~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
didled
[–]oneiorosgrip 253 points254 points255 points 13 years ago* (99 children) | Copy Link
This highlights the problem with the whole "date rape" concept pretty well. People do make stupid decisions when they're wasted. Sometimes those stupid decisions involve the participation of other people - whether it be the decision to ride with a drunk driver, go along with a drunken prank, have sex, or otherwise eschew the restraint one might have had when sober.
The fact that one has been drinking does not make others responsible for his or her choices. The writer in this situation did not take measures or use circumstances to deliberately bypass the guy's choice whether or not to engage in sex with her. She went forward on the information she had - that he was interested. What would be right if the sexes were reversed is right if they are not. Regardless of the sexes of the accused or accuser, situations like this do not constitute rape... and they shouldn't be treated as such.
thejosiekiller's comment is right on the money about reversing the sexes - which also highlights the issue of the double standard society has between the sexes on consent and responsibility. Men are held to a stricter standard of responsibility for obtaining consent, and a lower threshold of agency for giving it. When alcohol is involved, women can actually consent and later be excused from meaning it, leaving men who have obtained consent to be considered guilty of proceeding without it. When the sexes are reversed, those who advocate that lack of accountability for women would not treat the situation the same. That's one of the social attitudes which really needs to be confronted and countered if we are to reduce the incidence of men being wrongly prosecuted, persecuted, and imprisoned due to false allegations.
Edit - typos
[–][deleted] 78 points79 points80 points 13 years ago (29 children) | Copy Link
This is so spot on. There is something very very wrong with someones mindset if they think that being drunk means they no longer hold any responsibility for yourself and are unable to consent to sexual contact. I've witnessed feminists, after begrudgingly admitting that it is possible for a woman to rape a man, say that if two drunk people have sex then they technically raped each other.
I don't know how anyone can write that and not think "wait a minute, what the fuck am I saying?".
[–]Hacker116 47 points48 points49 points 13 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link
Concurrent rape
What a fascinating concept
[–]oneiorosgrip 13 points14 points15 points 13 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link
It does get stated... and it is a stupid idea... but the way today's legal environment is headed, I wouldn't be surprised to see it somehow prosecuted within the next decade. :/
[–]Hacker116 13 points14 points15 points 13 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link
How can you be victim and perpetrator at the same time?
[–]CODYsaurusREX 20 points21 points22 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Carefully.
[–]flooberses 6 points7 points8 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
In this event I would lean to say it's more 'carelessly'.
[–]DerpaNerb 5 points6 points7 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Not every crime needs a victim.
What happens when a drug dealer and a drug buyer are arrested at the same time?
[–]WhipIash 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This... is a very good point. It's not like it's hurting the state's revenue or monopoly either. And I know I've said in the past it's a victimless crime, but you really made me think. It is absolutely victimless, yet for some reason, the state cares. 1984 my ass, it's more like 2012.
[–]Jigijopo 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The kids. It's hurting the kids who sit back and watch their ole mum draw back the curtains. Turn off the lights. Take the phone off the hook and chase the dragon for a few hours
[–]loose-dendrite 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Not a fantastic example since drug dealing to non-minors is illegal for extremely stupid reasons. However it's a perfect example if you want to show that the state is entirely willing to make it possible for people to rape each other simultaneously.
[–]oneiorosgrip 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Unfortunately, just because you can't doesn't mean that the argument won't be made. Other things less senseless have occurred in America's courts.
[–]geckofishknight 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Do you mean more senseless?
[–]oneiorosgrip 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Yes, I did - glad you caught that... might as well leave it, though. >_<
[–]geckofishknight 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
yea it was obvious what you meant, I was just being a grammar nazi haha, have a good one dude.
[–]bombtrack411 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
In some states two underage teens can both commit statutory rape by having consensual sex with each other. Generally this isn't prosecuted, but I believe I have read about both kids being charged with something. Generally they just find a way to only charge the underage boy if they charge anyone.
[–]Njbb 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
imagine if they were both awkward... What if they both thought the other wanted it and couldn't say the word "no" just out of fear? I've actually been in this sort of situation (or, more accurately I was almost in it)
[–]AtheistConservative 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
As a legitimate answer to your question, it's similar to when the prosecution argues that someone went too far in defending themselves. Clearly they were a victim of something, but it doesn't mean they still won't have their own legal problems.
