting their bullshit.
That, and they refer to themselves as feminists. Well, at least Dines does.

Zachary Amaranth:

Treblaine:

Daystar Clarion:
Why is feminist suddenly a derogatory word?

I think it was more when people gradually realised it was less about female egalitarianism and more a female version of Male Chauvinism. They become they very mirror-image thing they sought to oppose.

That's not feminism. That's Straw-feminism.

So you are saying there has been so staying of feminism from female egalitarianism?

There have been no incidences of female "Affirmative Action"? No feminist has ever stated men are wholly inferior to women? Because I think there have.

iRevanchist:

Daystar Clarion:
Why is feminist suddenly a derogatory word? ...

Never vilify the victim, 'oh she was asking for it', 'oh she should have known better'.

Stay classy.

^this. taking advantage of and raping women is not okay, and saying that they are to blame because they didn't fight back hard enough is purely repulsive.

Exactly.

spartan231490:
It is not vilifying the victim to say that drunken sex isn't rape. She made the decision to get drunk, she is responsible for her actions while drunk. If she drove drunk you wouldn't be trying to say it isn't her fault. If she killed someone while drunk you wouldn't be saying it isn't her fault. But because she has sex while drunk magically she can't be held responsible for that choice? That's the most ridiculous logic I've ever heard. It directly contradicts itself. IF you are legally responsible for some choices when drunk, then you should be legally responsible for all choices when drunk and vice-versa.

If she went and run over someone trying to get run over by a drunk driver you mean?

Rape victims get raped because of rapists. If the rapists didn't decide to rape them, there wouldn't be any rape.

It doesn't matter how drunk she is, the rapist decides to rape. Not her. The criminal gets blamed for committing the crime, not the victim for doing more to stop them.

Sexual Harassment Panda:
Funnily enough, courts aren't happy to take their word for it and ruin a mans reputation and give him jail time based just on that testimonial...that would be an insane amount of power to give to anybody.

That's what it really comes down to with me, power, the power some of these people are pushing for is just frightening.

In 2008 I was accused of rape. I was present at a party where she apparently got so drunk and hooked up with another guy. Maybe we looked similar to her, but she ended up reporting me later, she insisted it was me. There was a file opened, the police questioned me and everything, I had no defense to make, they sympathized with her, to them I was guilty. I don't know how it ended exactly, but I got off the hook, but it's an allegation that will follow me forever and ever. It's in my file, I'm an alleged rapist, it will never be a relevant item in any criminal record check and will never be released to the public, but it's still right there.

That's what it all ties into for me, fighting for this cause is fighting to give people dangerous amounts of power.

thaluikhain:

iRevanchist:

Daystar Clarion:
Why is feminist suddenly a derogatory word? ...

Never vilify the victim, 'oh she was asking for it', 'oh she should have known better'.

Stay classy.

^this. taking advantage of and raping women is not okay, and saying that they are to blame because they didn't fight back hard enough is purely repulsive.

Exactly.

spartan231490:
It is not vilifying the victim to say that drunken sex isn't rape. She made the decision to get drunk, she is responsible for her actions while drunk. If she drove drunk you wouldn't be trying to say it isn't her fault. If she killed someone while drunk you wouldn't be saying it isn't her fault. But because she has sex while drunk magically she can't be held responsible for that choice? That's the most ridiculous logic I've ever heard. It directly contradicts itself. IF you are legally responsible for some choices when drunk, then you should be legally responsible for all choices when drunk and vice-versa.

If she went and run over someone trying to get run over by a drunk driver you mean?

Rape victims get raped because of rapists. If the rapists didn't decide to rape them, there wouldn't be any rape.

It doesn't matter how drunk she is, the rapist decides to rape. Not her. The criminal gets blamed for committing the crime, not the victim for doing more to stop them.

You're logic is circular. She was raped because he was a rapist because she was raped. She decided to get drunk, and while drunk she decided to have sex.

