The Escapist users and Rape

[Uncreation]

My problem is is that if I get drunk on wine I tend to jump on the nearest male thing in the vicinity, I can hardly blame them for that in the morning can I. xD

I do try not to drink wine...but it's so tasty. :<

If that's a problem, just get drunk on something else. And yes, wine is tasty. (Damn you wine!! )

 

[anthony87]

I'm gonna take a guess and assume that the self-righteous bunch in this thread and the others like it, the ones who seem to believe that any volume of alcohol makes you a bumbling rapist magnet have never actually consumed alcohol before.

Come back when you've got some actual experience on the subject before you start tossing down those half-assed arguments from atop your high horses yeah?

 

[Robert Ewing]

So tell me escapists, why are men always responsible for this sort of scenario?

 

[BrassButtons]

Read what I said. You can't consent to anything when drunk.

So if someone gets drunk in a bar and then orders a sandwich, the waiter shouldn't consider the order valid since the person can't actually consent to buying the food?

What if this person is sober enough to realize they shouldn't be driving, and so asks their sober friend to take them. Are they able to consent to being driven home?

And if someone who gets drunk and agrees to have sex isn't responsible for that choice due to intoxication, why is someone who gets drunk and then decides to drive held responsible for that choice?

 

[OtherSideofSky]

This tangle of red tape is why, on the rare occasion I attend a party, I remain relatively sober (I have basically no tolerance, so even a glass of champagne makes me slightly tipsy) and punch anyone I think might be hitting on me until they go away. I'm autistic and can't actually recognize or participate in flirtation, so I punch a lot of people. Some people have accused this of being extreme or insane, but I think it's very important to avoid raping anyone. I think that if everyone else were to follow my example, we could avoid this whole problem entirely.

In all seriousness, as someone who physically cannot stop worrying for medical reasons (I need pills to calm down enough to sleep), the huge grey areas and potential for exploitation in these laws have basically scared me off of even trying to have sex with anyone.

Sweet jesus, fellow escapists. I thought your views on kids were bad enough, but good god, if any sort of legal counsel or law enforcement official saw any of the two popular threads on what's considered rape or not, they'd probably vomit in rage.

I don't know why you were surprised that people's views on morality do not agree exactly with the law or that most people on a gaming site are raving idiots trying on extreme moral/political stances they're too scared to express in real life. That's pretty standard for basically any internet community except for a few very small or very academic ones.

Vomiting in rage is bad for your health. They could be developing serious problems with their throats and stomach lining, so I suggest you contact a doctor immediately. I believe that it is better to deal with all the people and statements you come across with a clear head (meditation and breath control are your friends in this regard). If you allow anger to cloud your judgment just because you disagree with someone, you'll often miss opportunities to learn from others or to show them the error of their ways. Ideally, an argument should be a valuable and informative experience for both parties and keeping a level head and an open mind is the first step toward achieving that goal. I hope that if you ever do meet these officials you can help them to manage the psychological issues underlying their anger problems.

 

[Master Kuja]

So tell me escapists, why are men always responsible for this sort of scenario?

Some bullshit about a guy has to have an erection in order to facilitate sex, ergo the man must be enjoying/wanting it.
Curiously, the idea that a guy can be drugged with those little blue pills in order to have that be a non-issue is something that courts of law seem to skirt around with the elegance of an ice skating hippo.

Also, while we're on this topic for the nth fucking time.


Seriously, this could have been posted in one of the umpteen rape related threads already currently sitting on page one. Why did your not even remotely unique brand of outrage require its own thread?

 

[Pyramid Head]

Don't have sex with drunk people. Their breath is awful!
Plus one of the defining attributes of intoxication is impaired judgment, so it's easy to argue that drunken consent isn't consent because they are not in the right state of mind. Better to just stick with the sober or get consent before getting shitfaced. And i could bring up the fact that you should know your limits and stop drinking before you're liable to rise to the occasion with a total stranger, but expecting responsibility out of adults is apparently asking too much.

 

[Robert Ewing]

So tell me escapists, why are men always responsible for this sort of scenario?

Some bullshit about a guy has to have an erection in order to facilitate sex, ergo the man must be enjoying/wanting it.
Curiously, the idea that a guy can be drugged with those little blue pills in order to have that be a non-issue is something that courts of law seem to skirt around with the elegance of an ice skating hippo.

