California makes drunk consensual sex illegal and imposes mandatory sentencing for it. Not sex with someone unconscious or incapacitated. But now having sex with an intoxicated woman is illegal and will put you in prison for years. Drunk sex has NEVER been illegal in the US before this.

boringcarpets · 2016-10-03T09:23:53+00:00

He was drunk + she was drunk + sex = she was raped.

So women are children and shouldn't be allowed to drink alcohol? if they are incapable of judgment where a man is, they are not equals. Raise the age, keep them out of bars

JestyerAverageJoe · 2016-10-03T12:11:44+00:00

Remember when "progressives" were against mandatory minimum sentences?

cherrycheesecake · 2016-10-03T10:06:05+00:00

If you follow where the law links to, you'll find another part of California law that discriminates against men, specifically.

#265. Every person who takes any woman unlawfully, against her will, and by force, menace or duress, compels her to marry him, or to marry any other person, or to be defiled, is punishable by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170.

The above law specifically only mentions "women". Apparently, it also sets the implication that men are not covered under the protection of this law, thereby allowing for women to force men into marriage, against their will.

EricAllonde · 2016-10-03T09:17:55+00:00

Feminists are demonstrating their usual level of empathy with men and any woman who cares about them:

http://imgur.com/a/0oLGS

lodro · 2016-10-03T13:15:16+00:00

This would be outrageous if it were true.

But this law (full text, quite short) does not change anything about the actual rape offense in California law - which is quite reasonable and has absolutely no "affirmative consent" anywhere in it.

This new law disallows parole for those convicted under existing law whose victim was "either unconscious or incapable of giving consent due to intoxication".

Men face many serious issues in modern society - there's more than enough for us to get up in arms about here if we stick to things that actually happened.

Ortesk · 2016-10-03T07:09:10+00:00

When me and my wife hook up after I had a few beers, can I press charges?

Ultramegasaurus · 2016-10-03T07:36:00+00:00

California Closes Loophole That Allowed Brock Turner's Light Sentence. The law was inspired by the sexual assault case at Stanford University.

It makes me so angry that this bullshit causes national outrage and policy changes (horrible ones at that) while I have to read every day about women getting away with child abuse and murder.

aesopstortoise · 2016-10-03T08:00:03+00:00

If you read the text of the bill, link in the article, I think you'll find that it doesn't go beyond prohibiting probation for those found guilty in this sort of case. I couldn't find anywhere where it gave an actual length of time to be served.

HeForeverBleeds · 2016-10-03T12:27:43+00:00

So a state literally changes it's laws to put guys like him in jail for an even longer amount of time, and yet feminists still like to use his case as evidence that we live in a rape culture that doesn't take men raping women seriously...

trampson · 2016-10-03T10:39:47+00:00

rapists like Brock Turner

Can you sue for this kind of thing? He wasn't convicted of rape, yet this is plastered all over the media.

JackBond1234 · 2016-10-03T17:54:04+00:00

Mmmm this will all come back to the patriarchy, I guarantee it.

"He's telling me what I can and can't drink and withholding sex unless I obey!"

JayBopara · 2016-10-03T12:31:37+00:00

This truly is Orwellian culture. Where the feminists and white knights have conspired to create a situation where any woman who is intimate with a man can have that man placed in jail. White men are the new black men - dangerous sexual predators who must not be allowed access to female flesh.

EduBA · 2016-10-03T12:51:04+00:00

The law includes

oral copulation if the victim was either unconscious or incapable of giving consent due to intoxication.

How many drunk men in California will be given head in the first hours of next January 1? Should them denounce their partners?

Florinator · 2016-10-03T13:48:45+00:00

In general I am opposed to more mandatory minimum sentencing, but in this case it's alright.

What a tool!

VLXS · 2016-10-03T14:25:58+00:00

Based on how much damage alcohol causes to the human body, it should be illegal anyway! Oh wait, we already tried that and it led to Al Capone.

prominentmuggle1 · 2016-10-03T15:08:44+00:00

The sad thing is that this is better than the alternative, which is that if you have sex with a girl that's drunk, even if you're both drunk, she can claim that you raped her and jurys will let her win it. Women who cry rape when they really just don't want to take responsibility for their decisions are as bad as actual rapists.

jeff_the_nurse · 2016-10-03T15:51:23+00:00

Is drunk consensual sex with men illegal, too? Or is this not equality?

alecesne · 2016-10-03T16:42:04+00:00

The problem here is the lack of numerical criteria of what qualifies as "intoxicated". Without clear external thresholds, how do you know when you've assumed liability?