Let's be clear, I'm not talking about having sex with someone who is passed out, or so drunk they can't speak or even see straight. I'm talking about someone who gets pretty drunk and decides to have sex with someone and then regrets it the next morning. That's not rape, that's a poor decision, adults make them every day and live with the consequences. They don't cry out that their coffee made them do it. They don't say that the cop made them speed, or the Realtor made them buy that house, or that the car salesman made them buy that car. They might say they were tricked, but in the end that's not grounds to say the were forced into it.

They don't send the car salesman to prison for 20 years because someone didn't realize they couldn't afford the car they bought. The Realtor doesn't have to pay off the loan when someone defaults on their mortgage. But because it's sex, magically the person doesn't have to accept responsibility and instead say they were raped? There is only one word for that kind of logic: Insane.

Daystar Clarion:

spartan231490:

Daystar Clarion:
Why is feminist suddenly a derogatory word?

I always chuckle to myself in regards to 'date rape' drugs. That drug has been around for hundreds of years, you may of heard of it.

It's called alcohol.

The vast majority of people will put mistakes made while drunk down as just that.

A very small minority of women would ever cry rape after waking up next to a guy they never remember sleeping with, and even then, those cases would hardly ever make it to the courts.

It's not a matter of responsibility, people should be able to get absolutely hammered out of their minds without the worry that somebody will take advantage of them while in that state. You don't vilify the victim, that's just not classy, but you should also have the mind to realise that the world doesn't work that way and you should retain some kind of control so that you can at least try and prevent just such a scenario.

Never vilify the victim, 'oh she was asking for it', 'oh she should have known better'.

Stay classy.

It is not vilifying the victim to say that drunken sex isn't rape. She made the decision to get drunk, she is responsible for her actions while drunk. If she drove drunk you wouldn't be trying to say it isn't her fault. If she killed someone while drunk you wouldn't be saying it isn't her fault. But because she has sex while drunk magically she can't be held responsible for that choice? That's the most ridiculous logic I've ever heard. It directly contradicts itself. IF you are legally responsible for some choices when drunk, then you should be legally responsible for all choices when drunk and vice-versa.

I think we have different levels of legal understanding.

I wasn't making the assumption that intoxication is an infallible defence in regards to responsibility. There's a difference between a drunk person getting into a car and killing someone and a sober person taking advantage of a drunken person.

A balance must be struck, but every scenario must be examined on a case by case basis.

Why is intoxication grounds to say that you weren't capable of making a decision about sex, but in every single other situation it has no legal impact on your reasoning ability? Is it some magical combination of alcohol and hormones completely removes a person's ability to be an adult? No. Logically, either you are incapable of making decisions when drunk, and you shouldn't be held accountable for those decisions, or you are, and you shouldn't blame others for your actions. You can't have it both ways.

Regnes:

Sexual Harassment Panda:
Funnily enough, courts aren't happy to take their word for it and ruin a mans reputation and give him jail time based just on that testimonial...that would be an insane amount of power to give to anybody.

That's what it really comes down to with me, power, the power some of these people are pushing for is just frightening.

In 2008 I was accused of rape. I was present at a party where she apparently got so drunk and hooked up with another guy. Maybe we looked similar to her, but she ended up reporting me later, she insisted it was me. There was a file opened, the police questioned me and everything, I had no defense to make, they sympathized with her, to them I was guilty. I don't know how it ended exactly, but I got off the hook, but it's an allegation that will follow me forever and ever. It's in my file, I'm an alleged rapist, it will never be a relevant item in any criminal record check and will never be released to the public, but it's still right there.

That's what it all ties into for me, fighting for this cause is fighting to give people dangerous amounts of power.

That's rough. How old were you at the time?

If you sleep with a girl when she's drunk, you are not automatically a rapist. We've all had sex drunk at some point, and we don't automatically going crying rape when we wake up the next morning. However this does not mean that sex whilst drunk cannot be called rape.

