|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On November 22 2017 04:06 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2017 04:04 farvacola wrote:
Given that only around a third of sexual assaults are even reported in the first place, I'm not sure how an anecdote in which the false accuser got her due ought to inform a discussion pertaining to how we treat allegations of sexual assault. Because you are focusing on the accuser. The falsely accused got very little vindication. Do you have any idea how devastating that is in a small town. One of them left college because it was so humiliating.
How many people leave school because they are raped and never receive any justice?
|
Norway28705 Posts
On November 22 2017 03:56 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2017 03:51 Liquid`Drone wrote:On November 22 2017 03:24 Plansix wrote:On November 22 2017 03:19 Sadist wrote:On November 22 2017 03:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 22 2017 03:09 Mohdoo wrote:On November 22 2017 03:02 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 22 2017 02:55 Plansix wrote:
It sort of amazes me that people can be so god damn confused by the concept of consent and how it is given. And I'm not really seeing any "cost" to making sure your partner is also down to fuck at that given moment. The fact I've gone through my entire life without sexually assaulting or harassing anyone is seeming like a bigger accomplishment each day. Maybe according to your definition. I remember walking around campus and seeing a poster that said "IF SHE WAS DRUNK, IT WAS RAPE." Feminism club went just a weeee bit too far on that one, but whatever. What's wrong with that poster's message? I mean, if the intention is to point out that "she" implies that men can't be raped, sure that's wrong. Also, if both parties are drunk then I don't think that counts as rape either. But if a sober person has sex with a drunk person, it's rape. Drunk people can't consent. So if a sober person has sex with their drunk spouse its rape? Couples are constantly in a state of rape if thats the definition. To be clear we arent talking blackout level here right? Straight up, I would be in some deep shit if I had sex with my wife if she came home super drunk and was trying to go to bed. I dont' understand why anyone would think that was ok. What if she comes home and is like BLRAHARAHHRAGAA HAHA IM SO DRUNK AND HORNY FUCKING FUCK ME NOW? and then she gets naked and enters the lady side of some sex position and goes like WTF ARE YOU SO SLOW I SAID FUCK ME NOW? Basically in this situation she's drunk as fuck and consenting as fuck. I personally think that is perfectly fair game , even if you are sober yourself. (Although if I'm completely sober I wouldn't find the behavior particularly attractive - still would prolly comply, though.) The thing is, that's often the case. Girls, just like guys, can get incredibly horny while incredibly drunk. I think if you deliberately stay sober so you can target near-blackout/full blackout girls when pubs are closing or whatever, then that's rape, but drunken sex is the grayest of possible areas and statements like 'if she was drunk, it was rape' ends up being about as wrong of a statement as "if you're married, it's not rape." would be. Drunk is not a binary position, and a lot of people, from both genders, like to have sex when they're somewhat intoxicated. You can't even go by BAC levels because those vary greatly from person to person, and even individuals can have completely different degrees of control on different days even if they drank the same amount. What if both are near blackout drunk? Is the guy still expected to have behaved responsibly, but the girl not? I completely agree that stuff like 'im gonna get her drunk so she'll sleep with me' or any variant thereof is scummy behavior. But I don't think you're a rapist (or even a jackass, tbh) because you drank 12 beers and had sex with some girl who drank 8 beers where both of you wanted to but where neither of you remembered it and where the girl regretted it afterwards. There is an important balance to be had on this issue, too. The current legal discussion around sexual consent frames it in the exact same way as we frame medical consent. In other words, you can't consent to anything when you're drunk because you are cognitively impaired. this is how we treat it in the medical/legal world (you can't consent to a medical procedure or sign a legal contract while you're drunk). The exact same scenario can happen where someone is drunk and demanding that they sign a legal document or undergo a medical procedure, or they may just be emotionally or otherwise situationally compromised and it's a physician's ethical duty to refuse to do a treatment or procedure. Y'all can debate if it's a good idea to treat sexual consent like that or not.
