A question to the grown adult men of the Escapist

[b3nn3tt]

short answer: that guy is scum. if she was obviously wasted and especially if she had a boyfriend, he is a complete bastard for taking advantage of her.

if the guy is also drunk then things get a little murky. in general, i would say the person with the most control over their actions (ie, the person who is less drunk) would bear the responsibility. since the girl in your story seems to pretty much be too drunk to move im gonna put the blame on the guy. in any case, i see this guy as a 10 and a rapist

Quick question for you. What if the guy was an 8 on the scale of drunkenness? That would make him more sober than the girl, but far from sober, would you still consider him 'responsible'?

From the OP I think it sounded like the guy had also been drinking, so I think it's unfair to label him a rapist.

Also, do you think being drunk absolves people of responsibility? Genuine question, I'm curious about your view on that.

as i said, it gets significantly more complicated when both people are drunk but the person who is the least drunk is the one i would place most of the blame on. no, i dont think being drunk means you arent responsible for your actions. that is why i blame the guy even if he was drunk. the fact that the dude seems to have known she was in a relationship, was less drunk than her, and initiated things, leads me to the conclusion that she is the victim in this situation. she definitely deserves some of the blame for getting so wasted but i would still place the vast majority of it upon his shoulders

But the woman is also obviously aware that she's in a relationship, yet still made no efforts to stop the guy's advances. And if she's aware enough to think about a condom (even if one ultimately wasn't used) then I don't think she's drunk enough that it should be assumed the guy took advantage of her.

I agree with you that the guy is not very nice indeed, but I think claiming that the situation is akin to rape is too far.

 

[AshuraSpeaks]

Here is the situation. First of all, notice that I am female so this is most definitely not me we are talking about and the situation didn't happen to me, but never the less affects me deeply. Anyway here is the scenario:

A girl is very drunk. An 8-9 on the 1-10 scale of sober to passed out drooling. You know her, you know she has a serious partner and would never entertain you sober. You come on to her asking if you can touch her. she agrees. she seems into it. She asks you several times if you have a condom and you say no, but have sex with her anyway. She doesn't stop you.

I know scales suck, please explain yourself if you reply. On a scale of 1 to 10 where 1 is 'extremely sweet and respectful towards women' and 10 is 'this guy would have fucked her if she was passed out', how bad and/or normal is this guys mindset?

I obviously don't understand male sexuality at all and in my eyes this is extremely disgusting. Like, devastatingly disgusting. I have been in a situation where a girl was naked and begging for it and i left. She was so drunk and horny she was actually pissed at me at the time. But I couldn't have lived with myself the next day, I knew she would never have been there if she wasn't beyond capacity hammered.

What do you think?

Edit: She didn't come on to him, he came on to her and she didn't stop it or say no specifically. I hope that clears that up.

Edit 2: Yes he had also been drinking, but I am of the type that believes, like some posters that being drunk doesn't excuse behavior. In the example I gave of myself in the same situation, I was not only wasted, i was also (for better or worse) super high on coke (it was a long time ago). This means that, yes, she has some blame here for her own actions. She knows that and hates herself, but putting that aside, it's the guys side of this i'm interested in really just now.

Edit 3: I really wanted to try and keep it very impersonal so as to respect the situation and the fact that i have turned to the internet to understand it. I am the 'bloke' she 'cheated' on, so i am very much involved. It is an awkward situation and i love her very much, we have been together for four years and just moved in together. I wish to respect her here - she is absolutely disgusted with herself and can't stop crying. She knows she is wrong as well and neither of us are unclear about that fact, I'm just very curious about men's thoughts about this. Understand I'm not trying to hate on men. My experience with them sexually is limited I just wanted a gauge of your thoughts.

Edit 4: Setting is important here it seems. This was a work party at a farm out of town. She had worked there for the summer and this was the last night party. She was already hammered and stuck there having planned to stay before he arrived. He was the bosses wife's brother. He apparently came on to her after she had gone to the farmhouse to bed.

He apparently came on to her after she had gone to the farmhouse to bed.

Total chav. There's "we happened to be near each other and I gave in" and then there's "I shouldn't even be here." I personally try to avoid drinking because I don't want to end up losing my inhibitions, and even if he was drinking he ought to be responsible enough not to mess around with someone who's taken.

 

[Sniperyeti]

In NZ if she's not in a condition to give a fully cooperative yes as found by a court of law, that's rape.