[–]Hacker116 5 points6 points7 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
This makes sense when it comes to muggings or other such (possibly) violent crimes, but for somebody being raped to defend themselves to the point of raping the raper? I don't think a judge can honestly reason it like that.
[–]WhipIash 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Well, that can technically happen, but it is impossible for the rapee to rape the raper, without stopping the raper from raping... if that makes sense.
[–]AtheistConservative 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Obviously it's not a direct comparison. The main point is that having a felony committed against you doesn't give you a legal shield.
[–]kinghfb 9 points10 points11 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Two consenting but otherwise underage people would fall into this category and is possibly the most common example of this. Ridiculous.
[–]DerpaNerb 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
It's not that "they raped each other" is an impossible concept.
IF as a society, we wanted to start a zero-tolerance rule on sex while drunk... then it could most definitely work.
It just wouldn't be treating anyone as a victim which many people find odd.
[–]oneiorosgrip 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It's also a good example of the extreme level of ridiculousness that comes out of attempting to fairly uphold zero-tolerance policies.
[+][deleted] 13 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]Jesus_marley 3 points4 points5 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
The difference is in the "start point" of rational decision. An animal/underaged/mentally handicapped/unconscious individual has a default state of an inability to consent. With voluntary intoxication with alcohol and drugs, you start out with the capacity to consent which is then affected by your voluntary decision to partake in intoxicating substances. That is why a person is still held responsible for injuries and damages incurred while driving a vehicle under the influence. While you may be "unable to make a rational decision" while under the influence, you initially made the rational decision to place yourself in that state and must accept the consequences for that rational decision.
[–]Lawtonfogle 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You might also want to mention this is why, if someone drugs you instead of you drugging yourself, it is a major crime and they should be held responsible for all problems.
[+][deleted] 13 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Jesus_marley 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Umm... no. And the reason is that voluntarily compromising ones ability to make a decision is completely different from removing it entirely. In the first case, while intoxicated you are still able to make a decision to have sex even if you wouldn't normally do so. In the second case, your ability is removed. you can't make a decision either way. I marvel at the fact that you felt it necessary to even ask such a question. The answer is quite obvious.
[–]Lawtonfogle 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Eh, this is the same problem with the age of consent, especially in areas without the same-age exception. We need to look at the mind of the person, not at objective outside factors, to really determine what happened. But that is hard and imprecise, so people avoid it.
[+][deleted] 13 years ago* (27 children) | Copy Link
[–]swizzcheez 10 points11 points12 points 13 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
What happens if you get hot and heavy with the notary?
[–]Trotrot 6 points7 points8 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
if you're straight, have the notary be male. if bi/gay, just hire someone who does not look attractive to you.
note: why am I responding seriously to an obvious joke.
[–]twitchygecko 6 points7 points8 points 13 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
...bring a backup?
[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
3-way time!
[–]twitchygecko 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Guys, we can't bring the whole DMV just to have sex, it's impractical and from the way this is going we will just end up having an orgy celebrating bureaucracy
[–]oneiorosgrip 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Party pooper.
Ah, but that doesn't protect you either. According to feminist advocacy, consent may be withdrawn after the act.
[–]AtheistConservative 13 points14 points15 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This is actually true folks. Unfortunate, but true.
[+][deleted] 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
All the alleged victim has to do is claim duress, or threat (hard to prove those didn't happen), or that activity occurred which is not listed on the form, and she didn't consent to that.
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
So I should start bringing a cyanide capsule with me too, got it.
[–]oneiorosgrip 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Or be picky about who you choose.
There is that - to an extent (and I've seen the result of the deceptively "normal" chick turning out to be a complete psycho) but you do face greater danger of psycho behavior from someone who hasn't gotten comfortable enough with you to get lazy about hiding it.
To effectively take that advice, you'd have to invest time.
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Crazy is really good at looking normal.
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
I mean, if consent is withdrawn mid-sex, you stop having sex. That's fine.
What is seen as a problem generally is more the hearsay of 'consent was withdrawn' vs 'no, it wasn't'
Fortunately, courts rarely accept hearsay evidence from the victim as that would place burden of proof on the accused. It happens, and happened a lot more in the past, but not so much now.
Now, if there's a witness to it, that is another story.
[–]oneiorosgrip 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Yes, but you said it in reply to a comment about consent being withdrawn after the act - so your comment really doesn't relate to the statement it follows. Presenting it like that made it look like a counterargument.