I don't think that works, because most of the time when one part is drunk the other part is also drunk, but drunkenness manifests very differently for different people, and sometimes even differently for the same people. Hell, the line between 'I'm the fucking life of the party' and 'I'm falling asleep at the party' can sometimes be a really fine line, one that you can cross during a drink, or even 25 minutes after having had your last drink. It's totally possible for a guy and a girl to both be at the same level of drunken-ness where they are actively, super-eargerly incredibly mutually consenting to amazingly passionate sex, for the girl to chug one glass of wine before they start having sex, and for that glass to push her over her personal limit and make her black out. What if they have super amazing consentual sex for 30 minutes and then she passes out and it takes him 2 minutes to notice? (Guy is also super drunk and so exhausted that his eyes are closed, and it's dark?) Did he become a rapist for two minutes, should he in his drunken state have expected the girl to cross her own threshold through that one glass of wine?
A medical or legal procedure is obviously a different scenario.. Firstly those are both way bigger deals than having sex with someone you normally don't find attractive enough to have sex with.
I feel a bit like I do regarding drunk driving personally. If you know that you're the type of asshole who likes to drive your car when you get piss drunk, then you should not get piss drunk or have taken steps in advance to hinder you from driving it. 'I was so drunk I had no idea what I was doing' isn't a valid defense for why you decided to drive your car drunkenly. Likewise, if a girl actively consents (just to be really clear, I am by no means including 'didn't say no audibly enough because she was drunk, but I'm including the 'come on LETS FUCK'), which drunk girls totally do, then no way does it qualify as rape, even if the girl totally regrets it afterwards and would not normally have had sex with that particular guy. This also isn't victim blaming - I don't acknowledge the victimhood. ;p
|
If you guys think I'm arguing against encouraging the reporting of sexual assault then I obviously haven't explained myself well.
I'm arguing that there are two sides to the story, and that its worth ALSO considering the other side and considering the idea that even individual cases of people being falsely accused can be completely devastating.
|
On November 22 2017 04:10 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2017 04:06 Jockmcplop wrote:On November 22 2017 04:04 farvacola wrote:
Given that only around a third of sexual assaults are even reported in the first place, I'm not sure how an anecdote in which the false accuser got her due ought to inform a discussion pertaining to how we treat allegations of sexual assault. Because you are focusing on the accuser. The falsely accused got very little vindication. Do you have any idea how devastating that is in a small town. One of them left college because it was so humiliating. How many people leave school because they are raped and never receive any justice?
See this is a problem though. From an outsiders perspective this seems to devolve into assumed guilt again.
I see it quite often. Its as if we agreed somewhere along the way to play the odds. If 95% are guilty its ok if the 5% deal with the consequences.
Thats kind of fucked up if you think about it. Especially with all the grey area thats ripe for miscommunication.
|
On November 22 2017 04:10 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2017 04:06 Jockmcplop wrote:On November 22 2017 04:04 farvacola wrote:
Given that only around a third of sexual assaults are even reported in the first place, I'm not sure how an anecdote in which the false accuser got her due ought to inform a discussion pertaining to how we treat allegations of sexual assault. Because you are focusing on the accuser. The falsely accused got very little vindication. Do you have any idea how devastating that is in a small town. One of them left college because it was so humiliating. How many people leave school because they are raped and never receive any justice?
This discussion will never work.
Your absolute refusal to even attempt to consider the other side of your argument makes it pointless.
I agree with almost everything you are saying about the female perspective on this issue. There is a male perspective also and completely ignoring it is beyond ignorant.
|
On November 22 2017 04:14 Sadist wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2017 04:10 Plansix wrote:On November 22 2017 04:06 Jockmcplop wrote:On November 22 2017 04:04 farvacola wrote:
Given that only around a third of sexual assaults are even reported in the first place, I'm not sure how an anecdote in which the false accuser got her due ought to inform a discussion pertaining to how we treat allegations of sexual assault. Because you are focusing on the accuser. The falsely accused got very little vindication. Do you have any idea how devastating that is in a small town. One of them left college because it was so humiliating. How many people leave school because they are raped and never receive any justice? See this is a problem though. From an outsiders perspective this seems to devolve into assumed guilt again. I see it quite often. Its as if we agreed somewhere along the way to play the odds. If 95% are guilty its ok if the 5% deal with the consequences. Thats kind of fucked up if you think about it. Especially with all the grey area thats ripe for miscommunication.