 

[00slash00]

short answer: that guy is scum. if she was obviously wasted and especially if she had a boyfriend, he is a complete bastard for taking advantage of her.

if the guy is also drunk then things get a little murky. in general, i would say the person with the most control over their actions (ie, the person who is less drunk) would bear the responsibility. since the girl in your story seems to pretty much be too drunk to move im gonna put the blame on the guy. in any case, i see this guy as a 10 and a rapist

Quick question for you. What if the guy was an 8 on the scale of drunkenness? That would make him more sober than the girl, but far from sober, would you still consider him 'responsible'?

From the OP I think it sounded like the guy had also been drinking, so I think it's unfair to label him a rapist.

Also, do you think being drunk absolves people of responsibility? Genuine question, I'm curious about your view on that.

as i said, it gets significantly more complicated when both people are drunk but the person who is the least drunk is the one i would place most of the blame on. no, i dont think being drunk means you arent responsible for your actions. that is why i blame the guy even if he was drunk. the fact that the dude seems to have known she was in a relationship, was less drunk than her, and initiated things, leads me to the conclusion that she is the victim in this situation. she definitely deserves some of the blame for getting so wasted but i would still place the vast majority of it upon his shoulders

But the woman is also obviously aware that she's in a relationship, yet still made no efforts to stop the guy's advances. And if she's aware enough to think about a condom (even if one ultimately wasn't used) then I don't think she's drunk enough that it should be assumed the guy took advantage of her.

I agree with you that the guy is not very nice indeed, but I think claiming that the situation is akin to rape is too far.

hm...well it would appear we are at an impasse. shall we agree to disagree?

 

[Hagi]

I mean she repeatedly asked him if he had a condom.... Obviously she did not object.

Incorrect. Right through to the Supreme Court this has been shown NOT to be considered a sign of consent, it is often an attempt to minimize injury.

Do you seriously not interpret this:

You come on to her asking if you can touch her. she agrees. she seems into it. She asks you several times if you have a condom and you say no, but have sex with her anyway. She doesn't stop you.

as consent? Realizing that the guy was very likely also drunk and thus not of the best judgement.

The fact that he is drunk is explicitedly not allowed to be considered under the law.

She was drunk, which 100% excludes her from giving consent in Canada.

In the senerio, if both were sober, there was no explicit consent given. Thus, the court would have to determine he he took reasonable and effective steps to determine consent and if a reasonable person would have agreed consent was given. However, that doesn't apply here since she was drunk.

But what about his drunkenness? He'd also be unable to give consent, no matter his actions, as drunkenness 100% excludes him from giving consent.

Was it a mutual rape? She raped him and he raped her?
Does consent only apply to women and men automatically give it?

This sounds like you've got some serious double standards going on.

Her drunkenness excludes her from giving consent while his drunkenness is not allowed to be considered under law? That's one fucked up law right there and I'm very very happy I don't live in Canada in that case.

 

[b3nn3tt]

short answer: that guy is scum. if she was obviously wasted and especially if she had a boyfriend, he is a complete bastard for taking advantage of her.

if the guy is also drunk then things get a little murky. in general, i would say the person with the most control over their actions (ie, the person who is less drunk) would bear the responsibility. since the girl in your story seems to pretty much be too drunk to move im gonna put the blame on the guy. in any case, i see this guy as a 10 and a rapist

Quick question for you. What if the guy was an 8 on the scale of drunkenness? That would make him more sober than the girl, but far from sober, would you still consider him 'responsible'?

From the OP I think it sounded like the guy had also been drinking, so I think it's unfair to label him a rapist.

Also, do you think being drunk absolves people of responsibility? Genuine question, I'm curious about your view on that.

as i said, it gets significantly more complicated when both people are drunk but the person who is the least drunk is the one i would place most of the blame on. no, i dont think being drunk means you arent responsible for your actions. that is why i blame the guy even if he was drunk. the fact that the dude seems to have known she was in a relationship, was less drunk than her, and initiated things, leads me to the conclusion that she is the victim in this situation. she definitely deserves some of the blame for getting so wasted but i would still place the vast majority of it upon his shoulders

But the woman is also obviously aware that she's in a relationship, yet still made no efforts to stop the guy's advances. And if she's aware enough to think about a condom (even if one ultimately wasn't used) then I don't think she's drunk enough that it should be assumed the guy took advantage of her.

I agree with you that the guy is not very nice indeed, but I think claiming that the situation is akin to rape is too far.

hm...well it would appear we are at an impasse. shall we agree to disagree?