It's also often an issue of women claiming consent never was, even after active participating in a sex act.
It happens, and happened a lot more in the past, but not so much now.
What happens now is that defense attorneys are so intimidated by laws surrounding allegations of violence by men against women that they talk their clients into plea bargaining even when they're innocent, as happened with Brian Banks.
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Typically such cases don't go to court because the forensic evidence is inconclusive of 'forced penetration'. There are exceptions, of course, and Banks had a particularly shit lawyer.
It's not necessarily typical that these cases don't go to court. It may be typical in your region, but I've seen detectives and prosecutors pursue cases that bad in my area, one of them against one of my friends whose ex-wife was using malicious prosecution in a custody battle.
The detective let her change her story (not just a little, but the time, date and location) multiple times looking for a time when the guy couldn't prove his whereabouts. It wasn't the overwhelming lack of evidence that kept the case from going to court - it was evidence against the complainant, which only existed because his friends had figured out what she was doing (this wasn't her first or last false allegation against him) and were taking shifts guarding him so we'd be able to say where he was and what he was doing at all times... and the threat of legal action by my friend's attorney if the police didn't stop harassing him over an obviously false case.
[+][deleted] 13 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]oneiorosgrip 7 points8 points9 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Show me where someone here suggested otherwise.
[–]loose-dendrite 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
"poor reading comprehension" is quickly becoming my most-used RES tag :/
[–]wanttoseemycat 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You read good?
Poster above you said 'after', not 'during'. Quite a difference there (regardless if you agree with the remarks the poster was saying).
[–]partint 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
oh i thought he meant after the beginning of the act, i guess i need more sleep, my bad
[–]X-Y-Z 3 points4 points5 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
In most states, contracts signed while intoxicated are voidable.
[–]firex726 11 points12 points13 points 13 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link
Makes me wonder about other activities, like drunk driving.
So being drunk while having sex is considered rape; but if you are driving while drunk then you are 100% responsible for your own actions?
[–]oneiorosgrip 10 points11 points12 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
There's a funny thing about that - the publication makes a comparison, in that there is a blood alcohol content measurement for drunk driving, but not one for inability to consent. So yeah, prosecutors are basically encouraged to hold you responsible for your actions while drunk if your actions involve the use of a car, but not if you're female and they involve intercourse with a man.
[–]EddieFrits 3 points4 points5 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
The argument that I've heard is that a car can't talk you into driving it; having sex requires an extra person that can also make decisions and has responsibility. This makes sense to me; if the other person is sober and taking advantage of the person who is drunk then that's wrong but if both people are drunk then I don't really see a problem.
I can completely dig this line of reasoning. Many feminists, even radfems, actually do think this way. They only divulge this belief when confronted with the absurdity of their apparent beliefs because the rhetoric that even a drop of alcohol == no consent just makes perfect sense to them. I'm not sure why but my guess is that they believe rape is political (men against women) so you only argue your side.
[+][deleted] 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]RedactedDude 4 points5 points6 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Well, it excludes passengers from suing drunk drivers they knowingly accepted a ride from.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
In both cases you are responsible for getting drunk in the first place.
[–]gmano 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
That would be victim blaming though.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
I'm not sure how you figure that: If you get drunk and kill someone, you aren't blaming the victim. If you get drunk and rape someone, you aren't blaming the victim.
[–]gmano 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Saying that someone is responsible for their own action of getting drunk usually results in cries of "victim blamer", and "supporting rape culture".
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I think you're conflating criticism of people who get raped while drunk with people who commit rape while drunk.
[–]gmano 3 points4 points5 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I saw the comment with very little context, I thought you were stating that "no matter which gender flip we go with, both are still responsible for intoxicating themselves." In that light I see my comment as a reasonable commentary.
Absolutely. Granted, I draw the line at incapacitation/unconsciousness resulting from drinking, but everything else is fair game.
[–]Legolas-the-elf 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
The only thing I'd add to that is to say that I think the difference in accountability is a symptom rather than a cause. The attitude that's most relevant is the perception that sex is something a man does to a woman rather than a mutual activity. That turns a drunken mistake by two people into an event with an attacker and a victim.
[–]oneiorosgrip 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
That's a good point - one people often tend to let go right by them without even feeling the breeze. It's so often assumed that the male is the initiator and the female is reluctant, despite decades of sexual-revolution "empowerment" of women to initiate.