Pretty much every mechanism of justice in the world can look fucked up in one way or another; the hard work of governance is in managing the perpetually shifting boundaries of collective interest relative to seeing good things happen and bad things discouraged.
|
Norway28705 Posts
On November 22 2017 04:04 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2017 03:51 Liquid`Drone wrote:On November 22 2017 03:24 Plansix wrote:On November 22 2017 03:19 Sadist wrote:On November 22 2017 03:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 22 2017 03:09 Mohdoo wrote:On November 22 2017 03:02 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 22 2017 02:55 Plansix wrote:
It sort of amazes me that people can be so god damn confused by the concept of consent and how it is given. And I'm not really seeing any "cost" to making sure your partner is also down to fuck at that given moment. The fact I've gone through my entire life without sexually assaulting or harassing anyone is seeming like a bigger accomplishment each day. Maybe according to your definition. I remember walking around campus and seeing a poster that said "IF SHE WAS DRUNK, IT WAS RAPE." Feminism club went just a weeee bit too far on that one, but whatever. What's wrong with that poster's message? I mean, if the intention is to point out that "she" implies that men can't be raped, sure that's wrong. Also, if both parties are drunk then I don't think that counts as rape either. But if a sober person has sex with a drunk person, it's rape. Drunk people can't consent. So if a sober person has sex with their drunk spouse its rape? Couples are constantly in a state of rape if thats the definition. To be clear we arent talking blackout level here right? Straight up, I would be in some deep shit if I had sex with my wife if she came home super drunk and was trying to go to bed. I dont' understand why anyone would think that was ok. What if she comes home and is like BLRAHARAHHRAGAA HAHA IM SO DRUNK AND HORNY FUCKING FUCK ME NOW? and then she gets naked and enters the lady side of some sex position and goes like WTF ARE YOU SO SLOW I SAID FUCK ME NOW? Basically in this situation she's drunk as fuck and consenting as fuck. I personally think that is perfectly fair game , even if you are sober yourself. (Although if I'm completely sober I wouldn't find the behavior particularly attractive - still would prolly comply, though.) The thing is, that's often the case. Girls, just like guys, can get incredibly horny while incredibly drunk. What the hell? That is soooooo not consent.
How is this not consent? If you're literally asking for someone to fuck you then you're clearly consenting to having sex with the person? What if you know for a fact that not having sex is gonna lead to an argument because your wife is gonna be really offended, and being drunk, she won't have any filter and everything she says is gonna come out insane?
|
United States43201 Posts
On November 22 2017 04:12 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Likewise, if a girl actively consents (just to be really clear, I am by no means including 'didn't say no audibly enough because she was drunk, but I'm including the 'come on LETS FUCK'), which drunk girls totally do, then no way does it qualify as rape, even if the girl totally regrets it afterwards and would not normally have had sex with that particular guy. This also isn't victim blaming - I don't acknowledge the victimhood. ;p
What in the literal fuck eri.
Stop raping people and then saying that it's their fault for getting horny drunk.
You have a responsibility for your own involvement in sex beyond making sure you have an excuse and can get away with it in the morning. If you've obtained wasted consent but you're uncertain whether or not you would have been unable to get sober consent then the correct course of action is not "yeah, but nobody can prove whether or not I'd have had sober consent so technically it's her fault that we had this sex she didn't want to have".
Seriously. Rethink your moral framework.
That's fucked up.
They're responsible for getting drunk and making drunk decisions, I'm with you that far. What I don't get is why you suddenly give yourself a pass for taking advantage of that. Your responsibility is to do no harm to the people you're fucking, not to only harm people when you can say that technically it's their fault.
|
On November 22 2017 04:13 Jockmcplop wrote:
If you guys think I'm arguing against encouraging the reporting of sexual assault then I obviously haven't explained myself well.