I fear we ought, lest this descent into a slanging match. Good day to you *tips hat*

 

[Hagi]

She *WAS* raped. A person who is on the border of "Passing out Drooling" is not in a state where they can consent to having sex. Sex without consent is rape. A person initiating sex with a person who has not consented is a rapist. This is very straight forward.

No Consent + Sex = Rape
Intoxicated just short of "Passed out Drooling" = Cannot Give Consent

There was no consent given, because she could not consent. He initiated sex with her. He belongs in prison. There is no "mutual blame" here.

No his being drunk doesn't absolve him.
Yes, it'd be exactly the same if the sexes of the parties involved were reversed.

Wait?

So her being drunk means she has no responsibility at all for what happened, but him being drunk still means he's got full responsibility?

If she's incapable of giving consent in her state then he's likely also incapable of giving consent in his state. By that logic they raped each other.

She wasn't an unconscious partner here...

You come on to her asking if you can touch her. she agrees. she seems into it. She asks you several times if you have a condom and you say no, but have sex with her anyway. She doesn't stop you.

She agreed to touching. She seemed into it. She explicitly asks for a condom. She makes no moves whatsoever to stop him.

She was drunk. He was drunk. They had sex. That's all that's happened.

 

[CannibalCorpses]

'"Drunken consent is still consent," Mr Justice Roderick Evans told the jury.'

'Even though 20-year-old Mr Dougal was a stranger to the woman, the judge told the jury to bring in a not guilty verdict because she could not remember whether she had given consent.'

'To find a person charged with rape guilty, a jury must be sure that sexual intercourse took place, the victim did not consent and the person being prosecuted did not reasonably believe that the victim consented,' said a spokesperson.'


In both the cases you mentioned there wasn't enough proof to be sure of the conviction and the man walked free. The policeman got sacked because he brought the police force into disrepute, not because they had enough evidence to do him for rape.

The whole attempt to change the laws was to drive up the conviction rate, as it states in the piece. It was an attempt by a political party to be seen to be tackling the issue, which it didn't at all, and was merely a PR stunt. This is common in British politics i'm afraid. This year we had an attempt by the government to actually lower the sentences for some kinds of rapes and the minister, Keneth Clarke, got some really high profile negative media attention...despite there being a case for what he was proposing.

If i apply the laws, as they are set out in the 2 pieces you quoted, then the original case we were discussing would have been thrown out in an English court...if it even made it that far at all. It's seen as better to let a possible criminal go free, than risk locking an innocent person up. If the same person ended up in court again for the same crime then that would be entirely different and they could expect to get a harsh sentence to reflect the major possibility they had commited both crimes.

One instance of bad judgement is possibly a mistake, twice is intentional.

It wasn't smugness i was displaying, it was confidence in my justice system to not prosecute me for a crime unless they were sure i'd done it. Its something i have always expected and had, which is why i was so disbelieveing it is different in Canada.

If Canadanians cant have sex, while drunk, without fear of prosecution...does that mean Canada is full of wankers? (joke!)

 

[bchampnd]

First things first: Taking advantage of drunk girls is not cool. Not using a condom with someone with whom you're not in a relationship is fucking stupid.

However, there's nothing wrong with two people getting drunk and hooking up after a party as long as it was consensual, which in this case it appeared to be, and protection was used. That's not to say that the next day you won't regret it.

Side note: The day-after rape allegations have gotten old - girl gets drunk at bar/party, girl voluntary goes back with guy (girl using the word "no" or "stop" or passing out beforehand completely changes the picture), girl wakes up next day and regrets it, girl says it was rape. Being an attorney, I know many states here in the US have moved towards allowing this type of rape charge to be brought by saying that women are incapable of giving consent while drunk / under the influence of drugs. Whether that is a good standard is a topic for another discussion.

As for the case at hand. This may go against the grain of what most people here have been saying but, when it comes to the whole having a partner issue, protecting the relationship is the duty of the person with the partner, not the person with whom (s)he is cheating. I wouldn't hook up with one of my friends' girlfriends, but that is out of loyalty to my friends. If the girl allegedly has a partner (whom I've never met), my view is that if she doesn't care about that person's feelings then it's not really my business. Sober, I probably would not go for it because of the whole "do unto others" principle I try to abide by and possibly having to deal with an angry boyfriend wouldn't be worth it (I try to avoid violent confrontation when not on a football field). Drunk, I might not care and roll the dice because it'd be a one night-stand because you'd be setting yourself up for heartbreak if you started dating a known cheater. I'll draw the line and say that if there's a ring on the finger, then the person is off limits. (I'm not single so this was a hypothetical discussion of what I would do if I were single.)