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 13 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
thejosiekiller's comment is right on the money about reversing the sexes
is it though? there was no sex. so is it attempted rape? sexual assault?
do people consider attempted rape of women actual rape? (honestly curious, because even if the roles were reversed I don't see rape in this.)
[–]oneiorosgrip 10 points11 points12 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Problems with your assessment:
1) There was penetration
2) Had it been an aroused guy attempting to have sex with a blitzed girl, the physiological factors which in this situation prevented erection may not have been present. Since lack of erection was the only barrier to vaginal penetration, it would likely have occurred had the sexes been reversed.
3) Even if it had not, had the activity been limited to oral penetration, it still would be considered rape by those who advocate that sex with a drunk woman is rape.
However, in answer to your question, no... attempted rape isn't rape, it's an attempt, just like attempted murder, attempted burglary, and so on. Also, like you, I don't see rape here, and I wouldn't think any differently if OP were male and the alleged victim were female... but the assertion that this behavior is rape when the person initiating sex is male and the desired partner is female has repeatedly been made.
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Wait, but he couldn't get an erection and his penis never went in her vagina. She just rubbed herself on him. If a man rubs his penis on a woman's vagina but there is no penetration, I think that's sexual assault.
Then, she only went down on him because he asked her too. Now ignoring the fact that he asked her to, is involuntary oral sex considered rape? (again, serious question here.)
It's just, reading this again, it wouldn't even seem like the man is accusing her of rape because he regrets it, it seems like he's accusing her of rape because he has no idea what happened. Because by her account, nothing rape-y happened.
Jesus. False rape accusations are so fucked up, convoluted, and stupid, I can't even believe we have to analyze the situation this hard.
[–]CODYsaurusREX 17 points18 points19 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I'm currently dealing with a false accusation right now, and can state with 100% certainty that the claim of forced oral is a form of sexual assault. But, rape is a colloquialism. There aren't really charges of rape- it's called that, but written down as sexual assault.
Exactly - this is why I disagree so vehemently with the position of vocal feminist advocates on drinking and sex. It's ridiculous for the court to get involved at this level.
[–]MsManifesto 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
The reason why I question josiekiller's comment is because if a woman asked the man to go down on her, then that would imply consent to most people.
The problem is, women can claim to have consented to one sexual act and not another - or that they never consented at all - and be believed whether we're telling the truth or not.
[+][deleted] -16 points-15 points-14 points 13 years ago* (16 children) | Copy Link
The only place where alcohol excuses women for consenting is Universities. I don't know why so many people confuse policy for law, but even with genders switched the Guy would not be charged.
EDIT- Wow, the myth runs deep. A person has to be completely incapacitated and not consent for alcohol to be a factor. If there is consent, it does not matter if the person even blackouts, provided they do not lose consciousnesses.
[–]oneiorosgrip 19 points20 points21 points 13 years ago* (10 children) | Copy Link
From the National District Attorneys Association's publication on prosecuting "alcohol facilitated sexual assault, in the section titled 'Three Step Process'" (PDF)
To begin, the prosecutor should determine which theory of sexual assault to allege.Three potential charging theories exist for proving sexual assault of a voluntarily intoxicated victim. First, sexual assault can be proven in the traditional way by demonstrating that the defendant had intercourse with a victim without consent by using force or the threat of force. In these cases, the victim is intoxicated but proof of the level of intoxication is not an element of the crime. Intoxication is only relevant to the victim’s credibility and vulnerability. Second, sexual assault can be proven by showing that the victim was unconscious at the time of the rape and therefore could not consent. Third, sexual assault can occur when the victim was too intoxicated to consent. Regarding the latter cases, the victim’s level of intoxication must be proven; however,“rape law essentially dispenses with the force requirement by finding that the force necessary for penetration is sufficient.”
and
In the United States, jurisdictions define this crime in various ways, which include the following: • Either statute or case law specifically outlaws having intercourse with a person who is too intoxicated to consent. In these states, the victim’s intoxication negates the element of consent, thereby showing that the sexual act occurred without consent. • Rape occurs when the defendant has sexual intercourse with a person who is “mentally incapacitated,” which is generally defined as being rendered temporarily incapable of appraising his or her conduct due to the influence of a narcotic, anesthetic, or other substance. In these jurisdictions, the prosecution generally must show that the victim was “mentally incapacitated” or mentally incapable of resisting due to drugs, alcohol, or an anesthetic.” • Rape occurs when the defendant has intercourse with someone who is “physically helpless.” In these jurisdictions, the prosecution can show that the victim was intoxicated to the point of being physically helpless because she was unconscious, unaware that the intercourse was occurring, physically powerless, physically incapable of resisting, or physically disabled due to intoxication.