I'm arguing that there are two sides to the story, and that its worth ALSO considering the other side and considering the idea that even individual cases of people being falsely accused can be completely devastating.
everyone already does that though, so you're making an unnecessary argument; and people, upon seeing what you say, think that rather than making an unnecessary argument, you're making an argument in some other vein.
mostly though it seems like you have a huge bias from one instance which is coloring how you look at and talk about the situation.
and you haven't picked up the right words to talk about the issue without sounding like the people who are a problem.
also, arguing wiht plansix is often fraugth with difficulty; and trying to having a thoughtful policy discussion on an internet message board generally doesn't work out well either. (and of course most people don't even have the sense to do thoughtful policy anyways, especially those who choose to discuss the issues)
|
Norway28705 Posts
On November 22 2017 04:16 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2017 04:14 Sadist wrote:On November 22 2017 04:10 Plansix wrote:On November 22 2017 04:06 Jockmcplop wrote:On November 22 2017 04:04 farvacola wrote:
Given that only around a third of sexual assaults are even reported in the first place, I'm not sure how an anecdote in which the false accuser got her due ought to inform a discussion pertaining to how we treat allegations of sexual assault. Because you are focusing on the accuser. The falsely accused got very little vindication. Do you have any idea how devastating that is in a small town. One of them left college because it was so humiliating. How many people leave school because they are raped and never receive any justice? See this is a problem though. From an outsiders perspective this seems to devolve into assumed guilt again. I see it quite often. Its as if we agreed somewhere along the way to play the odds. If 95% are guilty its ok if the 5% deal with the consequences. Thats kind of fucked up if you think about it. Especially with all the grey area thats ripe for miscommunication. Pretty much every mechanism of justice in the world can look fucked up in one way or another; the hard work of governance is in managing the perpetually shifting boundaries of collective interest relative to seeing good things happen and bad things discouraged.
I agree entirely, but I think that is the reason why we must accept arbitrary decisions and why we must avoid making blanket statements. Few things that apply to interpersonal relationships always apply.
|
Norway28705 Posts
On November 22 2017 04:18 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2017 04:12 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Likewise, if a girl actively consents (just to be really clear, I am by no means including 'didn't say no audibly enough because she was drunk, but I'm including the 'come on LETS FUCK'), which drunk girls totally do, then no way does it qualify as rape, even if the girl totally regrets it afterwards and would not normally have had sex with that particular guy. This also isn't victim blaming - I don't acknowledge the victimhood. ;p What in the literal fuck eri. Stop raping people and then saying that it's their fault for getting horny drunk. You have a responsibility for your own involvement in sex beyond making sure you have an excuse and can get away with it in the morning. If you've obtained wasted consent but you're uncertain whether or not you would have been unable to get sober consent then the correct course of action is not "yeah, but nobody can prove whether or not I'd have had sober consent so technically it's her fault that we had this sex she didn't want to have". Seriously. Rethink your moral framework. That's fucked up.
Literally 0 of this applies to sex that I myself have had. You trying to think this is behavior I'm projecting because I've been in 'that guy's position' is completely misplaced. I've had drunk girls be hysterically angry at me for not having had sex with them though. Like honestly, fuck off, you making this assumption towards me is way, way out of line.
|
On November 22 2017 04:16 Liquid`Drone wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2017 04:04 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 22 2017 03:51 Liquid`Drone wrote:On November 22 2017 03:24 Plansix wrote:On November 22 2017 03:19 Sadist wrote:On November 22 2017 03:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 22 2017 03:09 Mohdoo wrote:On November 22 2017 03:02 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 22 2017 02:55 Plansix wrote:
It sort of amazes me that people can be so god damn confused by the concept of consent and how it is given. And I'm not really seeing any "cost" to making sure your partner is also down to fuck at that given moment. The fact I've gone through my entire life without sexually assaulting or harassing anyone is seeming like a bigger accomplishment each day. Maybe according to your definition. I remember walking around campus and seeing a poster that said "IF SHE WAS DRUNK, IT WAS RAPE." Feminism club went just a weeee bit too far on that one, but whatever. What's wrong with that poster's message? I mean, if the intention is to point out that "she" implies that men can't be raped, sure that's wrong. Also, if both parties are drunk then I don't think that counts as rape either. But if a sober person has sex with a drunk person, it's rape. Drunk people can't consent. So if a sober person has sex with their drunk spouse its rape? Couples are constantly in a state of rape if thats the definition. To be clear we arent talking blackout level here right? Straight up, I would be in some deep shit if I had sex with my wife if she came home super drunk and was trying to go to bed. I dont' understand why anyone would think that was ok. What if she comes home and is like BLRAHARAHHRAGAA HAHA IM SO DRUNK AND HORNY FUCKING FUCK ME NOW? and then she gets naked and enters the lady side of some sex position and goes like WTF ARE YOU SO SLOW I SAID FUCK ME NOW? Basically in this situation she's drunk as fuck and consenting as fuck. I personally think that is perfectly fair game , even if you are sober yourself. (Although if I'm completely sober I wouldn't find the behavior particularly attractive - still would prolly comply, though.) The thing is, that's often the case. Girls, just like guys, can get incredibly horny while incredibly drunk. What the hell? That is soooooo not consent. How is this not consent? If you're literally asking for someone to fuck you then you're clearly consenting to having sex with the person? What if you know for a fact that not having sex is gonna lead to an argument because your wife is gonna be really offended, and being drunk, she won't have any filter and everything she says is gonna come out insane?
