Rape/Drunk Sex Confusion Anonymous 14278
Is drunk sex always rape? People seem to think the law implies this and I don't understand why. I don't mean if someone is passed out or can't speak or something, I mean two drunk people decide to y'know, I don't understand why someone would call that rape?
Because it's a drug that can impair one's judgement
The problem arises when one is impaired and one isn't. If both are drunk there should be no issues.
There's drunk and there's absolutely blitzed off your mind and clearly incapable. Anyone claiming not to recognise the differences is being willfully ignorant.
Is it ever rape though? I thought rape was a forced sexual act against the will of the "rapee" but if somebody is literally blacked out, then using him as a sex toy isn't rape. It should be still violating the law, starting from the premise that nobody should have any rights over another person's body (unless in very special cases, such as a brain tumor affecting their judgement) but not as bad as rape because it's likely not to leave any trauma.
Also this >>14283
>>14290>I thought rape was a forced sexual act against the will of the "rapee"
You thought wrong
>>14290>if somebody is literally blacked out, then using him as a sex toy isn't rape
Spotted the male
>it's likely not to leave any trauma
Some people don't get any trauma from "actual" rape either. Should it be considered a more tolerable infraction to rape these people? Some people are suicidal and about to kill themselves. Should murder be more tolerable if committed against these people?
If you answered "yes" to either, you're a dumbass
i think they're just baiting
I don't think it's rape, if you have drunk sex. However it definetly is rape, if one of the participants is passed out. I think that it what people mean, when they say drunk sex is rape.
It's also kinda scetchy, if you're extremely drunk and not really in control of yourself anymore, but still not passed out.
People need to recongize degrees. Just because there is a spectrum, doesn't mean that at some point some line isn't being crossed.
I still rarely drink alcohol, because I am terrified of losing my control and being taken advantage of.
>if somebody is literally blacked out, then using him as a sex toy isn't rape>but not as bad as rape because it's likely not to leave any trauma
Shut the fuck up.
People can bleed because they are not actually prepared for it (obviously) and the anus and vagina can tore. Try waking up with blood running down your thighs and god knows what else. People feel like they are worth nothing more than a "sex toy", as you yourself put it, you putrid rape apologist.
drunk consent is still consent
It depends on the level of intoxication imo. If the person is just a bit drunk I guess it's still consent, but if they're about to pass out, or clearly out of their minds, then it's rape even if the person says yes.
People do lots of dumb shit while they are drunk. The blame is always on them-except when it comes to sex for some reason. Yes you still consented and whoever you are drunkenly fucking doesn't have a breathalizer on them to check your alcohol levels.
Moral of the story, don't get drunk, especially around fucking moids.
This doesn't apply to people being blacked out btw. This is when someone who is drunk clearly consents to sex or even actively seeks it out. NOT blackout drunk to where you are fading in an out of consciousness and don't know what's even happening. There is a difference between fucking someone who is drunk and fucking someone who is passed out just because they can't say no.
most of the people you see saying all drunk sex is rape are terminally online. like those girls who write fanfiction where the characters have two beers each before they get their grind on and tag it "noncon" "darkfic" "tw: intoxication" " "tw: abuse" "morally questionable behavior" "dead dove do not eat"
That means there's something in between consensual sex and ape. What is it?
I agree that people in a relationship should let the other one know their boundaries, learn their body language etc. but having a discussion before having sex…?
yeah, this. a lot of the issues regarding rape I think are actually rooted in the issue of how people are defining rape and consent. don't forget that just a few decades ago marital/spousal rape was legal in the US. I agree that consent is ongoing, just because I happened to say yes in the beginning doesn't mean I then consent to everything else that happens after the fact - halfway through sex something could make me change my mind. that doesn't mean it was rape the whole time, but it will be if the other person keeps pushing me to have sex after I've expressed a boundary and said no. consent is ongoing and can be rescinded at any time.
I think you're being too literal here. Most people are not having a literal full conversation during sex, but generally people might be checking in with their partner. Example:
M: Wanna have sex?
[20 minutes later]
M: Oh yeah, you like it when I do that?
[10 minutes later]
M: You like this too? pulls out robe and wizard hat
W: Uh, no. WTF? I don't want this anymore.
I also think having a discussion before sex doesn't have to be as strange or involved as it sounds, esp if you think you're going to try something new/different. I feel like it can be as simple as "Hey, would you like to try this new thing?" "Sure, but we need to stop if X happens because I really don't like Y." It would be doing exactly what you just said, telling each other about your boundaries.
Who the fuck wouldn't like a wizard costume?
>>144148>M: Wanna have sex?>W: Sure.
If your sex starts like this I'm sorry
I agree, but also not the point of this
Consent applies in every relationship. In general I think couples that have been together for a while have plenty of non-verbal cues. The "ongoing conversation" can look like:
> cute movie night
> lip kiss
> neck kiss
> it's on
and since you know and trust each other well you know that situations like these are 99% of the time mutually agreeable to have sex. It seems more common to get explicit "no"s in long-term relationships (e.g. in case of tiredness, trying to focus on something etc.) than explicit asking for sex.
Whereas I think the dialogue around consent began as a result of casual hookups becoming a thing, and it becomes necessary to ask explicitly because you don't know your partners quirks and features yet and don't trust them fully yet. So I think it's fine to ask explicitly for consent if early in a relationship. Also helpful if your partner has a history of sexual trauma and doesn't always feel consistently about physical intimacy.