In the United States, jurisdictions define this crime in various ways, which include the following:
• Either statute or case law specifically outlaws having intercourse with a person who is too intoxicated to consent. In these states, the victim’s intoxication negates the element of consent, thereby showing that the sexual act occurred without consent.
• Rape occurs when the defendant has sexual intercourse with a person who is “mentally incapacitated,” which is generally defined as being rendered temporarily incapable of appraising his or her conduct due to the influence of a narcotic, anesthetic, or other substance. In these jurisdictions, the prosecution generally must show that the victim was “mentally incapacitated” or mentally incapable of resisting due to drugs, alcohol, or an anesthetic.”
• Rape occurs when the defendant has intercourse with someone who is “physically helpless.” In these jurisdictions, the prosecution can show that the victim was intoxicated to the point of being physically helpless because she was unconscious, unaware that the intercourse was occurring, physically powerless, physically incapable of resisting, or physically disabled due to intoxication.
The publication lists the following as states in which the condition listed in bold is met, and under what statutes/codes it is defined:
Arkansas: A.C.A. §§ 5-14-101 and 5-14-103; Colorado: C.R.S. § 18-3-40; Illinois: 20 IL Comp. Stat. § 51/12-13; Iowa: Iowa Code 709.1l; Montana: M.C.A. §§ 45-2-101 and 45-5-502; Nebraska: R.R.S. Neb. § 28-319; Nevada: N.R.S. 200.366; New Mexico: NM Stat. § 30-9-10; New York: NY CLS Penal § 130.05; South Dakota: S.D. Codified Laws § 22-22-7.2; Virginia: VA Code §§ 18.2-61 and 18.2-67.10; Washington: ARCW § 9A.44.060. In addition to the elements stated above, some jurisdictions require the prosecution to prove that the defendant knew that the victim was intoxicated. A victim can become intoxicated by drugs and/or alcohol in three ways: (1) surreptitious administration by the assailant; (2) mixing of prescription or over-the-counter drugs with alcohol or recreational drugs; or (3) recreational use by the victim.
Arkansas: A.C.A. §§ 5-14-101 and 5-14-103; Colorado: C.R.S. § 18-3-40; Illinois: 20 IL Comp. Stat. § 51/12-13; Iowa: Iowa Code 709.1l; Montana: M.C.A. §§ 45-2-101 and 45-5-502; Nebraska: R.R.S. Neb. § 28-319; Nevada: N.R.S. 200.366; New Mexico: NM Stat. § 30-9-10; New York: NY CLS Penal § 130.05; South Dakota: S.D. Codified Laws § 22-22-7.2; Virginia: VA Code §§ 18.2-61 and 18.2-67.10; Washington: ARCW § 9A.44.060.
In addition to the elements stated above, some jurisdictions require the prosecution to prove that the defendant knew that the victim was intoxicated.
A victim can become intoxicated by drugs and/or alcohol in three ways: (1) surreptitious administration by the assailant; (2) mixing of prescription or over-the-counter drugs with alcohol or recreational drugs; or (3) recreational use by the victim.
(only some jurisdictions - meaning that others don't even require that you know your alleged victim is intoxicated)
[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 13 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
Great source! Thank you for responding with the specific precise definition. AFAIK being able to appraise your conduct means you have to know what you are doing. Meaning your actions which would indicate consent need you to know that you are engaging in consent. You cannot fuck a chick up the ass because she kissed you, but you can if she kissed you because she wanted you to fuck her up the ass. Alcohol can interfere with her making that connection in the first case (assuming that was a common indicator, I suck with examples like this).
So if she engages in a sexual activity you are good, but if she puts your dick in her mouth because she thinks it is a toothbrush, that cannot be taken as consent.
[–]oneiorosgrip 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
From reading the advice in that publication, it appears more that if it may be considered that drinking significantly altered an individual's inhibitions. It would not have to be that the individual does not know she is having sex. She simply has to state that she wouldn't have made that choice while sober.
The worst part of it is that in some states, even if you don't know she's that drunk, or if the substance is a drug instead of alcohol and you don't know she's high, you can still be prosecuted.