If she cant legally consent to any contract in that state, how can she consent to sex? Mentally impaired is mentally impaired regardless of whether it includes a boner or a car.
|
On November 22 2017 04:22 Trainrunnef wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2017 04:16 Liquid`Drone wrote:On November 22 2017 04:04 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 22 2017 03:51 Liquid`Drone wrote:On November 22 2017 03:24 Plansix wrote:On November 22 2017 03:19 Sadist wrote:On November 22 2017 03:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 22 2017 03:09 Mohdoo wrote:On November 22 2017 03:02 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 22 2017 02:55 Plansix wrote:
It sort of amazes me that people can be so god damn confused by the concept of consent and how it is given. And I'm not really seeing any "cost" to making sure your partner is also down to fuck at that given moment. The fact I've gone through my entire life without sexually assaulting or harassing anyone is seeming like a bigger accomplishment each day. Maybe according to your definition. I remember walking around campus and seeing a poster that said "IF SHE WAS DRUNK, IT WAS RAPE." Feminism club went just a weeee bit too far on that one, but whatever. What's wrong with that poster's message? I mean, if the intention is to point out that "she" implies that men can't be raped, sure that's wrong. Also, if both parties are drunk then I don't think that counts as rape either. But if a sober person has sex with a drunk person, it's rape. Drunk people can't consent. So if a sober person has sex with their drunk spouse its rape? Couples are constantly in a state of rape if thats the definition. To be clear we arent talking blackout level here right? Straight up, I would be in some deep shit if I had sex with my wife if she came home super drunk and was trying to go to bed. I dont' understand why anyone would think that was ok. What if she comes home and is like BLRAHARAHHRAGAA HAHA IM SO DRUNK AND HORNY FUCKING FUCK ME NOW? and then she gets naked and enters the lady side of some sex position and goes like WTF ARE YOU SO SLOW I SAID FUCK ME NOW? Basically in this situation she's drunk as fuck and consenting as fuck. I personally think that is perfectly fair game , even if you are sober yourself. (Although if I'm completely sober I wouldn't find the behavior particularly attractive - still would prolly comply, though.) The thing is, that's often the case. Girls, just like guys, can get incredibly horny while incredibly drunk. What the hell? That is soooooo not consent. How is this not consent? If you're literally asking for someone to fuck you then you're clearly consenting to having sex with the person? What if you know for a fact that not having sex is gonna lead to an argument because your wife is gonna be really offended, and being drunk, she won't have any filter and everything she says is gonna come out insane? If she cant legally consent to any contract in that state, how can she consent to sex? Mentally impaired is mentally impaired regardless of whether it includes a boner or a car.
What if the other party cant legally consent either (ie both drunk).
|
Yes, according to the law you can give consent to sex while drunk.
No, slurring out an ok before she passes out is not going to count.
There is plenty of grey area to interpret things concerning intoxication, but use common sense and don't seek to take advantage of people and you'll be fine. Comon people.