Onto the friend issue. Many people have friends of the opposite sex. Despite what they may try to get others (including said friend) to believe, people sometimes have a not-so-platonic interest in one or more of said friends of the opposite sex. In some cases that feeling is mutual. Under normal (read: sober) circumstances, each can keep it his or her own little secret. Throw in a variable (read: alcohol or some other inhibition lowering substance) and the real feelings might come out. This concept applies even when one or both of the friends are involved in relationships with other people. There is no doubt that it would suck to be the partner who is cheated on but it might be a wake-up call that the other person is not as committed to the relationship.

 

[janos16]

no ring dude .... fair game

 

[Squarez]

Well all guys are different for a start. And when you add alcohol into the mix you fuck up the scale even more.

So basically, there is no answer. It's like asking 'on a scale of 1-10 how likely is an average girl at a club DTF?' Everyone's different.

What is DTF, first of all?

I know all men are different, that's why I'm asking what you think of this guy in this situation. I would like to get a gauge of what men think of this. I already know what women think. What do you think of this guy? Is he an ass if so why? If not, why?

DTF? Look it up on Urban Dictionary. It's a pretty common expression.

As I said in my edit of my previous post. Taking advantage of drunk girls for sex is not cool, especially if they've got a partner. But I reserve judgement because I don't know how drunk the other guy was in this situation. We all make mistakes when we've drank too much alcohol, that includes both the guys and ladies.

Alcohol doesn't change who you are, and it's not an excuse for something like this.

Yes it does and yes it is.

If alcohol impairs judgement and changes the way your brain functions then I'd say it makes a pretty fucking huge change to your character and fundamentally who you are for that brief period of time, unless we're going by some other qualifier as to what makes a person who they are.

 

[spartan231490]

Well all guys are different for a start. And when you add alcohol into the mix you fuck up the scale even more.

So basically, there is no answer. It's like asking 'on a scale of 1-10 how likely is an average girl at a club DTF?' Everyone's different.

What is DTF, first of all?

I know all men are different, that's why I'm asking what you think of this guy in this situation. I would like to get a gauge of what men think of this. I already know what women think. What do you think of this guy? Is he an ass if so why? If not, why?

DTF? Look it up on Urban Dictionary. It's a pretty common expression.

As I said in my edit of my previous post. Taking advantage of drunk girls for sex is not cool, especially if they've got a partner. But I reserve judgement because I don't know how drunk the other guy was in this situation. We all make mistakes when we've drank too much alcohol, that includes both the guys and ladies.

Alcohol doesn't change who you are, and it's not an excuse for something like this.

Yes it does and yes it is.

If alcohol impairs judgement and changes the way your brain functions then I'd say it makes a pretty fucking huge change to your character and fundamentally who you are for that brief period of time, unless we're going by some other qualifier as to what makes a person who they are.

Alcohol doesn't change who you are. Speaking as someone who's been hammered relatively frequently, it doesn't create thoughts or change who you are. It just makes you more impulsive, but the impulse has to be there to begin with. And it doesn't make you do anything, I'm perfectly capable of controlling myself when I'm blackout drunk, and so is everyone else. Alcohol is not an excuse for something like this. It's part of one, but it's not an excuse in and of itself.

There's a reason that people who drink don't suddenly become rapists and murderers or anything else. Impulse control is only slightly inhibited, and if something is truly against your values, you won't do it no matter how drunk you get. Generally, if someone does something when they're drunk that they wouldn't when they are sober, the only reason they wouldn't do it when they're sober is because they are afraid of how people around them would react, not because they actually think that it's wrong.

 

[Gingerman]

Alcohol doesn't change who you are. Speaking as someone who's been hammered relatively frequently, it doesn't create thoughts or change who you are. It just makes you more impulsive, but the impulse has to be there to begin with. And it doesn't make you do anything, I'm perfectly capable of controlling myself when I'm blackout drunk, and so is everyone else. Alcohol is not an excuse for something like this. It's part of one, but it's not an excuse in and of itself.

There's a reason that people who drink don't suddenly become rapists and murderers or anything else. Impulse control is only slightly inhibited, and if something is truly against your values, you won't do it no matter how drunk you get. Generally, if someone does something when they're drunk that they wouldn't when they are sober, the only reason they wouldn't do it when they're sober is because they are afraid of how people around them would react, not because they actually think that it's wrong.