Further, the entire publication is written from the perspective that prosecuting a man for having drunk sex is hard, not that it's wrong or that drunk sex isn't rape.
[+][deleted] 13 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]oneiorosgrip 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Not the situation - her actions. She has to be unable to appraise her actions - that can mean more than just not knowing she's having sex. It's essentially a statement which enables prosecutors to determine a point of intoxication at which the alleged victim may be able to knowingly participate, but may not be considered mentally capable of exercising the judgement to have her choice considered a legitimate choice... not necessarily because she didn't know sex was occurring.
Further along in the writing (and the publication is over 40 pages long, so I'm not going to keep copy/pasting... but the whole thing is linked at the top of the original comment) it mentions things like throwing up, stumbling, and the like as supporting evidence for that level of intoxication - things which can occur even when you're sober enough to know that sex is sex.
[+][deleted] 13 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]oneiorosgrip 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
No, it specifics that juries consider drunk sex to not be rape, not that drunk sex isn't rape. The publication only talks about what can be done to ensure success in prosecution.
Do you have a single case in which a person knowingly participated but it was considered Rape?
Yes, one I had personal involvement in. I even had to defend the guy myself, after uninvolved parties accused him of raping me. And I wasn't even drunk. I just wished later on that I'd made a different choice, not because of anything to do with the guy or the event, but because of the way other friends reacted to it.
[+][deleted] 13 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]oneiorosgrip 4 points5 points6 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Further, by your use of the word "only" your comment makes it sound like you think being accused at one's university and censured (up to and including getting kicked out of school) is no big deal. I'm sure that's not what you mean, but it's probably part of why you are getting downvoted.
[–]Vindicater 3 points4 points5 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
As someone who is currently going through a rape trial, I beg to differ. I hooked up with a girl while I was drunk (she had been drunk earlier, but had slept for quite some time and sobered considerably) and she changed her mind about having hooked up with me, and I'm currently going through the trial. I'm being charged with sexual offense because I "had sex with her when she was under the influence of alcohol." It's not just a policy at Universities.
[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Just to be clear, she is not saying she was passed out or that you forced yourself on her and that she gave consent and participated? She is admitting that and you still got charged?
If that is the case, fight it for all it is worth. VAWA requires mandatory reporting on the statistics each judge and prosecutor win or even decline to prosecute. You are being railroaded because they "keep count" and put pressure when ever a prosecutor decides a rape is not substantiated. I would NOT make a deal in your case.
[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I know someone who was convicted in high school, spent a year in jail, and is only now finishing up his probation for having consensual sex with a girl his same age, but mildly drunk. I, as well as several others, testified on his behalf that she was not incapacitated and she lead him into the bedroom by his hand, but apparently our testimony was not enough to overcome her tearful testimony that she was taken advantage of.
So fuck you... you are absolutely incorrect.
[–]didled 67 points68 points69 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
here's the link to the actual thread
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskMen/comments/12lw8t/he_says_i_raped_him/
[–]RealQuickPoint 56 points57 points58 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskMen/comments/12mmbn/he_says_i_raped_him_update/
And the follow up.
[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Vote those UP!!!
up...votes?
[–]Arcnsparc 32 points33 points34 points 13 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
This was a test thread, an identical one was posted in askwomen with roles reversed.
[–]richardstarky 8 points9 points10 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
say whaaaaaaaat
[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It looks the AskMen OP was legit and somebody else might have made a test thread out of it, although I can't tell since it's been deleted
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Link?
[–][deleted] 11 points12 points13 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
nvm found it, it's been deleted http://www.reddit.com/r/AskWomen/comments/12mbji/she_says_i_raped_her/
[–]WhipIash 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The most upvoted comment there, even though he / she realised it was a 'test', considers it a grey area, while the main consensues on /r/askmen was that it wasn't rape... it's just one person, of course, but still. It did get the most upvotes.
[–]DavidByron 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It read that way to me. I was going to suggest it was a role reversed script. Just had that vibe to me.
[–]JustOneVote 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It was not a test thread. redsox3x4 posted a doctored version of the original /r/askmen thread to /r/askwomen..
The OP of the original /r/askmen thread posted an update in which he says the guy was joking when he claim she had raped him.
[–]JockeVXO 15 points16 points17 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I agree with Josiekiller, it seems from the account given that the sex was consensual and the "victim" had only himself to blame if he regretted it later.