|
On November 22 2017 04:24 Sadist wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2017 04:22 Trainrunnef wrote:On November 22 2017 04:16 Liquid`Drone wrote:On November 22 2017 04:04 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 22 2017 03:51 Liquid`Drone wrote:On November 22 2017 03:24 Plansix wrote:On November 22 2017 03:19 Sadist wrote:On November 22 2017 03:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 22 2017 03:09 Mohdoo wrote:On November 22 2017 03:02 ticklishmusic wrote:
[quote]
The fact I've gone through my entire life without sexually assaulting or harassing anyone is seeming like a bigger accomplishment each day. Maybe according to your definition. I remember walking around campus and seeing a poster that said "IF SHE WAS DRUNK, IT WAS RAPE." Feminism club went just a weeee bit too far on that one, but whatever. What's wrong with that poster's message? I mean, if the intention is to point out that "she" implies that men can't be raped, sure that's wrong. Also, if both parties are drunk then I don't think that counts as rape either. But if a sober person has sex with a drunk person, it's rape. Drunk people can't consent. So if a sober person has sex with their drunk spouse its rape? Couples are constantly in a state of rape if thats the definition. To be clear we arent talking blackout level here right? Straight up, I would be in some deep shit if I had sex with my wife if she came home super drunk and was trying to go to bed. I dont' understand why anyone would think that was ok. What if she comes home and is like BLRAHARAHHRAGAA HAHA IM SO DRUNK AND HORNY FUCKING FUCK ME NOW? and then she gets naked and enters the lady side of some sex position and goes like WTF ARE YOU SO SLOW I SAID FUCK ME NOW? Basically in this situation she's drunk as fuck and consenting as fuck. I personally think that is perfectly fair game , even if you are sober yourself. (Although if I'm completely sober I wouldn't find the behavior particularly attractive - still would prolly comply, though.) The thing is, that's often the case. Girls, just like guys, can get incredibly horny while incredibly drunk. What the hell? That is soooooo not consent. How is this not consent? If you're literally asking for someone to fuck you then you're clearly consenting to having sex with the person? What if you know for a fact that not having sex is gonna lead to an argument because your wife is gonna be really offended, and being drunk, she won't have any filter and everything she says is gonna come out insane? If she cant legally consent to any contract in that state, how can she consent to sex? Mentally impaired is mentally impaired regardless of whether it includes a boner or a car. What if the other party cant legally consent either (ie both drunk).
I havent been able to come up with an answer that makes sense to be honest. because if i murdered someone while drunk im still a murderer, but if I'm too drunk to consider the fact that someone else giving me consent isn't all there then the line gets really blurry.
|
On November 22 2017 04:15 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2017 04:10 Plansix wrote:On November 22 2017 04:06 Jockmcplop wrote:On November 22 2017 04:04 farvacola wrote:
Given that only around a third of sexual assaults are even reported in the first place, I'm not sure how an anecdote in which the false accuser got her due ought to inform a discussion pertaining to how we treat allegations of sexual assault. Because you are focusing on the accuser. The falsely accused got very little vindication. Do you have any idea how devastating that is in a small town. One of them left college because it was so humiliating. How many people leave school because they are raped and never receive any justice? This discussion will never work. Your absolute refusal to even attempt to consider the other side of your argument makes it pointless. I agree with almost everything you are saying about the female perspective on this issue. There is a male perspective also and completely ignoring it is beyond ignorant.
No the problem you have is that I know there is no defense against people that are willing to bold face lie. There is no system in place that can deal with people who are fully willing lie to officials and make of evidence. And I don’t think the concerns of false accusations mean we need to hold off believing people saying they are sexual assaulted. And I’m of the opinion that men raising that concern are putting their own fears of being falsely accused above all the potential victims that have never come forward.
|
On November 22 2017 04:18 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2017 04:13 Jockmcplop wrote:
If you guys think I'm arguing against encouraging the reporting of sexual assault then I obviously haven't explained myself well.
I'm arguing that there are two sides to the story, and that its worth ALSO considering the other side and considering the idea that even individual cases of people being falsely accused can be completely devastating.
everyone already does that though, so you're making an unnecessary argument; and people, upon seeing what you say, think that rather than making an unnecessary argument, you're making an argument in some other vein. mostly though it seems like you have a huge bias from one instance which is coloring how you look at and talk about the situation. and you haven't picked up the right words to talk about the issue without sounding like the people who are a problem. also, arguing wiht plansix is often fraugth with difficulty; and trying to having a thoughtful policy discussion on an internet message board generally doesn't work out well either. (and of course most people don't even have the sense to do thoughtful policy anyways, especially those who choose to discuss the issues)
Not everyone. I mean P6 just said that he isn't concerned with the male perspective because the female perspective is more important.