Hedhunta · 2016-10-03T22:06:00+00:00

[permanently deleted]

HyenaBloke · 2016-10-03T12:20:22+00:00

"Penetrative sexual assault"? This has deluth model written all over it. Just wait till a woman gets a guy drunk and rapes him, then has him sent to prison under this legislation.

booty_boogey · 2016-10-03T14:18:00+00:00

Having sex with an intoxicated person is not illegal; raping or sexually assaulting someone when they are drunk, unconscious or otherwise incapacitated to give consent has now been given a mandatory minimum punishment (so that whether a man or woman is the perpetrator, they MUST serve a minimum sentence).

This isn't a law stopping people from having sex if drunk...

titoblanco · 2016-10-03T16:07:34+00:00

I am not going to get into the right or the wrong or pros/cons of having minimum sentencing, but even I can see in a 15 second scan of this bill that it does nothing to change the legal definition of what is or isn't rape, it simply enforces a minimum sentence once convicted. Very misleading title on this post.

EduBA · 2016-10-03T12:42:27+00:00

The last Friday of September ought to be No-Man-In-Bar Day in California as a means to repudiate this law.

Hypersapien · 2016-10-03T13:50:25+00:00

Mandatory minimum sentences fall under the category of "court stripping laws".

2016-10-03T14:04:24+00:00

can we just give the "nuts" California and we get the rest and just conciser it the "special" state.

mspk7305 · 2016-10-03T14:29:35+00:00

What if both were drunk? What if she was less drunk? What if only he were drunk?

TheRavenousRabbit · 2016-10-03T14:45:57+00:00

If I wasn't gay already, I'd say that this sort of thing is oppressive.

theninjallama · 2016-10-03T15:05:40+00:00

Pretty misleading title...

KingMong · 2016-10-03T15:11:00+00:00

when this news gets about, plenty of guys arent gonna risk it, there is gonna be plenty of drunk woman feeling rejected.

JohnnyLawman · 2016-10-03T15:16:46+00:00

so how am I supposed to know if the chick is drunk? give her a breathalizer test? When I'm drunk, everyone seems sober to me. That or I don't know or give 2 shits, cuz I'm dru-uhhh-unk. Woooooooohhh.

Zero4505 · 2016-10-03T15:26:04+00:00

Guy: Hey I see you are drinking a coke want to come back to my place for some fun.

Girl: it's Jack and Coke and sure I am game.

Guy: Oh i am sorry if that's jack and coke then I'll have to pass. You are not capable of making sounds decisions.

So at what point will this protested as a way for the system keeping women down?

2016-10-03T15:55:43+00:00

Ban alcohol at that rate. At least it wouldn't be sexual discrimination

JebberJabber · 2016-10-03T18:32:46+00:00

Holy fuck, this is actually astonishing. I mean this is beyond parody. I'd say probably 80% of consensual heterosexual sex in the western world involves alcohol. Alcohol and sex are so culturally intertwined and inter-dependent that where you find one, you find the other. These maniacs are basically trying to destroy western society.

MickDaster · 2016-10-03T18:59:42+00:00

Is this law going both ways? Atleast on paper?

BraunTheCrusher · 2016-10-03T22:51:32+00:00

This isn't the solution to the problem stated in the first sentence of the article. That rapist's rich dad got him off the hook. Getting judges out of other people's pockets is the solution. Ending corruption is the solution. Not this.

2016-10-04T01:10:29+00:00

Look on the bright side. At least this discourages men from fucking drunk sluts, getting them pregnant, and ending up paying 18 years of child support. Has California really thought this through? The state gets a big chunk of that child support money too you know.

2016-10-04T10:46:32+00:00

So I guess this is an unpopular opinion, but I feel that even when both parties are consenting during sex, if they are drunk, they are not truly consenting. Teg cannot make proper decisions. Alcohol impedes your judgement. Now, obviously, the law is targeting men, and this is wrong. I don't know how they would charge both parties for rape in this instance - perhaps some kind of lesser charge. I just don't think that drunk SE is consensual sex. Also...using the Brock Turner case to argue the point? Not a good idea. The guy is a clear, real misogynist and his father is even worse.