If someone was unconscious and you slept with them, it would be rape... well what if they were so inebriated that they were practically unconscious, and unaware of what was going on? If you think that it would be okay to sleep with a girl in that position (And then have the nerve to claim it's not rape) then you are a bad person with seriously twisted moral values, and yes, you are a rapist. (This is aimed at no one in particular here - so please don't take offense)

At the end of the day, if you consider yourself a "gentleman" (And there seem to be far too few of those left in the world) then you would always decline sex with a girl (Even if she offered it), if you believed she was only going along with it because she was drunk, and would never have considered it sober. Yes there may be cases where a guy really has done nothing wrong, but these are the minority.

Belive me, girls in general value classy guys who will take them home and look after them, more than guys who are (questionably) taking advantage of them. Treat a girl well and if your lucky and she likes you for your kindness, sex is probably on the table sometime soon, and sober sex is a lot better than drunk sex.

Ultimately if a girl has had a drink, then you need to be 100% sure that she really wants to sleep with you, and 100% sure that any alcohol consumption has not affected her (Or your) judgement. If you're not, then don't do it, it's that simple.

Now stop persecuting rape victims. Has anyone here proclaiming that it's not rape, ever been raped? I highly doubt it. The persecution of rape victims, and the stigma of being a victim is one of the main things people worry about when they're deciding to come forward or not. By defending rapists in this thread, you are all contributing to a social climate where victims will not come forward, and rapists believe what they did was okay (And this is reinforced because they get away with it). Furthermore the general feeling created by your thread will affect all situations not just the drunk scenario that's being discussed here. What you are saying is that "rape is not rape" this is wrong and immoral, and it will lead society down a bad road if such ideas ever become accepted.

There is really nothing more to say here, except that I have lost a lot of respect for the people defending rapists in this thread. Shame on you.

spartan231490:
Let's be clear, I'm not talking about having sex with someone who is passed out, or so drunk they can't speak or even see straight. I'm talking about someone who gets pretty drunk and decides to have sex with someone

With someone who, knowing the other person was drunk, decided to have sex with them.

In English law, drunken consent is still consent. Something I agree with. What I don't like is the fact that only a man can rape somebody (according to law anyways). Would be rather amusing if men would be able to claim rape in situation you just described

RagTagBand:
I don't think we're currently capable of, in the cases of Drunk sex vs. Date-rape, producing a fair or just system for dealing with it - Primarily because these cases normally rely on hearsay and one persons word over another and beyond that Evidence is usually fleeting at best or has long since become invalid.

This. There is a difference between drunk sex and taking advantage of a drunk individual, but there is no solid line that you can rely on in every case to provide a distinction between the two, because it comes down to a bunch of factors that are going to vary instance to instance.

Don't worry, Reg, I agree with you, but not so much in a sense that we group this as a supposed thing done by some more extreme feminists. That's stereotyping.

The trouble with talking about this is that people with assume you're accusing the victim, when all you're really saying is it isn't clear, and people shouldn't get a free ride by just claiming to be a victim, afterall, the whole argument is whether or not they actually are a victim. So people arguing against your point saying you must be accusing the victim are obviously biased because they're just assuming that they actually are a victim, just because they said they were raped. I know that's a serious claim, but people's lives could be ruined over one of those cases.

I'm going to sound like a prick now, but if you know you do bad stuff when you're drunk, have friends there, that's really all there is to it. Unfortunately, that assumes your friends won't get drunk, so which you're probably best just not getting drunk in public.

And now for my height or being a prick, if someone I knew complained to me that last night they went to a club, got drunk and had sex with a random person, that were also drunk, whether or not they had any recollection of even who initiated sex, and claimed rape, I'd laugh my ass off.

In other cases where the other person was sober, they certainly deserve a slap on the wrist if the drunken person had a problem with it, but claiming rape is too far, certainly weren't fighting against it in any way and were perfectly conscious. And if anyone claims rape on sex they can't even remember the next morning, I will call them stupid, because they obviously have no idea who even started it.

I know people who have been raped. Not the drunken kind. Just plain up rape against their will, that traumatised them. I'm going to have to pull the "I find this offensive" card, because I seriously find it offensive how this can come under the same category.

Regnes:
... it really seems as if feminists in general believe ...

There's your problem right there. You're equating the actions of a few with the policy of a group. It doesn't work that way.

AlouiciousKF:
Fuck it, I'm done, enjoy your rape-apologist circlejerk.

