Does anyone really believe that girls go to frat parties and bars full of horney guys and get shitfaced to NOT have sex with someone? It might not be with you but they are looking for someone.
That doesn’t excuse rape but it puts a little perspective on statements like “it’s rape if the woman has been drinking”.
<mod>
I think this has crossed the Great Debates threshold. Let’s pick it up over there.
Moved.
</mod>
Smith is right on the money. Guys are not the only ones that go to parties hoping to get laid. Let’s get this stereotype of the guy as a “sex-crazed beast” and the poor girls as innocent little flowers right out.
I have a theory that many girls get drunk at parties so that they can have casual sex and then blame it on the alcohol instead of admitting that they have normal human sexual urges. A girl can get drunk and have sex and it’s ok, but go out and have sex with random guys WITHOUT THE DRINKING and there’s somethnig wrong. This is such a warped perspective. Girls who like sex should go out and have sex without adding alcohol into the mix. It’s possible to initiate sexual hookups without the help of alcohol.
We’re talking about two different situations here. There’s a difference between nearly-unconsciously-drunk and wildly-uninhibited-drunk. IMO, it should be illegal to take advantage of someone’s condition if it is the former (i.e. physically incapable of consenting or not consenting,) whereas the latter if done on purpose is immoral and unethical but shouldn’t be illegal unless the person didn’t know what they were consuming.
The question is, what level of drunkeness renders one “unable to give consent”? I think these laws are intended to deal with cases where a woman is so drunk she can barely speak, not just so drunk that she thinks sleeping with Joe is a good idea, even though she normally thinks Joe is a total asshole. A guy who has sex with a woman because she’s so drunk she literally doesn’t know where she is or what she’s doing is a rapist. A guy who has sex with a woman who’s just too drunk to maintain her usual standards in sex partners is just lucky. It sounds like the study cited in the OP is counting the latter cases as rape, and I don’t think most reasonable people would agree with that definition.
Silly rabbit. Rape claims are for women ! [/trix ad]
Seriously; the silliness of this definition is clear when one realizes that it would never apply when the roles are reversed. Although this conversation would be mildly amusing:
Woman: You raped me!
Man: No, you raped me!
I’d go further than that. If you know that a person wouldn’t normally go for you, but you know that she’s inebriated enough to go for you and you take advantage of it, I’d say you’re being a creep. Not a rapist, but definitely a creep.
If you think that the person is drinking deliberately in order to lower their inhibitions so that they can have sex, that’s a different situation, and not a problem. I’m talking about cases where person A thinks it’s likely that person B will regret the hookup in the morning, and goes through with it anyway. Creepy.
Daniel
Well, I know at least some rabid feminists classify a “mercy fuck” as rape, for example, since she doesn’t really want to but is just being nice. For that matter, some will call it rape ( against the woman ) if she leaps on her boyfriend and rips off his clothes, because he never asked her.
Plus, some will even claim that a woman has been raped even if she doesn’t think she has been. It’s called “false consciousness”, a concept ripped off from Marxism. ( on preview, like elfbabe says )
The usual rule is the man, because he’s the man. It’s like age of consent laws; two 16 year olds screw, and the girl gets counciling while the boy goes to jail, or flees to Canada.
Well I guess that I’m a freak then. I go out to parties and drink and do not want/expect any sex at all. Especially in college people are still learning their limits, but that doesn’t mean that any girl who gets taken advantage of while drunk was asking for or expecting it. Besides being passed out drunk, what if she’s just too drunk to fight someone off or realize what is happening?
I don’t subscribe to all men being sex-crazed maniacs, and I know that some girls are too, but admit it, there are creeps out there. People who knowingly take advantage of others in bad situations should face the consequences.
I agree that there are differences of degree between sex with someone barely conscious and sex with someone whose inhibitions are merely lowered. And, for that matter, with someone whose inhibitions were already low, but who wanted an excuse. If someone deliberately gets drunk with the intent of excusing the sexual behaviour which that person expected to follow, then that person was not raped. But if that person claims that he or she would not ordinarily have done such a thing, but that “the alcohol made me do it”, then that person is effectively claiming to have been raped. Such a person would be lying, and such lies do no good for the anti-rape cause.