Also, while we're on this topic for the nth fucking time.


Seriously, this could have been posted in one of the umpteen rape related threads already currently sitting on page one. Why did your not even remotely unique brand of outrage require its own thread?

Hmmm... It seems to be that rather annoying trope of 'Rape is okay... If a woman does it.'

Sigh.

 

[beniki]

Sweet jesus, fellow escapists. I thought your views on kids were bad enough, but good god, if any sort of legal counsel or law enforcement official saw any of the two popular threads on what's considered rape or not, they'd probably vomit in rage.

[link]http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.334217-Poll-Is-it-rape-if-you-have-consensual-sex-with-a-willfully-intoxicated-person[/link]

[link]http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.334108-So-according-to-some-feminists-this-anti-rape-ad-campaign-is-sexist[/link]

To sum up the majority's feelings:
-Drunk people are accountable for their actions
-If someone consented while intoxicated that means they are willful, and, if they didn't mean it, then they shouldn't have gotten drunk
-If both parties are drunk then it can't be rape because neither had a sound mental state, so no one can be blamed

First point, this one is true. Intoxication has never been a defense ever. That goes for both parties, however, and one party will usually be seen as just "the one who got drunk" while the other would be "the one who took advantage of the other". It doesn't matter if the predator was drunk, then they just drunkenly took advantage of someone.

Second, the key word here is "willful". Legally, consent is seen as a contract between two people. Consent doesn't even have to be verbally expressed. It can be implied if one of the party's actions can be construed as willful agreement. But there's that word willful again. Willful implies a mental ability to weigh the consequences of an agreement. YOU CANNOT ENTER INTO AGREEMENTS (legally) WITH PEOPLE OF AN IMPAIRED MENTAL STATE BECAUSE THESE PEOPLE ARE NOT SEEN BY THE LAW AS BEING "WILLFUL". I really can't stress that enough. If you go to the judge and say, "It's ok, she said yes." He's gonna reply with "Did she know that? And did she know what she said yes to? Since she's charging you with rape, I'm gonna assume the answer to both of those is no."

Finally, if both parties are drunk, rape still has occurred. We've already established that drunk people are still responsible for their actions, but it's now much harder to tell which is the perpetrator. Generally, the rapist in situations of unlawful consent would be whoever initiated sexual contact, and it's now impossible to tell who is who without further evidence. One of the parties could technically bring charges against the other, but the defense will always be, "I couldn't have consented either."

The lesson here is DON'T HAVE SEX WITH DRUNK PEOPLE UNLESS THEY CONSENT BEFORE THEY'RE DRUNK! If you find yourself constantly waking up in strange beds after getting drunk, STOP DRINKING! No one is saying that people should be running around blitzed all the time telling people they'll have sex with them without realizing there are consequences for those actions. Let's face it Escapist, drunk sex isn't even that awesome anyways.

... You realise, of course, that your argument is contradictory. You open saying drunk people are responsible for their actions, and then in the second paragraph state that (legally) they aren't.

Not that I advocate taking advantage of drunken people, I just don't like the arrogant lecture against a community I kind of like being, well, badly thought out.

 

[Kinguendo]

Whats with all the threads about rape recently? Its disturbing.

 

[Paradoxrifts]

On the one side you have the people who identify with those people, predominately male who are falsely accused of rape because they had sex with an agreeable but mildly intoxicated sexual partner who waking up the next day with their crazy switch well and truly flipped have gained a new found quest to utterly ruin the person they just had sex with.

Could happen. Does happen. People can be vindictive little bastards. Probably not the likeliest of the two scenarios that I'm in the middle of positing but it could very well happen.

Now on the other side of the argument you have the people who identify with the rape victims who have the misfortune of meeting up with the wrong person, predominately male again, and being date raped by them. And if that wasn't enough to deal with right there, they also have to deal with a court system that must go through the motions of disproving their rapists lies about just how 'consensual' the sex was.

Could happen. Does happen. But probably just a 'pinch' more likely to happen than the first scenario I mentioned.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

On the one side you have the people who identify with those people, predominately male who are falsely accused of rape because they had sex with an agreeable but mildly intoxicated sexual partner who waking up the next day with their crazy switch well and truly flipped have gained a new found quest to utterly ruin the person they just had sex with.

