The law holds that everyone who drives drunk consented to getting behind the wheel of a car. Why do our laws look at consenting to drunk sex differently?

Atlas_B_Shruggin · 2017-12-25T06:17:18+00:00

"Consent" is completely irrelevant to drunk driving. Please stop. Consent has nothing to do with personal actions that don't involve other people. You don't "consent" to perform individual acts by yourself. Do you "consent" to getting out of bed everyday? Lol

Consent is only relevant to multiparty actions, contracts, sex, a boxing match, or as a defense to certain accusations arising from mutiparty actions like theft, rape, trespassing

There is no criminal rape statute in the us that "throws consent out the window" because of mere self induced intoxication. It has to be DEFENDANT induced intoxication or actual unconsciousness. You literally have no idea what you're talking about.

Orange_Paisley · 2017-12-25T05:58:58+00:00

You can’t drive a car passed out. Someone can have sex with you without your consent while you are passed out.

DashneDK2 · 2017-12-25T13:00:53+00:00

It is possible to give consent to drunk sex. This is only an issue if you are black out drunk. You can't drive if you're black out drunk either.

[deleted] · 2017-12-25T12:10:18+00:00

No the law does not hold that you consented to drunk driving. Who would you be consenting to?

Do you even know what 'consent' means? Your question doesn't make any sense at all.

SexyMcSexington · 2017-12-25T05:57:53+00:00

They actually don't. What feminists call rape is not at all what the law calls rape.

Scatre · 2017-12-25T08:31:13+00:00

Because society treats women like children

Grizzlybear_Nobility · 2017-12-25T17:36:12+00:00

In the eyes of the law, your actions only matter as they affect other people. It aims to prevent people from becoming victims. It will always, and should always imo, be more extreme in protecting victims than being fair to perpetrators. That's why a drunk person isn't able to consent to sex because they're not mentally present enough, but a rapist is held accountable for raping while drunk because he is mentally present enough (which is a better example than your false equivalency). It's not meant to be fair. It's meant to err on the side of caution and the side of the victims in order to deter that kind of behavior.

Also, another note: the consent of the other drivers on the road in regard to sharing the road with a drunk diver is automatically assumed to be no.

[deleted] · 2017-12-25T17:26:29+00:00

why can't I put drunk people into my car without being charged with kidnapping?

Xholica · 2017-12-25T20:53:24+00:00

Because people are responsible for what they do to others, not what others do to them.

The problem is defining 'too drunk', in terms of legally punishable it's generally when one partner has deliberately intoxicated the other to a high degree while remaining sober themselves, or when one partner is largely unresponsive due to intoxication (unable to walk unassisted, unconscious, form a sentence etc.) and isn't an active participant in the sex.

goatismycopilot · 2017-12-25T13:55:39+00:00

Don't get trashed and have sex with people? Dunno, we did plenty of partying in college, my girl gang had a leave with who you came with policy. We ran interference when our buddies were super drunk and about to sex up a random guy.

TrueRustyShackleford · 2017-12-25T10:28:02+00:00

I think laws and judicial attitudes in most American jurisdictions are horribly outdated.

If a man gets deunk and then gets seduced by a sober landwhale he wouldn't even look at while sober there's no way he could ever get her convicted for rape, while if the victim was a woman and the perp an ugly dude, she would have a chance, even if the ugly dude was just as drunk as she was at the time.

That said, women who drive drunk do get prosecuted and convicted and I'm sure it is illegal to convince a drunk person, who wasn't planning on driving, to drive a car, if it can be proven.

PBRScagsquad · 2017-12-25T05:57:54+00:00

Something something bodily autonomy, no more questions or there will be screeching.

Five_Decades · 2017-12-25T15:19:07+00:00

Because eggs are expensive and sperm is cheap. So society creates protections for eggs that don't exist for sperm. Hence men die in wars while women stay at home.

obviously, laws like this (whether they admit it or not) are directed at protecting women from the consequences of drunken sex. Nobody gives a damn if men have sex while drunk.

The laws are unfair, but their purpose is to put eggs on a pedestal.

AutoModerator · 2017-12-25T05:57:03+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Entropy-7 · 2017-12-26T03:18:31+00:00

The car doesn't drive itself. If you were drunk in a self-driving car you probably would not get in trouble. On the other hand, if you are drunk and someone does something to you, that is on them, not you.

eliechallita · 2017-12-26T22:40:33+00:00

You're confusing two different situations.

Drunk driving is criminalized because it puts other people in danger. There would be little incentive to criminalize it if the danger was only to yourself, or if you were simply leaving yourself open to harm without risking anyone else's safety.

A closer comparison would be like saying that a blind-drunk person basically consents to being given a medical operation or having their bank account drained: Everyone understands that this person was incapable of giving informed consent. For some reason sexual assault seems to be the only crime where the victim's state seems to matter more than the perpetrator's actions.

daveofmars · 2017-12-27T02:01:54+00:00

As much as I hate to side with the law on this, it's because it takes two people to have sex and there is a possibility that the other person could have taken advantage of you. The problem is essentially different.

AstuteBlackMan · 2017-12-25T07:27:50+00:00

To be honest I don't know how to answer this question. I'm just conveying my thoughts and hoping someone fills in the gaps.

Drunk Driving consists of you essentially you being intoxicated and committing a harmful act to someone else.

Drunk Sex consists of you being intoxicated and doing a harmful act to someone else, Assuming the other person is passed out. But if the other person isn't passed out and it's mutual I don't get why someone can just claim they were raped.

Someone once told me that if a man and a woman are both drunk and having sex mutually and midway she says no and you get off her immediately she should still be able to put you on trial for rape. The amount of bias in situations like this makes me sick honestly.

None of us want anyone to be raped. That's God awful and disgusting. But if you're going out and getting drunk to the point of being passed out then you can't get upset when bad men come and take advantage. You need to be smart and protect yourself. This probably sounds like victim blaming but I believe every individual shouldn't neglect themselves in that manner in terms of drinking. I'm more anti-binge drinking.

This is probably a lot of thoughts but oh well

Scatre · 2017-12-25T12:13:50+00:00

Because law and consistency never been best friends. For example, why government can tax me but I can't tax the government? Double standard. And I am dead serious here.

Comments