PierceHarlan · 2016-10-04T11:54:15+00:00

The new law doesn't say what the headline here says. The act does not change the substantive crime of rape--it doesn't make intoxicated sex illegal, it imposes a mandatory sentence for rape that's already on the books.

The real question is: since when do liberals (the sexual grievance industry is liberal) insist on mandatory sentences? Answer: when the target of their sentences is young men.

TejrnarG · 2016-10-03T12:20:21+00:00

I thought it already went nuts, but TIL it can always go more nuts!

People in cali should protest against this. If this spreads to other states and countries then good night ladies and gentlemen!

chaircushion · 2016-10-03T15:25:02+00:00

Non American. Does this go both ways? So, if a woman takes advantage of an intoxicated man, will she be put in prison too? What if both were drunk? Will they both be put away?

Anyways, for you it's just one state. You don't HAVE to live there.

romulusnr · 2016-10-03T16:30:01+00:00

Cue article from angry tumblrist about how there's no guys to pick up at bars anymore. #mustbepatriarchy

skywreckdemon · 2016-10-03T17:54:23+00:00

They're basically saying that women are like children at this point. This is as much a women's issue as it is a men's issue.

Hectorseventeen · 2016-10-03T14:45:02+00:00

Why is it legal for women to drink alcohol anyway? Maybe some aspects of sharia law can be woven into western law? If we can control their alcohol and drugs intake and regulate what they may wear, life will be a lot safer for men. We need to put the safety and welfare of men and boys before that of women.

2016-10-03T14:55:53+00:00

The Red Pill has been warning about this for awhile and now right on schedule - its happening. I dont understand where theres so much water between these two groups. You're both in the same sinking ship, together. Now men can officially go to prison when a woman wants to clear her reputation of "regret sex".

emperorhirohito · 2016-10-03T15:33:01+00:00

Sooo under the new law if a women is "drunk", an utterly subjective idea, she is incapable of deciding to have sex. This is in response to a man not being sentenced long enough because he had sex with someone who was unconscious (which is already against the law) while he was completely drunk and thus, by the laws internal logic, incapable of consenting to sexual activity thus committing the act of rape on two people, one of whom was him.

So in answer to a rich person getting off a crime in an already utterly illegal manner the State of California has decided that if I and my girlfriend come and visit, go to a restaurant, have a meal, split a bottle of wine, go back to our hotel and have utterly consensual sex it can arrest me, charge me with a crime slightly more vile than murder in the eyes of the public, find me guilty (because it can decide how drunk is drunk and the media will call for literally any alcohol in your system being called drunk), and put me in prison forever.

Whereas if we decided to go on holiday to Germany my girlfriend could be raped by a so-called "refugee" and I'd be racist for wanting him to be charged.

Or we could stay in Britain where she already would have been raped when she was young if she lived in Rotherham and the men who had done it would be protected by both the police and our most powerful left wing politician party.

Fuck the left. Fuck feminism. Fuck multiculturalism. Fuck all the institutions, bodies, journalists, commentators, so-called academics and know-nothing journalists that have frog marched the western world back to the dark ages because minorities and women earn tuppence on the pound less than white men. You have done your best to destroy the greatest society mankind ever achieved. I only hope men like Trump and Farage and De Wilders will finally stop government listening to you and put us back on track to civilisation. Otherwise we'll end up in some dark dystopian future being forced to choose between Putin and ISIS, and I know what my choice would be.

SacredWeapon · 2016-10-03T13:38:11+00:00

by extending automatic denial of probation to individuals who commit any penetrative sexual assault

That's certainly one way to make sure that the law is not gender-neutral.

2016-10-03T14:05:49+00:00

I would think this would lead to an upswing in prostitution.

9279 · 2016-10-03T15:18:54+00:00

Hold on. Thelaws made drunk sex a crime all together right. Isn't that kind of a good thing? Now women will have automaticallybrole the law too. It makes women accountable in a way.

But it also could scare rape victims who were drunk from coming forward out of fear.

I just think were jumping to conclusions. This laws could help men.

Zenom · 2016-10-03T15:33:32+00:00

If enough of a ruckus was made, could somebody higher up (Congress, the President etc.) go LOL NO! and over turn this? And before anybody mentions it, yes I know I am simplifying it a lot, but I know nothing about American politics.