Could happen. Does happen. People can be vindictive little bastards. Probably not the likeliest of the two scenarios that I'm in the middle of positing but it could very well happen.

Now on the other side of the argument you have the people who identify with the rape victims who have the misfortune of meeting up with the wrong person, predominately male again, and being date raped by them. And if that wasn't enough to deal with right there, they also have to deal with a court system that must go through the motions of disproving their rapists lies about just how 'consensual' the sex was.

Could happen. Does happen. But probably just a 'pinch' more likely to happen than the first scenario I mentioned.

I think the difference of group B is that while they indeed are more likely to have this happen they also indirectly cause the problems of group A. Group A on the other hand does not promote men having sex with drunk women cause they're already afraid of being accused for rape anyways so why risk it.


The only people who are not included here are the actual rapists/date-rapists and that's the thing, while group B takes issue with group A's reaction to being unjustly accused of horrible acts they leave the actual bad guys go free.


Unless they truly believe everyone in group A is a faker rapist who wants to make excuses for himself or rape seem less horrible (and one would have to show why such feelings are justifiable, since, to me that sounds preposterous) they really should focus their efforts elsewhere.

 

[Iron Mal]

-Drunk people are accountable for their actions

The number of things that you can avoid responsability for with the line 'I was drunk' is remarkably small, it's not like an insanity plea where you weren't in your right state of mind because of something you had no influence or control over, you choose to drink, you knew the risks so the consequences are yours to face as a result.

-If someone consented while intoxicated that means they are willful, and, if they didn't mean it, then they shouldn't have gotten drunk

Probably a bit of a corruption or the original intention most people had.

A potential rapist isn't going to give you fair warning or give you a chance to escape so if you want to avoid the worst case scenario then it is you and only you who can take measures to ensure your own safety (not drinking too much and avoiding dangerous situations in the first place goes a long way towards this).

This isn't people wagging their fingers at victims for having the audacity to be raped, it's a reminder that you need to be responsable for your own safety because no-one else can do it for you.

-If both parties are drunk then it can't be rape because neither had a sound mental state, so no one can be blamed

If both parties are drunk then it is a hard situation to determine since it could be argued by either side that the other person raped them (most of us would usually side with the woman's story being the chivelrous bastards we are) but seeing as they were both intoxicated at the time it get's hard to figure out what really happened without the presence of a neutral third party (which isn't likey to be there).

The lesson here is DON'T HAVE SEX WITH DRUNK PEOPLE UNLESS THEY CONSENT BEFORE THEY'RE DRUNK! If you find yourself constantly waking up in strange beds after getting drunk, STOP DRINKING! No one is saying that people should be running around blitzed all the time telling people they'll have sex with them without realizing there are consequences for those actions. Let's face it Escapist, drunk sex isn't even that awesome anyways.

Thank you Dr. Phil, while you're at it do you think maybe we stop smoking and doing drugs too?

Sarcasm aside however I do have to be serious when I say that bad things happen, this is not an ideal world.

Just saying 'don't drink and have sex!' may be an ideal solution just as abstinance is the only contraceptive method with a 100% effectiveness but it needs to be kept in mind that this isn't ideal for everyone, people want to have fun and they want to go out and enjoy the various pleasures the world has to offer. Just saying 'don't do it' is like saying don't go outside or you'll get run over, yes, it'll keep people safe but it'll also deny them the fun and excitement people should be allowed to have in their lives.

All we can do is just advise people about how they can maximise their safety and minimise the risks, you won't get people to stop doing stupid things (it'll never happen) but you can try and guide people so that they at least do them a bit more safely.

There will be times where this fails (and sometimes fails majorly) but at the end of the day giving people advice on how they can avoid bad situations in the first place is the course of action that holds the most benefit for everyone.

 

[Twilight_guy]

I share the same sort of opinions as the OP on everything up to making this thread. The correct response is not to make your own thread since it's unlikely to convince anyone unless you post links to relevant laws. The correct response is to ignore the thread full of people ignorant of the law or just post your own thoughts there and then laugh at them when they get arrested and try to argue that the law breaking is not morally wrong to them and judge says "I don't care" if they should happen to be in the wrong situation at the wrong time. People aren't going to listen to you but it's nice to enjoy delicious ironic justice.