How many young women accused of making false rape allegations are prosecuted and convicted - DERAIL from 1/3 of young men prosecuted...

[J842P]

I'm sure it's very rare for two people to be equally drunk and equally engaged in non-consensual sex acts with each other, and I'm sure it's even rarer that something like that could be successfully prosecuted, but that doesn't mean it can't happen.

You think it's rare for two similarly excessively drunk people to have sex?

I think I've witnessed that many time in my life, and I'm not particularly social. So I do this think it's very rare.

You do or don't think it's rare?

Ugh. Sorry, I was responding on my phone.

I don't think it's rare.

Well, I don't think it is uncommon. I don't think everyone is engaged in some bacchanalia every night.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Wait up there: Why can’t a drunk person force himself on a woman, no matter how drunk he is (assuming he is nor too drunk to maintain an erection or alternatively use an object for penetration)? Of course he can. Even if she is sober, he can still be the aggressor—and successful at raping her. Just because Kavanaugh chickened out doesn’t mean he couldn’t or would have raped Ford if he hadn’t changed his mind. This plays out at drunk parties all over the country every single night.

He's considering the cases were no force is involved and both parties are actively engaging in the sexual behavior, both both are probably too drunk to really consent.


It's a case that happens very often.

And there's that poster that gets brought up now and then. Both are too drunk, only he gets charged with rape.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

This has nothing to do with the issue.

What you are describing is an issue where there is clearly a lack of consent on the part of one of the parties.

The issue with drunk on drunk sex is a matter of being too drunk to consent, not a case of non-consent. If they're both drunk either both raped or neither did. The current approach of allowing rape charges by someone who regretted it later makes no sense.

What? One can be drunk and NOT consent. One can be drunk and successfully fight off a would be rape by someone who is stone cold sober. Speaking from personal experience.

So what? That's not the scenario under discussion! Keeping trying to make it into a forcible rape scenario doesn't change the fact that we are talking about too-drunk-to-consent.

You keep clinging to some fantasy that 1) two drunk people agree to have sex and it’s either no rape or mutual rape or 2) a drunk woman cannot have refused sex because? All drunk women want sex with whoever is available but then feel bad about it the next day either because she feels like a slut or he doesn’t call the next day or the sex was bad. I suppose it’s progress that you can even consider that perhaps the sex wasn’t good for her. Or that it matters to her.

Look at that anti-rape poster. Both too drunk, only he's charged. That's the problem we are talking about.

 

[Toni]

So what? That's not the scenario under discussion! Keeping trying to make it into a forcible rape scenario doesn't change the fact that we are talking about too-drunk-to-consent.

You keep clinging to some fantasy that 1) two drunk people agree to have sex and it’s either no rape or mutual rape or 2) a drunk woman cannot have refused sex because? All drunk women want sex with whoever is available but then feel bad about it the next day either because she feels like a slut or he doesn’t call the next day or the sex was bad. I suppose it’s progress that you can even consider that perhaps the sex wasn’t good for her. Or that it matters to her.

Look at that anti-rape poster. Both too drunk, only he's charged. That's the problem we are talking about.

So what are you: a pro-rape poster?

Explains a lot.

 

[RVonse]

So what? That's not the scenario under discussion! Keeping trying to make it into a forcible rape scenario doesn't change the fact that we are talking about too-drunk-to-consent.

You keep clinging to some fantasy that 1) two drunk people agree to have sex and it’s either no rape or mutual rape or 2) a drunk woman cannot have refused sex because? All drunk women want sex with whoever is available but then feel bad about it the next day either because she feels like a slut or he doesn’t call the next day or the sex was bad. I suppose it’s progress that you can even consider that perhaps the sex wasn’t good for her. Or that it matters to her.

Look at that anti-rape poster. Both too drunk, only he's charged. That's the problem we are talking about.

So what are you: a pro-rape poster?

Explains a lot.

I think he is saying just treat both people the same for the same deed. And that actually sounds like what should be a feminist viewpoint to me.

 

[Arctish]

So what are you: a pro-rape poster?

Explains a lot.

I think he is saying just treat both people the same for the same deed. And that actually sounds like what should be a feminist viewpoint to me.

It is.

 

[Toni]

So what are you: a pro-rape poster?

Explains a lot.

I think he is saying just treat both people the same for the same deed. And that actually sounds like what should be a feminist viewpoint to me.

I respect Loren enough to believe he can speak for himself. And that he did.

No one is arguing that people don’t get drunk and mutually engage in sex.

What is being argued is whether a drunk person can rape another drunk person. To me,it is quite obvious that is possible. One drunk person can and sometimes does overpower another drunk person. One person can be much more in control of the situation than the other.

 

[laughing dog]

I can't think of any other reason why a self-intoxicated woman who had consensual sex with an equally intoxicated male sex partner would belatedly withdraw consent - refusing to believe that they had actually slept with THAT guy.

Perhaps the issue is not what the situation but with your ability to think because the answer is she did not consent in the first place.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

So what? That's not the scenario under discussion! Keeping trying to make it into a forcible rape scenario doesn't change the fact that we are talking about too-drunk-to-consent.

You keep clinging to some fantasy that 1) two drunk people agree to have sex and it’s either no rape or mutual rape or 2) a drunk woman cannot have refused sex because? All drunk women want sex with whoever is available but then feel bad about it the next day either because she feels like a slut or he doesn’t call the next day or the sex was bad. I suppose it’s progress that you can even consider that perhaps the sex wasn’t good for her. Or that it matters to her.

Look at that anti-rape poster. Both too drunk, only he's charged. That's the problem we are talking about.

So what are you: a pro-rape poster?

Explains a lot.

I'm not a piece of paper on a wall.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

So what are you: a pro-rape poster?

Explains a lot.

I think he is saying just treat both people the same for the same deed. And that actually sounds like what should be a feminist viewpoint to me.

I respect Loren enough to believe he can speak for himself. And that he did.

Except you misinterpreted the word "poster". I was referring to the piece of paper on a wall that's been linked here a few times, not to an individual who writes a message.

No one is arguing that people don’t get drunk and mutually engage in sex.

What is being argued is whether a drunk person can rape another drunk person. To me,it is quite obvious that is possible. One drunk person can and sometimes does overpower another drunk person. One person can be much more in control of the situation than the other.

You appear to be willfully blind here. Nobody is saying a drunk can't rape. The case were are talking about, the case on the piece of paper, involves two people who are too drunk to consent.

- - - Updated - - -

I can't think of any other reason why a self-intoxicated woman who had consensual sex with an equally intoxicated male sex partner would belatedly withdraw consent - refusing to believe that they had actually slept with THAT guy.

Perhaps the issue is not what the situation but with your ability to think because the answer is she did not consent in the first place.

More like your lack of ability to understand the discussion.

We are talking about too-drunk-to-consent.

 

[laughing dog]

[

More like your lack of ability to understand the discussion.

We are talking about too-drunk-to-consent.

Lion IRC wrote

I can't think of any other reason why a self-intoxicated woman who had consensual sex with an equally intoxicated male sex partner would belatedly withdraw consent - refusing to believe that they had actually slept with THAT guy.

Whether "That guy" was equally intoxicated or not is irrelevant to why Lion IRC cannot think of any other reason.

It is pretty clear that you don't even bother to actually read the posts to which you respond or you are logically impaired.