This thread is regarding the recent decision by a British judge that it is no rape if drunken consent is given (just google it). What do people think(please look at the case before replying).
My personal opinion is that the judge is right as long as they are both equally drunk.
That is a link to a related article
Consent is consent.
Non-consent is non-consent.
If the person doesn’t have the capacity to consent due to age, illness, disability or, indeed severe intoxication, then any consent given is null and void.
Having sex with an unconscious person, or one who is so incapacitated that their consent cannot be informed or reasonable is rape.
Acquittal was the correct verdict in this case because the woman concerned couldn’t remember whether she gave consent, raising the possibility that in fact she did. That’s reasonable doubt.
There is already a rant going in the pit on this, http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=346434 , though I don’t feel we need to 86 this one if we want to have a calm exchange on it.
Personally, I don’t know how a judge would be able to rule on something like that (which is why I didn’t report my drug-addled experience in this area). I mean, particularly if both parties are drunk/drugging. It’s different if one person is more under the influence than the other (as was my case), and it’s a man taking advantage of someone who’s incapable of speech. I dunno…it’s a tough call.
But, the decision has much wider implications (I still agree with the decision). Also, the man was not as drunk as her by a long-shot ergo it is probably rape. The real problem is that it allows for a precedent that says drunken consent is consent.
It is remeniscent of the old laws here in Ireland that said rape could not occur within marraige
Forgive my innocence but what does to 86 something mean?
Taking the last point first, it often helps to stick to one topic at a time in Great Debates, though it’s a principle possibly more honoured in the breach than the observance.
I’d recommend looking at the discussion in the Pit, as it addresses the points you’re making with remarkably little shouting and swearing.
Precedent? ::shrug:: No means no. Yes means yes. Being unable to remember whether you said no or yes, and a complete absence of any other evidence, means it’s a waste of the court’s time bringing it to trial: there isn’t a hope of a reasonable conviction.
“Get rid of it”. I think it harkens back to the CB (Citizen’s Band) radio craze of the early '70s. Everyone talked on radios using code language. Silly humanoids.
Thank you
So let me get this straight. Girl goes out to a party, gets drunk of her own accord. Hooks up with a guy. Feels embarassed about it the next day. That’s rape?
It’s older than that. It had long been used to mean cutting off the serving of drinks to an intoxicated customer. However, the actual origin is hazy, and there have been long discussions of it here.
I don’t intend to argue origins, here. I just wanted to let you know what a hatful of bees this question can be.
msmith537-don’t be deliberately obtuse. Of course that’s not rape, no-one implied it was.
If you’re too drunk to stand, see or talk you’re too drunk to give consent.
If you get a woman into that state so you can have sex with her you are a rapist.
If you have sex with a woman in that state, you are a rapist.
I have a hard time with this, too. And I’m a woman. In my mind, it’s your fault if you’re getting so shit-faced you seriously can’t function enough to consciously say no.
I realize in a perfect world it shouldn’t be this way. Men should always be able to keep their hands to themselves and be perfect gentlemen. But there’s a point where you do need to take care of yourself. Going up to Mike Tyson’s room alone in the middle of the night was stupid, and getting shit-faced at a party where you don’t know everyone is stupid, too.
Now I don’t include date rape in this, of course. And maybe I’m wrong. But I know this: If you don’t get yourself into the situation, nothing will happen. I realize this sounds like blame the victim but we are way too much of a victim society these days. Personal responsibility is flying faster and faster out the window, I fear.
I meant to add: I also don’t count it if the man has deliberately gotten her into that position, as in feeding her drinks or not telling her how strong they are, or lying about them. But if the glass is going from your hand to your mouth with no coercion, and then you get raped, perhaps you should rethink what you’re doing at the very least!
No, you shouldn’t get yourself that fucked up, but it’s still rape and therefore not your “fault”. The situation is your fault; not the act.
Yes, I understand that. What I’m trying to figure out is what **firespinner ** means by “drunken consent”. There’s a whole lot of grey area between “sober” and “too drunk to stand”. And firespinner also seems to imply that the guy has greater culpability if he is more sober than the girl.
My experience in a situation somewhat like this. For the record I am a guy.
In 1st year University, at a formal. A friend and I are leaving early as we have another party to go to. By early I mean 1030pm or so (formal started at 5). A girl, who is known to me but I wouldn’t say friends we just lived in the same residence, is VERY drunk and needs a ride home. No problem, we are taking a cab, she can come with us. This girl can stand, can sort of talk. In the backseat of the Cab she gets VERY frisky shall we say with no encouragement from either of us. She is sitting next to me, and proceeds to be very forward with some actions. I had been drinking as well, but was nowhere near as drunk as her. This girl is very hot. I allow things to get frisky in the cab ride. When we return to the residence she brings me up to her room, continues to be very aggressive. She says things to the effect oh you are so nice for bringing me home, thank you so much, blah blah blah all the while her hands are active. She then trips, falls into bed, starts taking her clothes off. Then she says what is your name?
That sent a very bad signal to me. This girl knows who I am. Knows my name, she should know who I am. At that time I realize that I just can’t do this, no matter what my body is telling me, no matter how HOT she is (did I mention she was hot? Really hot? Much hotter then I should really be able to get?). I tell her thanks but no thanks, and leave. Go up to my floor where my friend is waiting, he is shocked to see me so soon. I tell him I just couldn’t do it she was to drunk.
The next day her friends come flying into my room what did you do last night? How dare you? We are going to charge you with rape. It seems they found a used condom in her room, the drunk girls says she had sex, but doesn’t remember with who. I of course deny it, my friend backs me up, as does building security because apparently they had checked on her almost right after I had left, and came up to my room and saw me as well. So I had nothing to worry about.
Now it was never found out who did sleep with her that night, however if that guy had been charged with rape I would have been completely on his side. This girl wanted it, wanted it badly, and was very disappointed that I was not willing. She had no recollection of the night because she was to drunk, however it was apparent what she was looking for. By some definition this would be rape as she was probably to drunk to really give informed consent, however, IMO this was in no rape.
Sometimes when we drink we get horny. We have all been there, made mistakes. Most of the time we have to live up and own our own mistakes not try to blame them on others. I worry that in cases such as these people are looking for an excuse, and this excuse could ruin anothers life. The drunken consent equals/doesn’t equal true consent, in some cases, seems to me to lessen the effect true rape cases have and potentially contribute to the idea of blaming the victim.
::golf clap::
For a number of years now the phrase, “No means No!” has been a staple of rape discussions. And I believe it is a good one. However, do we now add an amendment to that stating, “Yes may mean yes, but then again it may mean no depending on the situation or if drinking is involved, but that is left open to a later time when the woman decides if she meant yes or no”?
That will make for a rather large bumper sticker.
How does a court determine whether consent was given anyway?
If the man says “yep, she consented” and the woman says “no, I didn’t consent” it seems it’s one person’s word against another?
I guess you would look for physical evidence to support the woman (ie. bruises, tearing etc) although would this be more tricky for a woman with a previous predeliction for “rougher” sex?
Or would it be that you’d need independent confirmation that a woman was too drunk to give consent?