Bahahahaha, we will.

I love how that's the main argument for that side. "You're just justifying yourselves, dirty chauvinistic man." You know how stupid that sounds? That shows that your only defense is calling the opposing side rapists. This is akin to the yourafuckingnazi tactic. It is only used by people who have nothing to say. They cannot find an adequate counter so they just name call.

Being drunk should not free you from responsibility. If a drunk man rapes a woman, it's still rape. If a drunk woman consents to sex, that's legitimate.

Consider this.
I buy a shotgun. I fill out the papers. I buy a large amount of ammunition. Standard 12 gauge shells filled with buckshot, lets say. I plan on hunting. I grab a bottle of whiskey chug it down. I find a random man and, using the shotgun, paint the wall behind him with bits of grey matter. I get off guilt-free because I was drunk. That's the same logic.

Drinking messes with your judgment but you still must take responsibility for your actions. When I go out, I'm not there to watch out for some whore I don't know. It's not my job to make sure she makes good life choices. Why do women subconsciously expect men to give a fuck about their well being? I'm not her father, I'm an individual seeking a good time (which often translates into meaningless sex).

The issue is that men are the one's left defenseless when the word rape is thrown out, yes they do it mostly, but if a woman get's mad at the man or just really regrets it in the morning she has a way to say it wasn't her choice.

If I am to believe that a man would be evil enough to rape someone I am damn well willing to think a would do something as evil as to lock up a man for something he really didn't do.

Sorry if someone's already said this, but in the UK, reports of rape that are never followed up on are absurdley high.

This is because girls, and I say girls because they are usually young, report it as soon as they wake up, then when their friends tell them how they were acting, they change their minds.

When it does get taken further, the police actually look at the facts from befofe the incident, ie, CCTV footage of how the persons involved acted in the clubs, CCTV footage of them walking home together, how in control of her own decisions she is, and alot of the time how she was dressed.

I am a strong believer in the 'She was asking for it' stance, in the cases where the victim and suspect go home together without being forced to.

Unfortunatley though, there are all too many cases where it becomes a case of 'His word against hers' and innocebt people do suffer as a result. This is mostly down to spitefull individuals with no thoughts to the consequences, ie, teachers being accused of rape by students who were told to
do detention, are cleared of all charges, but due to the often drawn out investigation process they lose their jobs and gain a tarnished reputation.

The way I ultimatley see it is no girl has a choice in being raped, but they do have a choice in how much they drink before they become too intoxicated to make the choice in what they do that night.

Seven pages in just over ten hours? Hot topic alert.

Anyway, obviously that's not rape. Alcohol doesn't cancel out free will and the ability to think, not even in large quantities. Only if someone is passed out. And even in that situation, nothing would've happened if they hadn't abused drink untill passing out.

Actually, I think allegations of rape under such circumstances that turn out to be fake should always lead to charges being pressed against that person, and the sentence being very severe, because the one who's had a fake report filed against him gets in all sorts of trouble.

It's happened to an uncle of mine who was stupid enough to start a relationship with some dumb cow (and I'm talking 'could hardly finish primary school'-dumb). Her daughter didn't like the limits he set on her behaviour, such as being home before midnight during weekdays (said daughter was 14 and in secondary school), only drinking in the weekends (ask yourself, did your parents allow you to get totally drunk by age 14?) and more common sense. In addition they were living in his house, so he had even more right to set such rules. But she didn't like that, so she reported him to the police for rape, and it took days to sort out that it was fake. Nothing was done against her in the end, despite costing the police days of work and putting my uncle through hell in return for trying to keep her on remotely the right track.

That kind of stuff shouldn't be something somebody gets away with. Reporting crimes isn't a tool to annoy and screw with people you don't like. Recently it was announced that fake rape charges would from now on always lead to legal action against the person who made up the charges, and I fully support that new policy, even if the sentences will probably be a joke.

Blablahb:
Seven pages in just over ten hours? Hot topic alert.

