Poll: Is it rape if you have consensual sex with a willfully intoxicated person?

[Jonluw]

If you go ahead and drink with a stranger, invite them home for some horizontal tango, and then accuse them of having raped you, I will be tempted to punch you in the face.

Regret is not the same as non-consent. You cannot change your mind about your consent after the deed is done.
In this case, I'd say it's entirely the "victim"'s fault. The "rapist" only went ahead and had sex with someone who invited him to it.
If your judgement is so impaired while under the influence, you should have the common sense not to drink in a setting where people are looking for hook-ups.
You did something you regret while in a state with impaired judgement. Boo-hoo. It's not the same as someone forcing you to do something you didn't want to do. You don't try to pass the blame on to other people when you do things you regret that don't have to do with sex, so why should this be different?
Rape is a horrible and painful forced experience. It's not having sex with someone whom - in retrospect - you'd rather not fuck. The drunk people enjoyed it while it lasted, but have decided that it might not have been such a good idea afterwards.
Inebration isn't a free pass to the undo button, you know. Imagine if you could sue everyone who sold you some stupid shit while you were drunk.
If I go to buy a massage while under the influence, can I ask to get my money back?

The exception is if a sober person is hanging around people drinking with the intent of getting with people with lowered inhibitions.
I'd still not count that as rape though. More like sexual exploitation.

And how are you going to establish which one is the rapist and which one is the rapee in the first place?

 

[ShadowKatt]

In todays world where you don't have to be responsable for your own actions, if you're a woman and you have sex while drunk it's rape. Of course, if you have sex and it's just plain awful you can claim rape. And if it's fantastic and you agreed to it completely it's still rape. The law is skewed so heavily that women are victims and men are godless barbarians that any woman can point to a man and say "He raped me!" and form a lynch mob without any second thought, any evidence, any arguement. Men are guilty and women are innocent.

 

[DarkRyter]

I don't know. Do I look like a rape lawyer? Is that even a real occupation? Cause that sounds like a terrible job.

 

[Fetzenfisch]

It's not. Or if it is, you can sue each other for raping each other for both are drunk and want to do it in that moment.
It maybe a mistake afterwards but calling it rape is idiotic. Even drunk you should be able to decide what to do, and you definatly should take your own responsibility for your action.
"sorry officer we were drunk when we decided to light your car on fire, so we were technically forced to do it and can go free of charge right?"#
No rape without clear declaration of unwillingness (is this a word?) or violence. Case closed.

 

[Thyunda]

Ok, let´s say you´re at a party. At the party, you meet a cute young man(or woman, or transgender or whoever you want to fuck) and you two get along nicely. You both get a little tipsy and the man/woman asks you if you want to go home with him/her. You go home with him/her and have a night of awkward drunk sex WHICH NONE OF YOU OBJECT TO DURING THE ACTUAL SEX.

HOWEVER, the morning after, the man/woman says that S/he regrets sleeping with you, and now claims that you raped him/her. Is she/he in the right?

Personally, if you *can* consent, your consent is almost always valid. You should know where your limits are. Note: I am talking about being drunk enough that you *can* actually talk and orally(heh) consent. I don´t need to tell you having sex with someone unconcious is rape. I´m also not talking about the cases where someone put something in your drink. Putting something in the other persons drink, is rape, since you actively tricked the person into going over his/her limits.

But what do you think? Am I just a sick victimblamer(although I believe there is not a victim in thise case?), am I thinking completely straight? Something inbetween?

If you're inebriated, you're not in a fit state to make decisions. Ergo, you cannot consent. Doesn't matter if you don't object at the time or not - you still can't consent, because you don't have all your faculties.

That said, I've known women who have cried rape (not to authorities, just to their social circle) simply to cover the embarrassment of drunkenly shagging someone they'd rather not have anything to do with.

In legal terms, this is true. In moral terms, it's totally wrong. While yes, it might be a mistake, it's certainly not rape. If you're going to get drunk, then you need to be prepared for what stupid shit you might end up doing. Drink and drive, and it's your fault, and your fault only. Not the pedestrian's fault for being in your way, after all, you weren't capable of making judgements.
When you picked up that first bottle, you knew exactly what you were getting into. I don't care if that guy kept buying you alcohol, he didn't pour it down your throat. You drank it. You consented. Now you feel stupid and don't want to deal with the consequences? Tough shit.

You're not getting a free ride just because you can cry rape.

 

[Sporky111]

In todays world where you don't have to be responsable for your own actions, if you're a woman and you have sex while drunk it's rape. Of course, if you have sex and it's just plain awful you can claim rape. And if it's fantastic and you agreed to it completely it's still rape. The law is skewed so heavily that women are victims and men are godless barbarians that any woman can point to a man and say "He raped me!" and form a lynch mob without any second thought, any evidence, any arguement. Men are guilty and women are innocent.