I agree that its more important, but I don't think that means you have to forget about the negative consequences of the ideas you subscribe to. Something can be overwhelmingly positive, like encouraging women to report sexual abuse of any kind and taking their accounts in good faith, and still have negative consequences that need to be addressed. If you decline to do that, like P6 just said we should, then those problems will grow until they are much more serious.
|
United States43201 Posts
On November 22 2017 04:22 Liquid`Drone wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2017 04:18 KwarK wrote:On November 22 2017 04:12 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Likewise, if a girl actively consents (just to be really clear, I am by no means including 'didn't say no audibly enough because she was drunk, but I'm including the 'come on LETS FUCK'), which drunk girls totally do, then no way does it qualify as rape, even if the girl totally regrets it afterwards and would not normally have had sex with that particular guy. This also isn't victim blaming - I don't acknowledge the victimhood. ;p What in the literal fuck eri. Stop raping people and then saying that it's their fault for getting horny drunk. You have a responsibility for your own involvement in sex beyond making sure you have an excuse and can get away with it in the morning. If you've obtained wasted consent but you're uncertain whether or not you would have been unable to get sober consent then the correct course of action is not "yeah, but nobody can prove whether or not I'd have had sober consent so technically it's her fault that we had this sex she didn't want to have". Seriously. Rethink your moral framework. That's fucked up. Literally 0 of this applies to sex that I myself have had. You trying to think this is behavior I'm projecting because I've been in 'that guy's position' is completely misplaced. I've had drunk girls be hysterically angry at me for not having had sex with them though. Like honestly, fuck off, you making this assumption towards me is way, way out of line.
It still results from an incredibly fucked up moral framework.
I'm fine with "if you make a sober decision to get drunk knowing that you'll probably drive while drunk then you made a sober decision to take that risk". Likewise if you make a sober decision to get drunk then sure, there's accountability there.
Where you lose me is where you think it becomes morally okay for another person to take advantage of this because they can use the above logic as an excuse to pin the blame for it on the victim.
If what you're doing is harming another individual, and let's be very clear here, if the girl wakes up with fragments of memories from the blackout and feels like she's been raped then there has been harm, and then saying "technically you caused all this when you decided to get drunk", you're a sociopath. If your standard for moral behavior is technically having an excuse about how it's really their fault that they got raped, you're a sociopath.
Apparently you don't do that, good for you. But you're fine with it. You defended it.
If the girl is drunkenly inviting you to have sex with her then yes, she has a responsibility for her choice to get drunk. But that does not absolve you of your responsibility to say "no" if you have any reason to believe that it is not a choice she would make sober.
As an individual you are morally responsible for your own choices and the way that you knowingly hurt other people with those choices. That goes beyond making sure that technically you're in the clear from a legal perspective. The objective should be avoiding having sex with people that fucks them up in the head and makes them feel like they got raped, not getting away with it.
|
Norway28705 Posts
On November 22 2017 04:22 Trainrunnef wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2017 04:16 Liquid`Drone wrote:On November 22 2017 04:04 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 22 2017 03:51 Liquid`Drone wrote:On November 22 2017 03:24 Plansix wrote:On November 22 2017 03:19 Sadist wrote:On November 22 2017 03:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 22 2017 03:09 Mohdoo wrote:On November 22 2017 03:02 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 22 2017 02:55 Plansix wrote:
It sort of amazes me that people can be so god damn confused by the concept of consent and how it is given. And I'm not really seeing any "cost" to making sure your partner is also down to fuck at that given moment. The fact I've gone through my entire life without sexually assaulting or harassing anyone is seeming like a bigger accomplishment each day. Maybe according to your definition. I remember walking around campus and seeing a poster that said "IF SHE WAS DRUNK, IT WAS RAPE." Feminism club went just a weeee bit too far on that one, but whatever. What's wrong with that poster's message? I mean, if the intention is to point out that "she" implies that men can't be raped, sure that's wrong. Also, if both parties are drunk then I don't think that counts as rape either. But if a sober person has sex with a drunk person, it's rape. Drunk people can't consent. So if a sober person has sex with their drunk spouse its rape? Couples are constantly in a state of rape if thats the definition. To be clear we arent talking blackout level here right? Straight up, I would be in some deep shit if I had sex with my wife if she came home super drunk and was trying to go to bed. I dont' understand why anyone would think that was ok. What if she comes home and is like BLRAHARAHHRAGAA HAHA IM SO DRUNK AND HORNY FUCKING FUCK ME NOW? and then she gets naked and enters the lady side of some sex position and goes like WTF ARE YOU SO SLOW I SAID FUCK ME NOW? Basically in this situation she's drunk as fuck and consenting as fuck. I personally think that is perfectly fair game , even if you are sober yourself. (Although if I'm completely sober I wouldn't find the behavior particularly attractive - still would prolly comply, though.) The thing is, that's often the case. Girls, just like guys, can get incredibly horny while incredibly drunk. What the hell? That is soooooo not consent. How is this not consent? If you're literally asking for someone to fuck you then you're clearly consenting to having sex with the person? What if you know for a fact that not having sex is gonna lead to an argument because your wife is gonna be really offended, and being drunk, she won't have any filter and everything she says is gonna come out insane? If she cant legally consent to any contract in that state, how can she consent to sex? Mentally impaired is mentally impaired regardless of whether it includes a boner or a car.