Anyway, obviously that's not rape. Alcohol doesn't cancel out free will and the ability to think, not even in large quantities. Only if someone is passed out. And even in that situation, nothing would've happened if they hadn't abused drink untill passing out.

Actually, I think allegations of rape under such circumstances that turn out to be fake should always lead to charges being pressed against that person, and the sentence being very severe, because the one who's had a fake report filed against him gets in all sorts of trouble.

It's happened to an uncle of mine who was stupid enough to start a relationship with some dumb cow (and I'm talking 'could hardly finish primary school'-dumb). Her daughter didn't like the limits he set on her behaviour, such as being home before midnight during weekdays (said daughter was 14 and in secondary school), only drinking in the weekends (ask yourself, did your parents allow you to get totally drunk by age 14?) and more common sense. In addition they were living in his house, so he had even more right to set such rules. But she didn't like that, so she reported him to the police for rape, and it took days to sort out that it was fake. Nothing was done against her in the end, despite costing the police days of work and putting my uncle through hell in return for trying to keep her on remotely the right track.

That kind of stuff shouldn't be something somebody gets away with. Reporting crimes isn't a tool to annoy and screw with people you don't like. Recently it was announced that fake rape charges would from now on always lead to legal action against the person who made up the charges, and I fully support that new policy, even if the sentences will probably be a joke.

While i agree overall but i don't think it should hold even if the person went that far that he/she passed out. When you pass out you cannot possibly express your agreement into something. And just like having intercourse with a sober person who doesn't agree is wrong it should also be with a drunken person. There is barely any difference between forcibly raping a drunken person and fucking one that passed out. Neither expressed their agreement. However if there is clear agreement and the person is wasted. Well, tough shit.

I don't see why anyone would want to get so drunk that they would consider themselves incapable of making rational decisions, at least not with strangers around.

Had a bad day and want to get shit-faced? Get some friends together and watch Plan 9 from Outer Space or something while you drink. The only strangers that want to deal with you when you're up to your eyeballs in alcohol are the ones that want to take advantage of you anyway. That goes for men and women.

Regnes:

Sexual Harassment Panda:
Funnily enough, courts aren't happy to take their word for it and ruin a mans reputation and give him jail time based just on that testimonial...that would be an insane amount of power to give to anybody.

That's what it really comes down to with me, power, the power some of these people are pushing for is just frightening.

In 2008 I was accused of rape. I was present at a party where she apparently got so drunk and hooked up with another guy. Maybe we looked similar to her, but she ended up reporting me later, she insisted it was me. There was a file opened, the police questioned me and everything, I had no defense to make, they sympathized with her, to them I was guilty. I don't know how it ended exactly, but I got off the hook, but it's an allegation that will follow me forever and ever. It's in my file, I'm an alleged rapist, it will never be a relevant item in any criminal record check and will never be released to the public, but it's still right there.

That's what it all ties into for me, fighting for this cause is fighting to give people dangerous amounts of power.

I know how you feel. I wasn't accused of rape but I was accused of something even more ambiguous and impossible to prove/disprove. "Sexual Harassment". From the get go, I was a pervert and she was the victim. They pulled me into the office and started a grownup version of "good touch bad touch". Turns out later she lied cause her boyfriend was jelly of my sexyness and thought I was hitting on her. So he told her to lie. They never even told me said investigation was over and that she lied. They were content letting me be afraid for months wondering what was going to happen to my job and reputation.

If women want to be treated like the equals they should be treated like, then the guilty until proven innocent when a man gets accused by a woman shit needs to stop.

I remember the time I was baked as holy hell and a girl that may have been underage, was an inexperienced drinker with no business drinking liquor at all, much less what she had, and was dealing with her first experience with good weed combined with prescription anti-psychotics came on to my ass hard. I had assumed it had something to do with her recent ex being at the same party and me being the best option amongst the single men to get back at him, combined with how fucked she was on everything she was on, and I turned her down because I have a conscience, even stoned, something a lot of guys just don't have.

I don't have an answer to this thread that satisfies every possible situation, or even most of them, it's one of the muddiest issues in the law and it happens with enough frequency that there's always a unique case that the police and the courts will never get the full story on. That said, a remedy we could work towards as a society is teaching everyone, men and women, boys and girls, how to respect another human being and how to take care of one's self.