And I agree that precision is desireable. It might be better if we had separate words for the various degrees of sexual offense, so long as they were used consistently. But as it is now defined in law, “rape” encompasses a lot more than most people think it encompasses.
So far as I understand it alcohol only lowers inhibitions it doesn’t make people do things they don’t want to do. So if someone drinks and starts coming on to someone else it it isn’t because the alcohol suddenly made the other person more attractive.
Am I suppose to be psychic, because I can’t figure out how I’m suppose to know why they’re drinking unless they tell me “I’m drinking so I can muster the courage to let you bone me” which isn’t exactly what I’d want to hear.
Marc
<stan,kyle,eric,kenny> “Thanks Chef!” </stan,kyle,eric,kenny>
Not all inhibitions are unreasonable, however. There are times when the idea of committing violence against someone was very tempting. Multiple sensible inhibitions kept them of sound body.
Similarly, though I am happily married, that doesn’t mean other women are all unattractive to me. My inhibitions keep me from pursuing women besides my wife, and that’s a very good thing: without these inhibitions, my marriage would collapse.
These are good inhibitions. Someone who drinks may have good inhibitions lowered, along with the silly inhibitions, the ones that people often drink in order to lower.
You’re not supposed to be psychic. Let me repeat what I said:
There are certainly cases where you don’t have to be a psychic to believe that this is true.
Daniel
But, that wasn’t the question for the rape statistic as quoted (“have you ever had sex you wouldn’t have had otherwise because of alcohol?”). It’s not “have you ever had sex you wouldn’t have wanted to otherwise because of alcohol”.
In other words, the question seems to be asking (or at the very least including) have your inhibitions ever been brought down enough, due to alcohol, to result in sex that wouldn’t have happened had you not been drinking. If you answer yes, as many people would, it is including you as a rape.
I can understand how one man could rape another, but how could a woman rape a man? If you pull a knife on a man, a necessary condition for him to perform sexually just is not going to happen. 10% of men being raped sounds extraordinarily high.
I don’t think they drink necessarily as an excuse for having sex with someone. I think they do it for the same reason guys drink. Because it removes your inhibitions. It makes it easier for guys to approach girls and vice versus.
That’s the problem. Most people go out to party for just a little harmless fun and to cut loose. It’s one thing to invite some girls over, get drunk with them and maybe hook up. It’s quite another to take advantage of someone who is passed out or even worse, tamper with their drinks so they get more messed up than they intended.
Uh, ok. I don’t remember saying inhibitions were bad so I’m not sure where this is coming from. I just said that alcohol lowers your inhibition it doesn’t make you do things against your will. There’s a big difference between the two I think. If I got drunk and slept with someone I’m sure my wife would hold me responsible and not the demon rum.
Marc
I think it’s actually the cup’s fault. Without the cup there couldn’t have been any sex either!
Situations like this, Marc, I think that the only way you’re going to satisfy anyone is if you go ahead and accept the fact that, yes, you have to be psychic. Anything else makes you a potential rapist. Or, I guess, you could carry a breathalyzer.
If a woman gets hammered, gets in her car, and takes out a schoolbus full of kids it’s her fault. However, if she gets hammered and does you in the coat closet at the office Christmas party, it’s your fault.
Neat, eh?
-Joe
I hear this a lot. Unfortunately, it’s just not true, and there are cases of men being raped by women, where the man got an erection due to anxiety or fear (it may never have happened to you, but my understanding is that it does happen).
I don’t know the reliability overall of this site, but here is one answer to your question. Unfortunately, the rest of my information is from a human sexuality textbook that I no longer possess and cannot reliably provide a citation from.
Maybe so. It just goes against how I think I’d react. I’m amazed that men could do it under duress, but I suppose anything is possible.