About the same thing as I was thinking. This whole idea really only came about from certain women going from "I regret what happened last night" to "he raped me". No sense of responsibility.

 

[El Danny]

My Rule: If you're as drunk as them, it's fine, if not then back off.

EDIT:

Holy fuck, this is apparently not getting through to you people. It's not a question of REGRET vs. NON-CONSENT. If someone accuses you of rape the morning after, clearly they never would've consented to it IF THEY HAD THE PRESENCE OF MIND TO KNOW WHAT THE FUCK WAS GOING ON IN THE FIRST PLACE! Not being able to understand what you're consenting to is the SAME THING AS NOT CONSENTING! This is why they don't let kids get legally married. This is why mentally handicapped people can't sign a mortgage. YOU CANNOT HAVE A CONTRACT WITH SOMEONE WHO DOESN'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON!

Here's a novel idea, HAVE THE PRESENCE OF MIND TO NOT HAVE SEX WITH THE DRUNK "*****" IN THE FIRST PLACE! DON'T HAVE SEX WITH DRUNK PEOPLE. DON'T HAVE SEX WITH DRUNK PEOPLE. DON'T. HAVE. SEX. WITH. DRUNK. PEOPLE. Yes it was stupid for that person to get smashed and agree to have sex with you. But doesn't seem like it's infinitely more stupid for you to either A) agree to have sex with someone so trashed or B) ask to have sex with someone so trashed.

I honestly hope a lot of you die cold and alone.

Don't go many parties do you?
Most of the parties I go too there's always drunk people hooking up, the difference is whether there's any advantage being taken.
Most of the people I know (including girls) are mature enough to realise that when you drunk there's a good chance you'll end up doing something you'll regret including sex, and unless you're being taken advantage of then it's just as much your fault.

 

[KLJT]

Legally if your drunk and didn't get her (or him) drunk your not a rapist, probably not a saint however

 

[irishda]

No, this is what's called "victimizing the irresponsible *****". The problem is not her getting drunk (if she'd got drunk and DIDN'T want to have sex, THEN that would be rape), the problem is whether or not she wanted sex when being drunk. You can't blame one for rape after he jumped at the offer of pussy you made last night, and if you did it while drunk, well, you shouldn't have sucked Tequila like a vacuum cleaner. And no, my dear friend, this is NOTHING like "she shouldn't have dressed that way". Hell, the guy can sue her for rape just as well, if he was drunk.

That's the point. How do you KNOW she wanted to have sex when being drunk? Because she said she did? Because you took the drunk, therefore legally mentally impaired, "*****" at her word? If she's accusing you of rape the next day, then clearly her sober, and therefore legally mentally competent, self DIDN'T want to have sex. Which is what you've agreed would be a problem. You can blame one for rape, because the guy was retarded enough to jump at the offer of pussy the MENTALLY IMPAIRED GIRL made. Can we have sex with mentally handicapped people now? Should that be a thing?

"Don't worry, officer. I know she's got a mental IQ of 5, but she still said yes so it's her own damn fault."

 

[irishda]

My Rule: If you're as drunk as them, it's fine, if not then back off.

Don't go many parties do you?
Most of the parties I go too there's always drunk people hooking up, the difference is whether there's any advantage being taken.
Most of the people I know (including girls) are mature enough to realise that when you drunk there's a good chance you'll end up doing something you'll regret including sex, and unless you're being taken advantage of then it's just as much your fault.

I know. A lot of people say, hey, maybe I shouldn't get drunk, then I won't end up like this. But that still doesn't erase the fact that they can make a legal case saying "I was raped". You have it right there in your own words.

"unless you're being taken advantage of"

According to the law, if a person is drunk, then any contract presented to them is considered taking advantage of them. It doesn't matter if the person OFFERING this contract is drunk or not. The law will still say, you asked for consent from someone who couldn't legally give it. Therefore, in the eyes of the state, country, whatever, it's like she never gave her consent at all, and you did take advantage of her. Drunk people having sex is just a reality of college and adult life. But it can go very, very wrong at the drop of a hat if you're not careful about this shit.

 

[James Crook]

Haha, not such an intriguing question coming from Dorian Gray himself...

 

[Daystar Clarion]

There are far to many variables in a situation like to good give a solid black and white answer, each individual case must be looked at under in its own light.