And I agree that if the sexes were reversed it would probably be construed as rape and that Josiekiller's comment would be construed as "victim-blaming".
But I don't want women to suffer the same sort of hatred and social discrimination men suffered in days past or today, I just want men to be freed from this discrimination and the hatred to be done away with.
[–][deleted] 11 points12 points13 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I had a problem like this guy, but I didn't let it escalate to actually being raped. I'm 17 and a few months ago I had a 15 year old girlfriend, I am abstinent and she knew that. I made it clear to her that I didn't want to have sex but when I was at her house her sister left while her mom was on the way home so we were alone for just a few minutes. Immediately she began trying to kiss me and I said no at least half a dozen times before she just climbed on top of me (clothes still on) and started making out with me, I didn't want to use force but I just threw her off me onto the other end of the couch. I said no in a more firm tone but she climbed back towards me like an unkillable zombie and said 'who's going to believe you?' I gave in and started kissing her but thank god her mom came home a few seconds later, I thought about that a lot and realized absolutely no one would have believed me and she could have done absolutely anything she wanted. Tl;Dr zombie-esque exgirlfriend would have raped me, saved by her mother.
[–][deleted] 39 points40 points41 points 13 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link
It wouldn't have been rape even if you swap the genders. The "raped" person said "go down on me." They spent the night cuddling.
[–][deleted] 29 points30 points31 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
But if it was a woman then feminists would consider that she was drunk, so even though she asked for it, she would not be able to give consent, therefore rape.
[–][deleted] 12 points13 points14 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
By this same mindset, me imagining a situation where I want to have sex with a woman means I raped here. Someone has to draw the fucking line somewhere, instead of making shit up as you go
I don't think anyone here disagrees with you, friestogo was just outlining the opposition's POV.
[–]truetofiction 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You're right. I think the point is not whether he was "raped" or not, but rather the legitimacy of that response.
[–]jtj-H 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Was not rape.
People be throwin that word around like candy.
[–]tehpwnzorerzz11 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
okay but there is nothing torn about it. just because there is a double standard doesn't mean she did anything wrong. guys do get a lot of shit but don't make her feel guilty because she's a minority in that regard
[–]Jahonay 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I don't drink, and never have. One benefit to this is that I'll never have a night where I'm hooking up with a drunk chick/a chick won't hook up with me when I'm drunk. I think it's really dumb that it's considered weird to try to flirt with a girl when she's sober and level headed. But that same girl would find it normal if you tried to sleep with her while she was drunk and high.
People should be more open to hooking up when they're sober, it would solve a whole bunch of problems.
I am so fucking tired of this argument. If you use force its rape. If you are passed out and someone has sex with you, its rape. If you were blackmailed or coerced in an unreasonable manner, its rape. Other than that its pretty much not rape. Someday we won't be able to even look at each other without it being considered rape. I think considering all these negligible events as rape makes a mockery of real rape victims who were physically forced or coerced through manipulation. We have a damn society of victim/weakness worship and its destroying everybody....WHite people stop your god damn guilt
It's the gender element all of us see as the problem. It's not about white people.
[–]boljek 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
lol white people?
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Alcohol is not an excuse.
[–]shitsfuckedupalot 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
ok, yeah, the top comment was bullshit, thats the reddit community, but the girl didn't do anything wrong either. If the guy didn't say stop, then its not rape. Theres no reason for her to lie, and if she is then she's a twat. So if she's not, "go down on me" sounds like a pretty clear invitation for sex, so he wasn't raped, and he's probably just a pussy.
[–]WhipIash 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
The top comment agrees with you...?
[–]shitsfuckedupalot -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Ok, yeah, i realized that afterwards, but, shut up
[–]VirSaturnA 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Only a retarded civilization would take two people driven to drooling idiocy from alcohol and cry rape when person regrets whatever sloppy pathetic physical encounter took place. We aren't talking about people being dragged into a closet and forced down here. This is just drunken stupidity and someone regretting it later. Girls somewhat getaway with claiming rape in these situations as if a drunk guy is any better at making great choices than a drunk girl, but there is no similar pandering when the gender is reversed. The whole thing is oversensitive bullshit of people refusing to take responsibility for the fact that they chose to put a toxic substance into their body until the point that they were effectively turned into stupid animals. Tough shit. Don't drink. Nobody has any respect for sex anyway. Oh here's a new person let's fuck them what could go wrong? Oh I feel bad now who can I blame besides myself? This kind of whiny bullshit is an insult to the horrible crime that real rape is. Of course men have every right to bitch about it since there is such a double-standard but the answer isn't to make rape an acceptable charge for everyone it's to grow up and take responsibility for your own actions especially if you choose to fuck up your body with brain destroying toxins.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This was absolutely not rape. He consented. But its unfortunate, if the genders were swapped, the guy would be in jail.