Calling bull on this one. My mother works at a homeless and drug addict hostel, she's met some perfectly lovely people whilst they're not on drugs/booze but when they are, they change to horrid abusive and sometimes violent people.

So until you can provide actual evidence to your claim that alcohol only "slightly" effects you when your blitzd then please dont argue the case otherwise because in my eyes it just seems your trying to pass off your opinion as fact.

OT: After reading the OP again I dont see the man in question as a "bad guy" he's an idiot and an arse for not having safe sex but he was drunk (then again dont know how drunk) and the woman in question didn't do anything to stop him from what I read. Now I know lots of people will say "A lack of a no doesn't mean yes" but she was saying yes, she responded to the touching and even wanted to have sex with a condom but didn't say no or try to stop him when he didn't have one, she might of when sober just in the same way he might of pulled back at the condom request if sober.

In the end they were both drunk human beings. Drunk human beings do stupid things so in reality they're both to blame. Her for cheating whilst in a relationship/ not saying no/ playing around and him for getting so drunk that he couldnt control his actions properly.

Edit: If the man of course was aware that she wasn't in a position to give proper concent (i.e to drunk) then the man is a rapist in my eyes because he took advantage. Thats if he was sober enough to notice this, being drunk tends to cloud this kind of thing which was what this post is about.
I look forward to getting yelled at

 

[NKnight]

I would like to think I wouldn't make a move. But while horny and drunk? I dunno. You have to realize men hold themselves back a lot to behave like civilized people and not animals. Our d***s are not suited for the cute society we build.

 

[spartan231490]

Alcohol doesn't change who you are. Speaking as someone who's been hammered relatively frequently, it doesn't create thoughts or change who you are. It just makes you more impulsive, but the impulse has to be there to begin with. And it doesn't make you do anything, I'm perfectly capable of controlling myself when I'm blackout drunk, and so is everyone else. Alcohol is not an excuse for something like this. It's part of one, but it's not an excuse in and of itself.

There's a reason that people who drink don't suddenly become rapists and murderers or anything else. Impulse control is only slightly inhibited, and if something is truly against your values, you won't do it no matter how drunk you get. Generally, if someone does something when they're drunk that they wouldn't when they are sober, the only reason they wouldn't do it when they're sober is because they are afraid of how people around them would react, not because they actually think that it's wrong.

Calling bull on this one. My mother works at a homeless and drug addict hostel, she's met some perfectly lovely people whilst they're not on drugs/booze but when they are, they change to horrid abusive and sometimes violent people.

So until you can provide actual evidence to your claim that alcohol only "slightly" effects you when your blitzd then please dont argue the case otherwise because in my eyes it just seems your trying to pass off your opinion as fact.

OT: After reading the OP again I dont see the man in question as a "bad guy" he's an idiot and an arse for not having safe sex but he was drunk (then again dont know how drunk) and the woman in question didn't do anything to stop him from what I read. Now I know lots of people will say "A lack of a no doesn't mean yes" but she was saying yes, she responded to the touching and even wanted to have sex with a condom but didn't say no or try to stop him when he didn't have one, she might of when sober just in the same way he might of pulled back at the condom request if sober.

In the end they were both drunk human beings. Drunk human beings do stupid things so in reality they're both to blame. Her for cheating whilst in a relationship/ not saying no/ playing around and him for getting so drunk that he couldnt control his actions properly.

Edit: If the man of course was aware that she wasn't in a position to give proper concent (i.e to drunk) then the man is a rapist in my eyes because he took advantage. Thats if he was sober enough to notice this, being drunk tends to cloud this kind of thing which was what this post is about.
I look forward to getting yelled at

I stand by what I said. Alcohol doesn't change who you are, it just makes you more likely to show it.

 

[DawgPac4Life]

Alcohol doesn't change who you are. Speaking as someone who's been hammered relatively frequently, it doesn't create thoughts or change who you are. It just makes you more impulsive, but the impulse has to be there to begin with. And it doesn't make you do anything, I'm perfectly capable of controlling myself when I'm blackout drunk, and so is everyone else. Alcohol is not an excuse for something like this. It's part of one, but it's not an excuse in and of itself.

There's a reason that people who drink don't suddenly become rapists and murderers or anything else. Impulse control is only slightly inhibited, and if something is truly against your values, you won't do it no matter how drunk you get. Generally, if someone does something when they're drunk that they wouldn't when they are sober, the only reason they wouldn't do it when they're sober is because they are afraid of how people around them would react, not because they actually think that it's wrong.