Like I said earlier, in the UK, someone has to have a penis in order to be charged with rape.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/march/16/newsid_2521000/2521053.stm

Like to direct attention to this article from 2001. Women convicted of rape. What you saying is ludicrous

Just noticed that it's a 2001 case, which precedes the 2003 Act, so it's an irrelvant case in regards to how the law is today.

I thought it was odd...

 

[xPixelatedx]

I have heard women say it's rape when they sleep with someone 'willingly and without intoxication' and then regret it several days later. "Oh, now that I think about it I didn't really like him... Rape!'. Then there is the group who while similar, have a somewhat different story. The ones who don't want to do it, but do it anyway because they feel sorry for someone or pressured by circumstance (not actually forced in any way). You can't go home with a guy after a nice dinner on the town, feel you are obligated to have sex with him while he makes puppy-dog eyes, then do it, and then call it 'emotional rape' later. You shouldn't be dating if you are the kind of person who just can't say no (that's your problem, not other people's)

All of this (including getting floored at a party like a retard and sleeping with a stranger) is a gross mockery of what an actual rape is. You need to learn the difference between a 'mistake' and a 'rape' because the gap between them is pretty significant. And you emotionally unstable/confused people who still can't tell the difference: I hope to god you never actually experience what an actual rape is, because you are going to feel pretty stupid afterwords.

 

[Guardian of Nekops]

Holy fuck, this is apparently not getting through to you people. It's not a question of REGRET vs. NON-CONSENT. If someone accuses you of rape the morning after, clearly they never would've consented to it IF THEY HAD THE PRESENCE OF MIND TO KNOW WHAT THE FUCK WAS GOING ON IN THE FIRST PLACE! Not being able to understand what you're consenting to is the SAME THING AS NOT CONSENTING! This is why they don't let kids get legally married. This is why mentally handicapped people can't sign a mortgage. YOU CANNOT HAVE A CONTRACT WITH SOMEONE WHO DOESN'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON!

Here's a novel idea, HAVE THE PRESENCE OF MIND TO NOT HAVE SEX WITH THE DRUNK "*****" IN THE FIRST PLACE! DON'T HAVE SEX WITH DRUNK PEOPLE. DON'T HAVE SEX WITH DRUNK PEOPLE. DON'T. HAVE. SEX. WITH. DRUNK. PEOPLE. Yes it was stupid for that person to get smashed and agree to have sex with you. But doesn't seem like it's infinitely more stupid for you to either A) agree to have sex with someone so trashed or B) ask to have sex with someone so trashed.

I honestly hope a lot of you die cold and alone.

So let me get this straight.

The other person was too drunk to know better, but I was sober enough to have the presence of mind to say no when they offered? Just because they feel bad about it and I don't, particularly, I should go to jail and be registered as a sex offender for the rest of my life?

Some people go to bars for booze and only booze. Not many. Most people go to bars for booze and sex. If you're saying that it is morally reprehensible to ever have sex while drunk, then we should raze all the bars to the ground, because EVERY NIGHT, in EVERY ONE of them, at least one couple hooks up.

Thing is, most of the time it all works out okay. Most of the time, both parties are satisfied afterwards with, perhaps, a bit of embarassment at their own behavior (or so I'm told).

This is why I advocate the idea of signing a consent form while sober, on the way into the place... think of it as giving your drunk self a power of attourney that allows them to decide whether they want to have sex or not. Have some bars that require you to sign these on the way in the door, before you get your first drink. Turn away those who have already had a few at the door, as they don't get to sign. And make it crystal clear that a verbal "no" or any other sign of reluctance is still valid, no matter what the hell you signed.

That way, you don't have the drunks who want casual sex mixed in with the drunks who don't, forcing innebriated people to just guess. With their lives on the line if they guess wrong.

As it's written now, though, the law ignores one of the major reasons that bars EXIST, and puts innocents at risk. On both sides.

 

[Nightmare-Child]

No, but it's not necessarily right either.

 

[Soundchekz]

Well, technically it's not rape, but the woman can still charge you with rape if she wakes up in the morning and doesn't like what happened. It kinda sucks, but it's law.

 

[Naeo]

Aside from never having heard of an actual case of this happening, I think it's a very sticky sort of situation (no pun intended). If the person would not have had sex with you while sober, then yes, it could be considered rape; however, there is absolutely no way for you to know if they would have or not. Some people, also, can seem to be only tipsy and actually be quite drunk; again, there's no way for you to tell, though this is less a potential problem. Lastly, there is the fact that alcohol legitimately impairs your ability to make sound judgments, and having sex with someone under the influence could very easily be seen as taking advantage of their impaired state of mind, so that would very much be rape.

 

[lacktheknack]

How about "Don't do it, regardless"?