If you are married to someone, then you can presume that you've consented to sober sex in the past. I am not talking about 'try this new sexual thing I've been wanting to do', I am talking completely ordinary sex that you have had 400 times over the past 3 years. This is completely different from buying a car, it's more like buying groceries. And I'd be pissed off if I went to the grocery store and wanted to buy myself a loaf of bread and the cashier told me 'sorry, you are drunk so I cannot be sure you won't regret this transaction in the morning'.
I get that there's a big difference between this and having sex with a new person. Really big difference. But you don't rape your wife if she comes home and is drunk and wants to have sex and you have sex with her. I don't understand how that can be an opinion.
|
On November 22 2017 04:16 Liquid`Drone wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2017 04:04 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 22 2017 03:51 Liquid`Drone wrote:On November 22 2017 03:24 Plansix wrote:On November 22 2017 03:19 Sadist wrote:On November 22 2017 03:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 22 2017 03:09 Mohdoo wrote:On November 22 2017 03:02 ticklishmusic wrote:On November 22 2017 02:55 Plansix wrote:
It sort of amazes me that people can be so god damn confused by the concept of consent and how it is given. And I'm not really seeing any "cost" to making sure your partner is also down to fuck at that given moment. The fact I've gone through my entire life without sexually assaulting or harassing anyone is seeming like a bigger accomplishment each day. Maybe according to your definition. I remember walking around campus and seeing a poster that said "IF SHE WAS DRUNK, IT WAS RAPE." Feminism club went just a weeee bit too far on that one, but whatever. What's wrong with that poster's message? I mean, if the intention is to point out that "she" implies that men can't be raped, sure that's wrong. Also, if both parties are drunk then I don't think that counts as rape either. But if a sober person has sex with a drunk person, it's rape. Drunk people can't consent. So if a sober person has sex with their drunk spouse its rape? Couples are constantly in a state of rape if thats the definition. To be clear we arent talking blackout level here right? Straight up, I would be in some deep shit if I had sex with my wife if she came home super drunk and was trying to go to bed. I dont' understand why anyone would think that was ok. What if she comes home and is like BLRAHARAHHRAGAA HAHA IM SO DRUNK AND HORNY FUCKING FUCK ME NOW? and then she gets naked and enters the lady side of some sex position and goes like WTF ARE YOU SO SLOW I SAID FUCK ME NOW? Basically in this situation she's drunk as fuck and consenting as fuck. I personally think that is perfectly fair game , even if you are sober yourself. (Although if I'm completely sober I wouldn't find the behavior particularly attractive - still would prolly comply, though.) The thing is, that's often the case. Girls, just like guys, can get incredibly horny while incredibly drunk. What the hell? That is soooooo not consent. How is this not consent? If you're literally asking for someone to fuck you then you're clearly consenting to having sex with the person? What if you know for a fact that not having sex is gonna lead to an argument because your wife is gonna be really offended, and being drunk, she won't have any filter and everything she says is gonna come out insane?
The state of mind (sobriety) is what takes precedence when deciding consent. As soon as the premise is "She's drunk", the rest is moot. What if she's horny? Doesn't matter. What if she says yes? Doesn't matter. What if she- it can't be consent, period, full stop.
Not raping someone is more important than not arguing. That should be obvious. It sounds like the guy needs to have a serious conversation with her about this... when she's sober.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