You did not make the point well at all.
I think the reason that there isn't some well known rule-of-thumb about this is that the law doesn't establish one. The relevant laws are vaguely written and are just meant to establish the possibility of convicting someone for flagrantly taking advantage of a drunk person. It's not like driving where there is a measurable BAC limit, it's a squishy issue where a lot of factors can be relevant.
But it's still almost universally understood that it's legal if you're both equally drunk.
I though alcohol killed your sex drive. Maybe men are so porn addicted that a depressive drug like alcohol does nothing to their flesh master aka dick. Another problem with having sex when you're drunk besides rape is being lazy about protection. Save sex seems less of a priority when your drunk and that's a big problem for us.
It's pretty clear you have no actual experience with this stuff and are just declaring how you 'feel' things would go.
You mean sex and getting drunk? lol
In America having sex with a person who's drunk ("impaired") is considered by many to be rape even if the person is still conscious and consents. It makes no sense because, as others have pointed out, people are still considered legally responsible for every other thing they do while drunk…except consent to have sex. Not to mention the totally arbitrary definition of what constitutes impaired, or how that could even be determined after the fact.
Of course being drugged or being unconscious are different scenarios entirely. People shouldn't drink to excess regardless of gender; it makes you lose control, and anything can happen.
Yes, and perhaps relationships in general.
>>144170>Not to mention the totally arbitrary definition of what constitutes impaired, or how that could even be determined after the fact.
It's really not arbitrary, you have to think about this in the context of our constitution and court system. Convicting someone requires bringing them in front of a jury of their peers who unanimously agree they are guilty and should be punished (jury nullification is very much relevant in this case), it doesn't just magically happen because some bureaucrat added up the numbers and declared you a rapist. There is a lot of case law on this stuff, too. Many of the absurdly unfair situations you could imagine happening due to this law are exempted already.
Is this the first time that you hear that alcohol is a depressant? Don't tell me I hit too close home talking about porn addiction and the erectile dysfunction that it causes.
Use the dictionary if you don't know the meaning of a word.
Yes I know that alcohol is a depressant, but what the fuck are you trying to express? I think you just got mad at me calling you out for not having real life experience with this stuff and are trying to make random insults to feel better.
Alcohol sort of works in both ways at the same time. It reduces your general competence and physical prowess but also makes you more confident and out going due to easing your inhibitions, so people fuck on it a lot even if they don't win any medals for performance.
Where did I insult you? Don't project on me the mad thing. What's so hard to understand about reckless behaviour induced by alcohol, like unsafe sex?
The theory is not hard to understand, but it's clear you don't have any practical experience. And don't even try to deny that you insulted me, the comment you deleted was the least of it. >Don't tell me I hit too close home talking about porn addiction and the erectile dysfunction that it causes
yeah hurr durr I'm a moid, brilliant response
What retard mod removed the comment on consent being an ongoing conversation
>N-n-no you can't say you don't want it later on!
>You said yes before!
Entitled moid behaviour
In the comment I deleted I asked ''Minor?'' because after my post saying:>Is this the first time that you hear that alcohol is a depressant? Don't tell me I hit too close home talking about porn addiction and the erectile dysfunction that it causes.
You replied''What are you talking about?''. And it was pretty obvious what I'm talking about and it wouldn't be the first time I've found someone too young to be here exposing herself because she doesn't know what X is.>but it's clear you don't have any practical experience
Practical experience? About fucking drunk? Or fucking and getting drunk on separate? It's kind of ridiculous. I have done those things, and? It killed my sex drive, after a while it made me tired and sleepy. I dont drink in my bedroom , I drink in a club and I dance, so when I get home at 6 am after 5 hours of dancing and half an hour on the bus I don't feel like fucking and certainly I don't feel like fucking when I'm dancing to music I enjoy. I'm speaking from experience and I don't need to brag about doing this or doing that. >yeah hurr durr I'm a moid, brilliant response
Not about you being a moid but there's actually a lot of people out there that believe that alcohol is a stimulant. You didn't seem to know it at first because you'd rather reply defiant, so I assumed you had no idea. And I have nothing against you but you have to admit you jumped to my post so smug and now you're going to start backpedalling
I have always known that alcohol was a depressant, they taught us that at age 12. I said "What are you talking about?" because it was just a random statement that didn't follow from what I said, you were being blindly aggressive and nothing more.
>>144158>Whereas I think the dialogue around consent began as a result of casual hookups becoming a thing, and it becomes necessary to ask explicitly because you don't know your partners quirks and features yet and don't trust them fully yet.
>>144190>I dont drink in my bedroom , I drink in a club and I dance, so when I get home at 6 am after 5 hours of dancing and half an hour on the bus
Holy shit, that sounds awful. I think I'll stick to having some wine with a book before going to bed at a normal time.
What you describe is a healthy dynamic and something couples should generally strive for. But it's not that simple to reach that point. For example, a lot of people will think penetration is almost mandatory in intercourse. Or that a partner has the obligation to provide sexually. Because of stuff like this, explicit consent might be the lesser evil, at least at first, even if it's not super sexy.
Cf. >So I think it's fine to ask explicitly for consent if early in a relationship.