2016-10-03T15:39:46+00:00

Buzzed sex is drunk sex...buckle up its the law

Trail_of_Jeers · 2016-10-03T16:56:27+00:00

[permanently deleted]

aerovado · 2016-10-03T17:22:19+00:00

Welcome to California.

locks_are_paranoid · 2016-10-03T18:33:21+00:00

Is there any way this can be challenged in federal court on constitutional grounds? This law doesn't seem like a constitutional violation, but I hope there's some way to get this overturned.

gsettle · 2016-10-03T19:30:56+00:00

Stupid!

Ransal · 2016-10-03T20:21:44+00:00

We need a site like fakehatecrimes that documents how many men are arrested for this and how many women are, just to prove the law is discriminatory in its actions.

harbeas · 2016-10-03T21:19:24+00:00

What do you expect, it's California.

bumbuff · 2016-10-03T21:19:35+00:00

Meanwhile, next month at the local bars..

"Where are all the men?? This bar is just another clamfest!"

functionalsociopathy · 2016-10-03T21:40:49+00:00

Note to self: Never go to California ever. Not even for E3. Their wacky kooky laws will have you doing 25 to life for so much as parking the wrong way.

bsutansalt · 2016-10-04T00:28:17+00:00

Simple solution is simple: never have sex while sober. BAM! Good old Mutually Assured Destruction.

2016-10-04T01:10:32+00:00

Look on the bright side. At least this discourages men from fucking drunk sluts, getting them pregnant, and ending up paying 18 years of child support. Has California really thought this through? The state gets a big chunk of that child support money too you know.

kerrielou73 · 2016-10-04T16:28:22+00:00

As a feminist this really really bothers me. I also don't like the concept that at a very advanced point in the encounter a woman can decide not to and it's rape. I mean, it's wrong, but if you''re already in the act that is a tall order to stop. I am sure it is difficult to draw lines, but women also need to be held accountable and if the male is also intoxicated than that should matter as well. If her blood alcohol is bordering on unconscious and his is such he can still legally drive, then yeah, that's obviously rape. If they are both barely cognizant of what is happening then why should he be held to a higher standard? Drunk people are drunk and do stupid stupid things, but the level of intoxication should matter for BOTH parties.

I also think we have overly inflated the idea of rape in this country. Yes it is horrible horrible horrible, but is it more horrible than having your kneecaps broken? Does it have to be this life ending experience. I think your age and life experience matters. I can tell you at 20 and a virgin being raped would have been up there with being murdered to me. At 44 and having had 4 kids if I had the choice to have my kneecaps broken or get raped I'd choose rape. I'm sure that will raise some hackles, but at some point it's just assault and not some very very special assault. I do get it that it is different for every woman.

I feel like the whole virgin\whore concept is making this issue worse. If woman weren't so slut shamed or their chastity put up on a pedestal, maybe we wouldn't be so over the top nuts about rape. Maybe it wouldn't be this shameful thing you have to hide. Maybe it could be prosecuted like the assault that it is, instead of this extra very special thing, because is it? How much worse than a broken arm is it? Well, I imagine it depends and has depended on my stage in life.

Anyway, just thinking out loud. My sis was raped when partially unconscious and he was really fucked up too. She felt really violated and weird for quite awhile, but did not go to the police. I think she recognized she was at least somewhat culpable in being alone in a bedroom so fucked up with a guy also really fucked up. I hate hate hate slut shaming and this idea if you dress a certain way you're asking for it, but there has to be at least some accountability on the other side.

kerrielou73 · 2016-10-04T16:51:07+00:00

Rape should be treated as assault, because that's what it is. It's assault of the vagina, not necessarily a very extra special assault. By treating it as such we are reinforcing for the victim that it is this terrible life altering thing that is shameful and has to be hidden. Go get a rape kit and prosecute the guy for assault, because that's what it is. Treating sex differently for women than for men is what makes rape so traumatic for the victim. This would hold true for male victims of rape as well. When it's this life ruining thing you have to be ashamed of forever and ever altered that's where the problems really start.

This law is reinforcing female fragility and specialness. If women want equality then rape is just assault and that goes for boyfriends and husbands as well. I know they sometimes have a hard time with intercourse after knowing another man has been in there. Well that would also have to stop. It's assault so lets treat it as what it is and stop making it this over inflated thing only women experience (I know men do to, but outside of prison at a much lower rate). Instead of imagining what you would feel like if gang raped and experiencing it like we do as a virtually life ending event, maybe we could begin to deal with it rationally and more rapists would be prosecuted, because it wouldn't be so under reported.