[–]beforegalileo 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It's a step in the right direction. And while I would rather this person be there already, I'd much rather have a step at all than nothing.
So this post fills me with hope and pessimism. Mostly hope.
[–]LurkingLarkin 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
how is this even mentioned in the context of rape? are you people insane? he even told her to suck his dick, he was drunk and wanted it same as her, its ridiculous to think anything else. only in america.
[–]actanonverba8 -4 points-3 points-2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Funny how she "couldn't remember" anything except direct quotes that exonerate her. She sounds like she's full of the smelly stuff.
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]oneiorosgrip 253 points254 points255 points (99 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 78 points79 points80 points (29 children) | Copy Link
[–]Hacker116 47 points48 points49 points (20 children) | Copy Link
[–]oneiorosgrip 13 points14 points15 points (18 children) | Copy Link
[–]Hacker116 13 points14 points15 points (17 children) | Copy Link
[–]CODYsaurusREX 20 points21 points22 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]flooberses 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]DerpaNerb 5 points6 points7 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]WhipIash 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Jigijopo 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]loose-dendrite 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]oneiorosgrip 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]geckofishknight 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]oneiorosgrip 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]geckofishknight 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bombtrack411 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Njbb 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]AtheistConservative 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Hacker116 5 points6 points7 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]WhipIash 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]AtheistConservative 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]kinghfb 9 points10 points11 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]DerpaNerb 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]oneiorosgrip 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (4 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]Jesus_marley 3 points4 points5 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Lawtonfogle 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]Jesus_marley 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Lawtonfogle 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (27 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]swizzcheez 10 points11 points12 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]Trotrot 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]twitchygecko 6 points7 points8 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]twitchygecko 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]oneiorosgrip 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]oneiorosgrip 13 points14 points15 points (18 children) | Copy Link
[–]AtheistConservative 13 points14 points15 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]oneiorosgrip 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]oneiorosgrip 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]oneiorosgrip 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]oneiorosgrip 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]oneiorosgrip 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (5 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]oneiorosgrip 7 points8 points9 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]loose-dendrite 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]wanttoseemycat 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Lawtonfogle 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]partint 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]X-Y-Z 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]firex726 11 points12 points13 points (13 children) | Copy Link
[–]oneiorosgrip 10 points11 points12 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]EddieFrits 3 points4 points5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]loose-dendrite 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (2 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]RedactedDude 4 points5 points6 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]gmano 1 point2 points3 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]gmano 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]gmano 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Legolas-the-elf 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]oneiorosgrip 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]oneiorosgrip 10 points11 points12 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]CODYsaurusREX 17 points18 points19 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]oneiorosgrip 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]MsManifesto 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]oneiorosgrip 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] -16 points-15 points-14 points (16 children) | Copy Link
[–]oneiorosgrip 19 points20 points21 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]oneiorosgrip 2 points3 points4 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (7 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]oneiorosgrip 2 points3 points4 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (5 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]oneiorosgrip 1 point2 points3 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (3 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]oneiorosgrip 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Vindicater 3 points4 points5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]didled 67 points68 points69 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]RealQuickPoint 56 points57 points58 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]WhipIash 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Arcnsparc 32 points33 points34 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]richardstarky 8 points9 points10 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 11 points12 points13 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]WhipIash 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]DavidByron 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]JustOneVote 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]JockeVXO 15 points16 points17 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 11 points12 points13 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 39 points40 points41 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 29 points30 points31 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 12 points13 points14 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]AtheistConservative 13 points14 points15 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]truetofiction 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]jtj-H 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]tehpwnzorerzz11 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Jahonay 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 11 points12 points13 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]boljek 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]shitsfuckedupalot 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]WhipIash 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]shitsfuckedupalot -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]VirSaturnA 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]beforegalileo 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]LurkingLarkin 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]actanonverba8 -4 points-3 points-2 points (0 children) | Copy Link