Calling bull on this one. My mother works at a homeless and drug addict hostel, she's met some perfectly lovely people whilst they're not on drugs/booze but when they are, they change to horrid abusive and sometimes violent people.

So until you can provide actual evidence to your claim that alcohol only "slightly" effects you when your blitzd then please dont argue the case otherwise because in my eyes it just seems your trying to pass off your opinion as fact.

OT: After reading the OP again I dont see the man in question as a "bad guy" he's an idiot and an arse for not having safe sex but he was drunk (then again dont know how drunk) and the woman in question didn't do anything to stop him from what I read. Now I know lots of people will say "A lack of a no doesn't mean yes" but she was saying yes, she responded to the touching and even wanted to have sex with a condom but didn't say no or try to stop him when he didn't have one, she might of when sober just in the same way he might of pulled back at the condom request if sober.

In the end they were both drunk human beings. Drunk human beings do stupid things so in reality they're both to blame. Her for cheating whilst in a relationship/ not saying no/ playing around and him for getting so drunk that he couldnt control his actions properly.

Edit: If the man of course was aware that she wasn't in a position to give proper concent (i.e to drunk) then the man is a rapist in my eyes because he took advantage. Thats if he was sober enough to notice this, being drunk tends to cloud this kind of thing which was what this post is about.
I look forward to getting yelled at

Alcohol doesn't change who you are, what it does do is bring out some of the more "repressed" parts of your personality. That's why certain people become very flirty when drunk, or loud and obnoxious when normally they are shy and introverted. It's not making them a different person, just opening the gates and letting them act without inhibitions.

As for the OP, the guy is a serious DB. However, she obviously knew what was going on and how it would all end up. I also find it hard to believe that she never would have been okay with any of that while sober. Usually, alcohol just tends to help us do the things that we have in the back of our mind. It doesn't put ideas into our head that are completely against our beliefs or feelings.

 

[Sepphyre]

Alcohol doesn't change who you are, and it's not an excuse for something like this.

Yes it does and yes it is.

If alcohol impairs judgement and changes the way your brain functions then I'd say it makes a pretty fucking huge change to your character and fundamentally who you are for that brief period of time, unless we're going by some other qualifier as to what makes a person who they are.

Rewind a bit. It shows the very character of a person that they would allow themselves to get drunk to this extent in the first place, such that they lose control of their faculties. People can talk about laws and the integrity of this and that all they want, but at the end of the day, YOU are responsible for YOURSELF. Don't get yourself into this position to begin with.

I am by no means a prude regarding alcohol, however there comes a time when you need to be aware of where you're heading, and get back onto the water or soft drinks. It is called being a RESPONSIBLE ADULT.

 

[bluepilot]

She never really gave consent though

She said, "do you have a condom"

Which does not mean, "please take me now with your unprotected member"

I think you have a case and should prosecute since the guy had unprotected sex with her without consent.

Edit: the case of the Wikileaks' founder and his rape charges may be of interest here. He is accused of rape for having sex with a sleeping woman without her consent.

Having unprotected sex without consent, possibly subjecting the woman to pregnancy and disease is a very serious crime in Sweeden.

 

[David Abrams]

not normal as far as Im aware

 

[intheweeds]

Alcohol doesn't change who you are, and it's not an excuse for something like this.

Yes it does and yes it is.

If alcohol impairs judgement and changes the way your brain functions then I'd say it makes a pretty fucking huge change to your character and fundamentally who you are for that brief period of time, unless we're going by some other qualifier as to what makes a person who they are.

Rewind a bit. It shows the very character of a person that they would allow themselves to get drunk to this extent in the first place, such that they lose control of their faculties. People can talk about laws and the integrity of this and that all they want, but at the end of the day, YOU are responsible for YOURSELF. Don't get yourself into this position to begin with.

I am by no means a prude regarding alcohol, however there comes a time when you need to be aware of where you're heading, and get back onto the water or soft drinks. It is called being a RESPONSIBLE ADULT.

Yes you are responsible for yourself. YOU are responsible too. What if it was you, the next day, would you say "well if she didn't want me to fuck her without a condom she wouldn't have gotten so drunk that she couldn't physically stop me. Just asking isn't good enough. It her own damn fault." It may be her fault for getting so drunk, but it was you who made the choice to continue with dubious consent.

If a person is obviously drunk, that gives you the right to do whatever you want to them because they 'shouldn't be so drunk if they don't want others to abuse them'? Your intent is still your intent. Personally I choose to not abuse people regardless of how much drugs and/or alcohol they have consumed.