Two users spend their Holiday weekend the best way they know how: arguing about about whether drunk sex is rape and telling one another to kill themselves. (np.reddit.com)
SubredditDrama
72 ups - 0 downs = 72 votes
48 comments submitted at 01:38:19 on Jul 8, 2014 by Shuwin
Why are they talking about rape? There was no rape, the woman was blitzed and they recognized it and were level-headed about it (considering the bizarre circumstances).
Because reddit.
Indeed. The same reason that several of the comments devolve into how women are terrible and she probably would have accused them of rape.
People were pissed off that a guy didn't think it was a good idea to rape someone who was so drunk they couldn't put a whole sentence together or find their own way home.
Well maybe a responsible adult shouldn't choose to get that drunk. Why don't you go to tumblr, people will be more accepting of you shouting rape on consenting adults.
Ah yes, only Tumblr people think rape is wrong. Makes sense.
Look man, she's stumbling, she entered a random car and started hitting on the driver, she slurs and mumbles nonsensically, and can't even communicate properly with the guys in that car or her own friends. What part of that says "good to go" to you? It would be disgusting and predatory to take advantage of that woman's state to get laid, and thankfully where I live, the laws have caught up to reality and it's fucking illegal.
I have one question for you, if this woman was a man would you be screaming rape? If a man was this drunk and had sex would it be rape?
"Screaming", lol. That more accurately describes all the people who stumble in to bluster and mumble about "personal responsibility" as a way to excuse the fact that having sex with someone whose mental state has rendered them unable to give consent is rape.
And yes, if a woman takes advantage of man this drunk, that is also rape and if the man feels violated by the act then he's absolutely within his right to seek justice for the crime perpetrated against him. Rape is terrible no matter what combination of genders is involved, and I find it insulting that you immediately leaped to "LOL SJW TUMBLRINA MUST NOT THINK MEN CAN BE RAPED."
Life protip: if someone tells you "I'm not that drunk..." then they most likely are that drunk.
Why I still disagree with your definition of rape, I do now have some respect for your position. It's good to see someone not so much of a hypocrite at least. Please don't take offense from my asking. Here on the internet I would not have been surprised for someone to say it doesn't apply to men.
I will disagree with you even still. A person needs to live with their decisions. If someone is to impair themselves voluntarily and then proceed to consent to sex then that is what they have decided. If someone were to get drunk then drive, and they ended up killing some you should be sure they would be held responsible. So unless we say a drunk driver is to not be held responsible then someone who is says yes to sex while drunk should be.
Edit: Sorry for bring drama to the sub about reddit drama, but I feel like this might get worked out to where it's possible to understand each others view points without death threats.
Analogy is not quite right, because it removes the decisions of the rapist(?) from the equation. I think it'd be more correct to say it like this: If someone were to get drunk and drive, and someone else would commit suicide by throwing themselves in front of their car, knowing full-well that the drunk person wouldn't be able to react in time; who should be held responsible? edit: spelling
Both would be responsible because while the death wasn't 100% their fault if they weren't impaired they would of been able to stop the car. So they are to blame also.
The drunk driving analogy doesn't work because it leaves out the element of the drunk person being taken advantage of. A better analogy would be if a person was enabling or encouraging a person to drive drunk, in which case they could bear legal responsibility if something happens.
People have a responsibility not to take advantage of drunk people. I've never understood why people like you have such a big problem with that, why would you want something like that to be legal? What if people started camping outside bars waiting for blackout drunk people so they can convince them to sign away their life savings. That is currently illegal by today's laws. Do on think that should be legalized too?
The problem is that you can lock up your keys to ensure you won't drive drunk. With the exception of rare and very uncomfortable fetish gear, you can't lock away your vagina or your penis when you party. And you shouldn't have to, because people shouldn't be taking advantage of you. A lot of women WILL avoid getting that drunk because of this kind of situation, but that doesn't mean that women who don't are at fault if someone tries to hurt them. You wouldn't say "you weren't really mugged" to someone who was targeted by a mugger because they were drunk - you might say "you shouldn't have been drunk," although it's pretty douchey to say that to a mugging victim. But you never deny that they were the victim of a crime.
And we don't really need to say that at all. Under Canadian law, you can be charged with sexual assault (we don't have a specific rape law here, only varying severities of sexual assault) if you have sex with someone who is too drunk to offer informed, continuous and enthusiastic consent - something this woman most definitely could not have given in her heavily inebriated state. But you can still be charged with DUI.
When you are mugged the mugger doesn't say "hey want to get mugged?", and the victim doesn't say "Yes, I would like to be mugged". Here is the difference.
What makes you think that a drunk person is capable of making that kind of decision though? Drunkenness, by all measures, is both physically and mentally impairing to the point that people cannot accurately judge risk - that's why DUI is a crime in the first place. People who cannot accurately judge risk are considered to be unable to give informed consent, and uninformed consent isn't enough to have sex with someone (which is why you also can't have sex with the mentally disabled and children, even if they tell you they want it.)
You can say, arguably, that the victim never should have gotten drunk if she was afraid of having sex with someone but it doesn't matter how she got to that point. What matters is what happened to her at that point, and what happened was that she had sex with someone while mentally impaired and thus unable to consent. That hypothetical person had sex with her, unavoidably fully aware of her state of inebriation, and should have known better.
More Comments - Click Here