I don't think it's right to blame a girl for getting drunk and getting raped, and the thought of demonizing rape victims for coming forward and not being able to form an air-tight case with only their own testimony is one of the stupidest fucking things I've ever heard in my goddamn life. As a college student I see a wave of freshmen come in every year that don't know shit from shinola, especially when it comes to big-boy parties, and it always comes to mind that any of these kids that don't have a support system of friends at the university already are in danger because they don't know how little you can trust other college kids (especially frat boys). It's not right that someone might have to learn their alcohol tolerance the same night they learn the hard way not to get too drunk around a bunch of drunk college kids. That situation doesn't get fixed after the fact; if it gets fixed at all it's at the sexual assault seminar that prevents the situation from ever happening.

The part I hate about this is that, even though it's an impossible situation, there has to be an element of personal responsibility in this, which is why I think the absolute best way to approach the situation is from the preventative and educational perspective. An 18-year old that shows up to a party is seen as fair game by an older, more experienced, more assholish person, and he/she (usually she) is especially fucked if she wants to fit in by drinking and doesn't have any alcohol tolerance, as they often are. They're pressured to be there to fit in with the first people they're meeting as independent little adults in the real world, they're pressured to drink because everyone else is doing it, and they won't know how much they can handle until they're past that mark. The only way to avoid any chance of something bad happening is to be able to block out all peer pressure, something the vast majority of us can't or don't want to do, especially when tasting independence for the first time. That's why I believe the only way to approach this problem is for parents, the college, and ideally high school to address these kind of issues and tell kids what not to do.

As far as the "feminist" aspect of this, leave it the fuck out if you can help it. Taking the most extreme feminist perspective and attempting to juxtapose it with a seemingly more rational point of view doesn't do the argument or anyone participating any favors.

I am honestly not touching this with a ten foot pole. I have no idea what the best course of action would be in these cases.

But I will say this: If both parties are drunk and have sex, then NO charges may be laid. None. Both chose to get drunk out of their mind, and neither was in full control of their mental faculties. Charging either of them with rape would be stupid in that case.

Daystar Clarion:
Why is feminist suddenly a derogatory word?

Because boys on the Internet are often threatened by women who won't sleep with them.

Seriously OP, consent is fucking consent. It's not absence of denial.

Katatori-kun:

Daystar Clarion:
Why is feminist suddenly a derogatory word?

Because boys on the Internet are often threatened by women who won't sleep with them.

Seriously OP, consent is fucking consent. It's not absence of denial.

i agree but there has been a recent increase were if you fuck while drunk its considered rape now. instead of a fuck up, like it used to be.

keiskay:
i agree but there has been a recent increase were if you fuck while drunk its considered rape now. instead of a fuck up, like it used to be.

You say that as though this was a problem. It is only a problem if you are fucking people who you don't know want to fuck until after they're bombed.

It's funny though that this is presented as a feminist issue (boo-hiss! Mean old feminists!). When at least in my jurisdiction, the person who is guilty of rape is whoever gets the other party drunk and then initiates sex with them[1]. So this policy affords men the exact same rights as it affords women.

[1] Of course, this is only if the other party believes they have been raped. Drunk sex isn't illegal if both parties still want to do it. The only thing that's illegal is using alcohol to make someone do something they don't want to do

RobDaBank:
Sorry if someone's already said this, but in the UK, reports of rape that are never followed up on are absurdley high.

This is because girls, and I say girls because they are usually young, report it as soon as they wake up, then when their friends tell them how they were acting, they change their minds.

Well, there's plenty of other things that stop those cases from being prosecuted, and it's hardly just a problem in the UK, but yeah.

It seems odd and unfair that a woman shouts "rape" after she was drunk, because she was not of "sound-mind" or "aware", yet if a boyfriend sleeps with a woman while he's drunk, it is totally his fault - no matter what. I'm not justifying cheating boyfriends, but by the logic in question, men should also have an excuse.

