~ archived since 2018 ~

(xpost) If a person cannot be held responsible when they consent to having sex while drunk, how come they are held liable when they decide to drive while drunk?

Bobsutan

May 20, 2011

15 upvotes

/r/MensRights

http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/hfj91/if_a_person_cannot_be_held_responsible_when_they/

Archived from /r/MensRights

r/MensRights is a community advocating for the social and legal equality of men and boys since 2008.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/MensRights archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Post Information

Title	(xpost) If a person cannot be held responsible when they consent to having sex while drunk, how come they are held liable when they decide to drive while drunk?
Author	Bobsutan
Upvotes	15
Comments	42
Date	May 20, 2011 3:40 AM UTC (15 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/hfltj/xpost_if_a_person_cannot_be_held_responsible_when/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/xpost-if-a-person-cannot-be-held-responsible-when.1039664 https://theredarchive.com/post/1039664

Comments

[–]aetheralloy 9 points10 points11 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]halholbrook 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Bobsutan[S] 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]devotedpupa 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Junkie_Love 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Junkie_Love 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]dusty78 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]WineWhine -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (34 children) | Copy Link

[–]Bobsutan[S] 3 points4 points5 points 15 years ago (33 children) | Copy Link

[–]WineWhine -4 points-3 points-2 points 15 years ago (32 children) | Copy Link

[–]Bobsutan[S] 3 points4 points5 points 15 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

[–]WineWhine -2 points-1 points0 points 15 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

[–]ZQMFGB 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]WineWhine -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]ZQMFGB 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]PhysicsPhil 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ZQMFGB 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]WineWhine -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]ZQMFGB 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]WineWhine1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

First: Do you have ANY evidence for men being "laughed out of the building"? Second: Again, the fact that men in the lack of consent criminal procedures do not choose to report their crime doesn't mean that it wouldn't be taken seriously if it were reported. Third: The only difference in the amount of physical evidence between male and female victims of rape is semen, which can easily be taken out of the picture for female victims through the use of a condom, which many rapists use, so I really don't think it's that material to the issue. Fourth: I never said anything about a man only being able to have an erection if he consents; in fact, that "evidence" of female arousal is routinely thrown out in court for women as well - it's not used as evidence.

There isn't a legal double standard. If you think your guy friends would taunt you because you reported a rape, that's one thing, but that's due to the hyper masculinization of society rather than any legal impediments.

[–]ZQMFGB1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]WineWhine1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ZQMFGB1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]WineWhine1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ZQMFGB1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]WineWhine1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ZQMFGB1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]WineWhine1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ZQMFGB1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Actually trials for related offenses will often result in a single trial with co-accused. This is a bit different from that but to say you need separate and independent investigations is contrary to the fact that only one transaction occurred. If it can be determined that both parties were too intoxicated to proceed then you've either got enough guilt to go around or none at all, there's no middle ground here.

Consent in the legal sense may not have been obtained, but consent in the practical sense of voluntarily engaging in the activity is certainly present in a situation like this and it's that consent by conduct that's being retroactively withdrawn. If it weren't withdrawn there would be no legal proceeding you see. To put this in another context, if you've got a fight between two people where both are too drunk to legally consent to anything, but they nevertheless mutually agree to start throwing punches they've consented by conduct despite being incapable of consent legally. Similarly, it's only when one or both of then decides they didn't like what happened after the fact that it turns into a matter for the criminal justice system, despite the fact it was technically a criminal matter from the get go (assuming no serious injuries occur of course).

[–]WineWhine1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ZQMFGB1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]WineWhine1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ZQMFGB1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You can't claim the actions of two people are independent and therefore it's possible that while both were intoxicated beyond the level needed to vitiate consent regardless of their actions at the time only one is guilty here. Both failed to secure consent, therefore both, in the very same act, violated the other (based on the current legal standard). It's not logically possible for one party violating the consent of the other to be guilty while the other, who did every bit as much violating from a legal perspective, is only a victim.

By filing a claim in a matter where both parties were excessively intoxicated they have made a de facto admission of having engaged in every bit as much sexual assault as they claim to have suffered as they no more secured the consent of the other party than the other party did from them. I'm not sure how you can possibly be arguing that where both parties have engaged in this behavior only one should be held responsible. Again, to refer to my example of mutual assault, both parties are guilty of assault regardless of whether only one ended up regretting it later. Criminal behavior is criminal. If the incident were reported by a third party one would expect both sides to be properly investigated, I don't see why this should be any different if one of the parties is the one to relate the matter to the authorities.

My point is this regarding the report. If a violent rape occurs and a third party reports it, there's an investigation to find the victim and perp regardless of whether the identity of either is known at the outset. By contrast, if two people have excessively drunken but otherwise agreeable (at the time) sex, it's going to take one of them coming forward to trigger an investigation. That's the difference

Also, as an aside, more trials are judge alone than judge and jury so it's by no means necessary to be convicted by a jury of your peers. Not strictly relevant to the matter at hand though.

[–]WineWhine1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I never claimed that only one party is a victim. But if only one party goes to the police and reports a crime, there's only one party that is going to be charged with a crime. It doesn't matter whether the other person was drunk or sober, if they have sex with you while you were too drunk to consent, they raped you. There's no "defacto admission" or any of this other bullshit.

Yes, with rape that was predicated on too-drunk-to-consent, you're going to need a complaining witness. I understand that, I get that - - but what is your actual point?????? It doesn't change anything. Guess what, if my boyfriend and I, if we both have sex with each other too drunk to consent, we both raped each other under the letter of the law. And guess what, neither of us have gone to jail because we haven't gone to the police to report a crime. But it doesn't change the fact that that was "illegal activity" and, if I felt as though I was violated by my boyfriend, I would be within my rights to go to the police.

[–]ZQMFGB1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The problem with what you're saying is that if you go to the police and make a statement to the effect of "I was part of a mob that beat a homeless man senseless", "I just helped someone burned down a vacant building" or "I just assisted in the smuggling of drugs across the border" you'd be arrested for the crime you just admitted to, and rightfully so, in addition to being questioned about the nature of the crimes committed by those you were with. However, if you go to the police and say "I just violated another person's sexual integrity, oh and by the way they violated mine too" only one person gets in shit despite both having done the exact same thing and the police having an admission to having done so on record as a matter of having taken the complaint. That's the issue here. An on-the-record and unsolicited admission of guilt being made and subsequently ignored.

edit: sorry for the delay in responding, I'm enjoying this debate but I can't for the life of me remember my account password and only have it saved on this machine.

[–]overcontrol 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]WineWhine 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PhysicsPhil 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ghebert001 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]WineWhine -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Bobsutan[S] 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]WineWhine 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link