Drunks and consent

[Merkavar]

Ok so to the best of my knowledge in places like the UK and the US you need to give consent to have sex and that legally you cannot give consent if you are drunk etc. So if someone is drunk and gives consent it is legally rape or sexual assualt and the rapist can be fined or jails or what ever the punishment is. Correct me if im wrong about anything here.

So what happens under these circumstances.

Both the male and female are drunk so both cannot give legal consent. are they raping each other?

The male is drunk and the female isnt. Is it rape or is it just assualt, not sexual assualt cause only men can rape apparently (rape being defined as peneration by a penis in some places).

What if its 2 females and one of them is drunk?

On a slightly different topic. If you cant give consent if your drunk how can you be responsible for anything while drunk. the legal system seems to suggest that you are un able to give consent cause your not in the right frame of mind so how can you also be responsible for your actions.

So say you beat someone up while drunk, how are you responisble for your actions if you are unable to give consent to have sex in the same state of mind?

Drunk driving? Drunk breaking and entering?

 

[Kermi]

As far as I'm concerned if you are an adult and wilfully engage in sex after knowingly consuming alcohol which is known to affect judgement and reduce inhibition, then, no matter how "drunk" you were, you were not raped - even if you regret it the next day - if you were able to actively participate. If you get drunk enough to pass out, or are too intoxicated to state whether or not you consent, that's a whole different story.

Nevertheless in my opinion your scenario cannot happen as for two people to both be "too drunk to consent" the sex could not possibly occur. They'd both be passed out or otherwise incapacitated. At least one person would have to be in control in order to take advantage of the other person.

However let's assume two drunk people have sex and regret it and decide to say they were raped. The man would definitely cop it worse because the courts have difficulty with the idea of a female rapist, plus juries are likely to believe/accept that if the man was unwilling he wouldn't have been able to get an erection.

 

[Merkavar]

Nevertheless in my opinion your scenario cannot happen as for two people to both be "too drunk to consent" the sex could not possibly occur.

i edited my post. i meant they were both drunk so couldnt legally give consent cause you cant give consent when drunk. so they are both able to physically have sex but are both drunk.

man was unwilling he wouldn't have been able to get an erection.

kind of like its not rape if the women enjoys it?

 

[PunkyMcGee]

It is rape. The sign in the dorms says so.

 

[Merkavar]

It is rape. The sign in the dorms says so.

so if being drunk makes it so you are not incontrol of your actions, that you cant give consent why can people be charged with drunk driving or any other crime while drunk?

 

[Kermi]

Nevertheless in my opinion your scenario cannot happen as for two people to both be "too drunk to consent" the sex could not possibly occur.

i edited my post. i meant they were both drunk so couldnt legally give consent cause you cant give consent when drunk. so they are both able to physically have sex but are both drunk.

man was unwilling he wouldn't have been able to get an erection.

kind of like its not rape if the women enjoys it?

Don't quote me out of context. I'm referring to what a jury would be compelled or likely to believe, not what I personally believe.

Furthermore, my point is that if a person is able to actively engage in sex it should not be considered rape, even if their judgement is impaired because as an adult they should already be aware that alcohol impairs judgement. If two people are equally intoxicated and manage to have sex with each other, no one was raped.

As far as I am concerned, a rape only occurs if one party is unable to either give or retract consent.

 

[Merkavar]

man was unwilling he wouldn't have been able to get an erection.

kind of like its not rape if the women enjoys it?

Don't quote me out of context. I'm referring to what a jury would be compelled or likely to believe, not what I personally believe.

yeah sorry i wasnt trying to twist your words into something else. the part i quoted just seemed the most relevant part.

i was just trying to add another silly assumption people/juries had or maybe even still do.that it cant be rape if the female enjoyed it. which is stupid, just a stupid as getting an erection = consent.

 

[PunkyMcGee]

It is rape. The sign in the dorms says so.

so if being drunk makes it so you are not incontrol of your actions, that you cant give consent why can people be charged with drunk driving or any other crime while drunk?

What? no. How would you get that out of what I said?

Drunk driving is different since in the rape scenario the drunk one is not the offending party.

Let me explain. if the first party is sober and the second isn't, it's rape. There is not a double stranded. In other words if an individual is incapable of judgment (such as being drunk or mental handicap) it's rape.

Also, If a man is too drunk, he gets a condition commonly known as "whiskey dick". Which means he can't get it up even if he wanted to.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

Oh, great, THIS topic again

My view is that if you are too drunk to give consent, it is rape. If you both are at the point where it would be considered rape were the other sober, then you are both at fault. IE, if the woman cries rape, the man may as well.

But that's just my view.

 

[zehydra]

If a person is unable to give consent, then it's rape. This is basically the very definition of rape.

If both are intoxicated to the point where they both couldn't give consent, then yes, as silly as it may sound, they both raped each other.

 

[squeekenator]

No, it's not rape. If you agree to it then you agreed. I agree completely with your point that, if someone is considered responsible for their actions when drunk driving, they're also responsible for their actions when having sex while drunk. If they don't like it they can stop drinking so much.

 

[WolfThomas]

Also, If a man is too drunk, he gets a condition commonly known as "whiskey dick". Which means he can't get it up even if he wanted to.

That's an awful big generalisation, while certainly a lot of men while blotto couldn't f**k their way out of a paper bag (myself included), there are other men who not only can maintain an erection while drunk, but can maintain it far longer than normal. I lived with a guy who that was the case and I actually had to drive him to an ED after a drunken night with his girlfriend caused an acute medical condition (paraphimosis).

 

[Merkavar]

Also, If a man is too drunk, he gets a condition commonly known as "whiskey dick". Which means he can't get it up even if he wanted to.

That's an awful big generalisation, while certainly a lot of men while blotto couldn't f**k their way out of a paper bag (myself included), there are other men who not only can maintain an erection while drunk, but can maintain it far longer than normal. I lived with a guy who that was the case and I actually had to drive him to an ED after a drunken night with his girlfriend caused an acute medical condition (paraphimosis).

also rape doesnt have to involve the penis normally. its just penetration. so fingers toes nose tail etc.

 

[renegade7]

You consented to become drunk. Being drunk impairs inhibition. If you crash your car when you're drunk, it's your fault, and IMO if you sleep with someone when you're drunk and regret it later it's still your fault.