The fact is, nobody has an excuse when it comes to liquor; the law says so, and the sane say so. Women do NOT get to say they were raped or say mean things about a male ("man-whore" is such a stupid phrase anyway) because THEY were drunk. Even if they don't remember consenting while intoxicated - though I would recommend there be a witness to her saying, "Yes."

Spanishax:
It seems odd and unfair that a woman shouts "rape" after she was drunk, because she was not of "sound-mind" or "aware", yet if a boyfriend sleeps with a woman while he's drunk, it is totally his fault - no matter what. I'm not justifying cheating boyfriends, but by the logic in question, men should also have an excuse.

In my legal jurisdiction this is 100% untrue, and I'm going to request you cite some existing cases if you expect me to just believe that the law anywhere is so openly gender-biased.

Spanishax:
It seems odd and unfair that a woman shouts "rape" after she was drunk, because she was not of "sound-mind" or "aware", yet if a boyfriend sleeps with a woman while he's drunk, it is totally his fault - no matter what. I'm not justifying cheating boyfriends, but by the logic in question, men should also have an excuse.

Really? So the girlfriend/others won't harbour any ill feelings towards the woman that slept with her boyfriend while he was drunk?

Spanishax:
The fact is, nobody has an excuse when it comes to liquor; the law says so, and the sane say so. Women do NOT get to say they were raped or say mean things about a male ("man-whore" is such a stupid phrase anyway) because THEY were drunk. Even if they don't remember consenting while intoxicated - though I would recommend there be a witness to her saying, "Yes."

Correct, she doesn't.

She does get to do so if someone decided to rape her while she was drunk. She can be as drunk as she wants, if nobody decides to rape her, then she can't accuse anyone of rape.

Threads like these are always depressing as fuck because the scores of guys who jump in and say "We was drunk hurr hurr I have no responsibility" make all men seem like raging, uncontrollable animals the second we get turned on. Seems to infantalize us, and its fucking pathetic as far as I am concerned.

Gentlemen, you can be better than this. Yes, I like sex as much as the next red-blooded Canadian, but I avoid having it while drunk because I don't especially like taking advantage of people while they are out of their right minds for one and for two, because it is flat out unpleasant for me while I am in that state anyway.

In sum: grow up.

thaluikhain:

spartan231490:
Let's be clear, I'm not talking about having sex with someone who is passed out, or so drunk they can't speak or even see straight. I'm talking about someone who gets pretty drunk and decides to have sex with someone

With someone who, knowing the other person was drunk, decided to have sex with them.

What's your point? The fact that the other person is sober doesn't affect anyone's ability to make a decision either. Even if said person got the other person drunk to make them more likely to say yes, it's [b]still their decision.[b] Seriously, how is this not point A to point B simple.

Katatori-kun:

Spanishax:
It seems odd and unfair that a woman shouts "rape" after she was drunk, because she was not of "sound-mind" or "aware", yet if a boyfriend sleeps with a woman while he's drunk, it is totally his fault - no matter what. I'm not justifying cheating boyfriends, but by the logic in question, men should also have an excuse.

In my legal jurisdiction this is 100% untrue, and I'm going to request you cite some existing cases if you expect me to just believe that the law anywhere is so openly gender-biased.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23379673-men-face-jail-for-rape-if-women-are-too-drunk-to-consent-in-bed-to-boost-convictions.do

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3638785/The-sobering-subject-of-consent.html
his conviction was overturned, but initially he was found guilty and he spent 5 months in prison

http://www.k-state.edu/counseling/topics/alcohol/sex.htm
this site has an excerpt from the kansas law code which specifically states that it is rape "when the victim is incapable of giving consent because of the effect of any alcoholic liquor"

http://shs.illinoisstate.edu/sexual_assault/date_rape/alcohol.shtml
"Legally, an individual cannot consent to sex if they are drunk"

Though it isn't a gender bias. He said that a girlfriend would consider a man completely responsible if he cheated on her while drunk, but the law states that he was incapable of consent and was actually raped. I think he was simply pointing out that these laws, where they exist, run in complete opposition to common sense and logic.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked