Question: If a guy goes to the exact same party, actually this very guy, the one she intends to have sex with. And let’s say she even told this guy she plans to have sex with him (as per your example). But this man and that woman both drink too much and become incoherent (this is not excluded in your example) and as per your example he has sex with her, and also let’s just say for accurate fairness, and not to be sexist, she has sex with him, would that be rape? who raped who? Did they both rape each other? IMHO while it may not be ‘no harm no foul’, I don’t believe it’s in the best interest of humanity to have declared either one of them to have raped the other as doing so would seem to perhaps do greater harm to both parties.
And because this example is specifically possible in your example, your question simply does not provide enough information to make such a determination if it should be called rape or not. It is certainly possible for an incoherent person to engage in sex, and sleep sex is a thing as well which pretty much makes the person incoherent if they were being active while sleeping.
What troubles me is the automatic inherent misogynistic assumptions here that it is so common and ingrained in society that you don’t even list the condition of the guy. It’s very insulting to women and also very unfair.
OK would have helped if you asked directly instead of making up misogyninic ape shit that are an insult to women also while taking my post out of context and saying it means things it does not.
As I stated I see it the line is blurry. I don’t believe verbal or written or for that matter notarized consent is required in any sense but can be obtained. Nor does such consent, if obtained, guarantee it won’t be rape if sex were to happen. it is not something that can appear as such in a legal document or verbal agreement, it would be giving up bodily rights and thus not enforceable. Legally it may be very helpful in a defense I would admit, and it would establish a meeting of the minds at that moment of time, but such a thing simply can not be an iron clad consent agreement.
So if a hard line of rape must be drawn I would draw of rape the line at going forward with a sex act beyond an expresses objection. Though beyond that hard line there is the fuzzy line which will also include instances of rape. There are varying states of ability to consent or withdraw consent on both sides, there is intent of both sides.
If one was stone cold sober and the other was intentionally drugged by the former so they can have sex, that would almost certainly be rape, and legally it would be. Do I leave any fuzzy wiggle room? Yes, if this was the plan of the couple, to implement the above and neither party is objecting to what happened I would not call it rape.