When in doubt blame the woman.
When not in doubt, it’s just a failure of your imagination. Try harder and you can conjure up doubt.
It’s like talking to the fucking Taliban.
Fucking bullshit. Reverse the genders, it would be the same thing. Or it could be a guy raped by another guy. Shit happens. This rhetorical slight of hand is pathetic and your “gotcha” is pitiful.
Withdrawing consent after the fact, sure that’s not credible, but we aren’t talking about situations where a woman (or man) withdraws consent. It’s where they never gave it in the first place.
Literally the same parish in which the priest was molesting kids. Little girls for a change. The church sponsored girl scout troop in fact. Which didn’t allow any males into their meetings, except Reverend Father Diddler of course. I took my daughter to a meeting and was stopped at the door of the parish hall. The priest went in as I was leaving. I went back and took my daughter out. Three weeks later he was arrested. The kids didn’t testify so he skated.
No, not withdrawing consent the next day - it’s exactly what @ASL_2.0 wrote, and he/she is correct. Bad judgment isn’t a ticket to rape someone. Bad judgment isn’t the same as regretting consensual acts of sex; it was never consent in the first place. I’ll grant you that, in a handful of cases, there can be legitimate confusion under the influence of alcohol about whether someone is being receptive to an advance – at first. But that question certainly gets resolved once someone moves in for a kiss. There are so many cases of college date rapes in which someone claims that a woman consented just because they never screamed “Rape! No! Get off me!” and it’s trauma that women live with forever. Yeah, I don’t know what’s so hard to understand, really.
We are talking about where that lines blurs and who takes responsibility for their own actions, which does include my scenario.
If there is any doubt, then just don’t do it. It’s not so important to get your fuck on right now to take that chance. If they would have consented, then they will later, too. If they wouldn’t later, then they wouldn’t now either.
That’s fair game for the men too, right? If they are at the party, and they get assfucked, then they consented because they showed up to it, and anything else is just withdrawing consent after the fact.
Your scenario is that someone goes to a party, therefore, it’s okay to rape them.
Please never invite me to any of your parties. And furthermore, please never invite anyone to them.
Oh, and you are obviously not invited to any of mine. You wouldn’t like them anyway, as at the parties I go to or host, you aren’t allowed to rape the other attendees.
Why does gender matter? Let us, both male and female, come together to tear apart your faulty logic in trying to equate the above to my scenaro:
A: If they are at the party,
OK got ya
B: and they get assfucked
Ok all here is a statement of fact.
C: then they consented because they showed up to it, and anything else is just withdrawing consent after the fact.
How the fucking fuck did you make this giant leap; jumping Jesus on a pogo stick how can you even assume you have the capability of commenting here and people taking you seriously with that batshit crazy statement? That is nothing like what I stated. Yes she/he showed up, yes sex was had, yes she regretted it the next day, when she did not regret it at the time (by inference).
Your inference is the problem.
That’s very interesting. And i suspect you are right.
I forget whether it was Penn or Teller, but one of them, talking about not needing religion for moral rules, said that he had raped as many times as he wanted to, which was never. And he had murdered as many times as he wanted to, which was also never.
My guess is that most men have no desire to take advantage of a comatose woman, not just that they lack the ability to do it due to social conditioning. I mean… How sexy is it to interact with someone who is comatose? I’ve seen men who passed out drunk, and i might move them for their own safety or something, but they were physically somewhat repellant in that state.
You have explicitly stated that showing up to a party where drugs or alcohol will be present and that sex is a possibility is giving consent for sex which may not be withdrawn.
She may not have even been conscious, but that still would be consent by the rules that you have laid out.
Okay, scenario. Girl knows that a boy she likes will be at a party. She goes to the party, with the idea that if things happen with him, she most likely will be happy with that. While at the party, she takes some alcohol and drugs. Some other guy sees that she is not fully within her faculties, and takes advantage of this fact to have sex with her.
Do you think that was rape? If so, then you need to take back nearly everything that you have said in this thread. If not, then fuck you.
Here is what you posted
There is one extremely important step that is missing from this scenario. If you had written
But if a woman went to the place knowing drugs were used, and planning to use them, knowing that sex was a possibility as everyone was high and inhibition were low AND SHE CONSENTED TO SEX, and it was morning after regret that would be different.
You would have been fine. But by omitting the one detail that is the dividing line between rape and non-rape your scenario excuses situations that are clearly rape.
No it does not excuse it, it just fails to define if it was rape or not. It is simply we don’t have enough info. That does not exclude or excuse it in any way, thought legally it does not appear to prove rape beyond a reasonable doubt either (though many here seem to have already tried and convicted this person)
It is strongly implies that she has regrets after the incident in a way that was a change of position during the incident. So there was some change of her opinion overnight after the fact.
It’s true that she may not have been conscious, but that is in no way what I said. That is changing my scenario. And no that is not consent by the rules I laid out, that is a jump of logic that ends in a freefall into the pit.
Your scenario is that being a party with drugs and alcohol and possibility of sex is consent to sex. There is no other way to read what you wrote.
When is it consent then? If her eyes are open and she can mutter incoherently?
No, it is true. What people don’t seem to be understanding here is that both parties are responsible for obtaining knowing, willing consent.
It doesn’t matter who “initiates” anything, including the first kiss or hug or snuggle or even playing with the other’s naughty bits, at some point one of you has to say to the other, “I really want to make love to you/have sex with you. Is that what you want?” If your partner doesn’t ask you, ask them. If the answer is no, then nothing beyond what you’re currently doing happens. But you have to get the verbal acknowledgement first because otherwise, yes, you might be committing rape.
Getting that verbal acknowledgement means you both know where things are going, or not, and keeps you both safe.
I don’t think that anyone could credibly object to that. It’s good advice. As long as you don’t say “anything else is rape”. (And I don’t think you’re saying that.) If two people just attack each other and they are really into it, it’s not necessary. But it’s absolutely not a bad thing either if they pause to make sure they’re on the same page.
To your point, consent can be withdrawn - not totally after the fact, but certainly after initiation and even during penetration. If a man inserts his penis into a woman, who then says “Wait, I feel pain; this isn’t right, I need to stop,” then the guy absolutely must stop.
I agree, sometimes it seems to be pretty damned obvious, but stopping and checking should be the default, not the option.
Note the “might”. 
Yep. And vice versa. It doesn’t matter what point you’re at, if your partner changes their mind and says “no”, you stop.
I’m old, long married, and looong out of the dating game, but …
If both parties are stone cold sober ? Is there still ‘need’ for active, explicit, and unambiguous consent prior ?