ElMorono · 2016-10-04T20:39:23+00:00

Intoxication=automatically means unable to give consent?

What a load of fucking shit.

2016-10-05T14:14:09+00:00

So wait, if a drunk woman pushes sex on a drunk man... she can then say she was raped?

McGauth925 · 2016-10-07T22:34:14+00:00

The usual sexist bullshit that only the men will be charged and found guilty.

Mitschu · 2016-10-03T14:16:21+00:00

“The consequences of sexual assault needs to be severe enough that people feel enough fear to exercise good judgment even if they are drunk, severe enough to be preventative.”

You know what... that's kinda what we've been saying all along.

"Sexual assault" should not be a watered-down "he looked at me funny" crime, it needs to be severe enough and unambiguous enough that potential victims feel enough reasonable fear to exercise good judgement even if they are drunk... severe enough to be preventative.

I mean, maybe if we stopped pretending "hookups" were responsibility free, risk free occasions, less women would engage in them and thus not feel the trauma, shame, and stress of morning-after regret.

(And honestly curious here; if drunk consent is invalid and thus rape, and women live in constant state of fear due to an alleged culture of rape, why do women voluntarily engage in so much drunk sex?

If we lived in a culture of pot-dealerships, where every time you toked there was a very real risk of getting forced into buying a car you cannot afford, and society tacitly endorsed this because it is miscannabist against potheads and thinks they deserve it... wouldn't we see at least a dip in the number of stoners walking into dealerships every day "just browsing" as they wised up to how much abuse and sanctioned violation of their rights they were getting there?)

OH GOD WHAT A MISOGYNISTIC RAPE APOLOGIZING MONSTER AM I TO IMPUGN WOMEN'S FREEDOM OF SEXUALITY BY SUGGESTING WOMEN SHOULDN'T GET SHITFACED AND THEN FUCK A RANDOM GUY.

Besides, that quote only applies to drunk men, duh.

wwwhistler · 2016-10-04T01:04:45+00:00

if women can no longer be responsible for when they drink....perhaps they should not be allowed to drink...just like children. also ...how intoxicated? one drink? two? how is the man to know if she had a drink? woman has a drink, goes to mans apt, has sex... if she was intoxicated does he go to jail? even if he had no idea?

rg57 · 2016-10-04T02:29:09+00:00

If I had any California wine, it would now be down the drain.

There will be no California rape juice in my home.

JebberJabber · 2016-10-04T08:28:42+00:00

doesn't affect me. i avoid drunk girls like the cancer they are.

Daktush · 2016-10-03T13:12:39+00:00

/r/rage

Trident1000 · 2016-10-03T15:15:57+00:00

This is what liberals do. They are out of their minds.

Theccpalestine · 2016-10-04T02:09:55+00:00

They just need to make it illegal for women to consume alchohol. Since they obviously can't handle it.

XXX-XXX-XXX · 2016-10-03T18:13:58+00:00

Wasn't butt sex illegal in the the us recently? You guys will make it work.

feedmecarrots · 2016-10-04T00:13:54+00:00

Is there any piece of anti-,male legislation that Jerry Brown won't sign? It is time for men to boycott California and, if they live there, vote with their feet.

TimRattayGotScrewed · 2016-10-04T02:02:50+00:00

Last I checked, the law says "incapacitated," not "intoxicated." Just bad writing.

General_Fear · 2016-10-04T09:19:16+00:00

These laws are a pure double standard. So a man is held responsible for his decision while under the influence of alcohol. But she can't be held responsible for the same behavior. Now here is the kicker . . .

If she gets behind the wheel of a car, she can't use the excuse that she was drunk and did not know what she was doing. If she drives while drunk she will be punished.

So a man is responsible for his behavior no matter what. Same goes for the women, unless she has sex. If she has sex while under the influence she can't be held responsible. What???

conspiracy_thug · 2016-10-03T13:54:16+00:00

What the fuck how is this even possible none of us voted on this

Frontfart · 2016-10-04T02:11:11+00:00

Doesn't this set some kind of precident where drunk driving is now temporary insanity for women?

2016-10-04T10:31:43+00:00

Keep voting Democratic, and laws like this will sweep the entire fucking nation.

Noleaveforbirth · 2016-10-03T09:35:29+00:00

This is a discriminatory law. The law need s to be changed so that it is illegal for a man or a woman to have Sex while drunk, consenting or not.

Comments