[ForKicks]

(Original post by rattyryan)
Well it depends how big their bucket is lol. They could get it in on a floppy hahaha

No, lol. Rape requires penetration with a penis. Unless the girl is hiding something..

[skibur]

what's everyones thoughts on the Ched Evans case?

[Ray Bradbury]

So what if the woman and the guy are equally smashed and she partakes fully, including not being passive, going on top and bringing it to a conclusion.
The next morning realises she had sex but cant remember giving consent. If she went to the police, would it be rape.

[Foghorn Leghorn]

Because the level of intoxication the victim would need to be able to be considered unable to consent is at the point that they would be physically incapable of murdering someone. Sleeping with a drunk girl isn't rape, sleeping with a girl that is so drunk she doesn't know what's going on is.

[Foghorn Leghorn]

(Original post by Ray Bradbury)
So what if the woman and the guy are equally smashed and she partakes fully, including not being passive, going on top and bringing it to a conclusion.
The next morning realises she had sex but cant remember giving consent. If she went to the police, would it be rape.

It's not quite as black and white as that. The law does state that it is considered rape to sleep with someone so intoxicatated they are unable to consent however there are many factors to take into account and many grey areas, that's why the legal process of prosecution is so complex. I would say though that if the girl was capable of preforming sexual intercourse on the accussed i.e go on top, preform oral, then she probably wasn't intoxicated enough to be considered too drunk to consent and merely had sex with someone then later thought it was a bad idea.

[Ray Bradbury]

(Original post by Foghorn Leghorn)
Because the level of intoxication the victim would need to be able to be considered unable to consent is at the point that they would be physically incapable of murdering someone. Sleeping with a drunk girl isn't rape, sleeping with a girl that is so drunk she doesn't know what's going on is.

In this scenario she does know what is going on at the time and happily participates.
Its the next morning that she knows she has had sex, maybe with somebody she doesn't normally like, but cant remember what happened or the fact that she gave consent

(Original post by Foghorn Leghorn)
It's not quite as black and white as that. The law does state that it is considered rape to sleep with someone so intoxicated they are unable to consent however there are many factors to take into account and many grey areas, that's why the legal process of prosecution is so complex. I would say though that if the girl was capable of preforming sexual intercourse on the accused i.e go on top, preform oral, then she probably wasn't intoxicated enough to be considered too drunk to consent and merely had sex with someone then later thought it was a bad idea.

So what if that's what happened but she cannot remember it or the fact that she gave consent and goes to the police and tells them so.

[Foghorn Leghorn]

(Original post by Ray Bradbury)
In this scenario she does know what is going on at the time and happily participates.
Its the next morning that she knows she has had sex, maybe with somebody she doesn't normally like, but cant remember what happened or the fact that she gave consent




So what if that's what happened but she cannot remember it or the fact that she gave consent and goes to the police and tells them so.

Well in this case it would be up to the prosecution lawyer to prove her amnesia is down to intoxication and not some other factor. It's highly unlikely that someone isn't intoxicated enough to not give consent and happily engage in sexual intercourse then the next morning wake up and not remember anything. The first thing the lawyer would need to do is prove she was too intoxicated to consent, which would be fairly difficult. For examply in the case of ched evans there was video evidence of her stumbling and the hotel receptionist was wittness to her over intoxication. But even then it wasn't quite clear cut. Infact in most cases whether she remembered or not would be irrelevant because it's more down to was she too intoxicated to consent and can the prosectution prove it. The accusser claiming they cannot remember would have minimal impact on the trial as it isn't something you can prove easily. Secondly like I said amnesia may not be down to intoxication there are plenty of other reasons for it. And even if it was down to being drunk that doesn't necessarily mean the person was too drunk, although in most cases it does take quite a lot of alcohol to cause amnesia.

[L-x]

(Original post by johnadams121212)
But why is that a problem. Surely by that logic, drunk drivers and drunk murderers should not be punished as well, as they were too intoxicated to make a proper decision and that any damage caused by their actions were 'accidental' ?

So rape is ok because it's just an appropriate punishment for getting really drunk? Are you serious?

[rattyryan]

I still stand by the bloke can get raped without getting a hardon or being awake lol
bit sexist this rape malarkey is

[L-x]

(Original post by swiftylol)
But how does one give consent?

Saying "Yes" only results after a question has been asked, but people don't usually say "Let's have sex" and then wait for an answer. Not to mention, saying something less direct could be misleading. The boundaries are so unclear.

Lot of (scary) responses like this in the thread. How about, if you're not 100% sure someone wants to have sex with you, don't f*cking have sex with them!

[Ray Bradbury]

(Original post by Foghorn Leghorn)
Well in this case it would be up to the prosecution lawyer to prove her amnesia is down to intoxication and not some other factor. It's highly unlikely that someone isn't intoxicated enough to not give consent and happily engage in sexual intercourse then the next morning wake up and not remember anything. The first thing the lawyer would need to do is prove she was too intoxicated to consent, which would be fairly difficult. For examply in the case of ched evans there was video evidence of her stumbling and the hotel receptionist was wittness to her over intoxication. But even then it wasn't quite clear cut. Infact in most cases whether she remembered or not would be irrelevant because it's more down to was she too intoxicated to consent and can the prosectution prove it. The accusser claiming they cannot remember would have minimal impact on the trial as it isn't something you can prove easily. Secondly like I said amnesia may not be down to intoxication there are plenty of other reasons for it. And even if it was down to being drunk that doesn't necessarily mean the person was too drunk, although in most cases it does take quite a lot of alcohol to cause amnesia.

I have known two people like this, funny enough both women. One an old friend of my wife who to this day regularly gets so drunk that she cant remember the night before and another, a young girl who I worked with who used to binge drink at weekends and only stopped because she realised that she couldn't remember what had happened. I have seen both of them in this state and though well drunk they could both hold a beery conversation with you.

[swiftylol]

(Original post by L-x)
Lot of (scary) responses like this in the thread. How about, if you're not 100% sure someone wants to have sex with you, don't f*cking have sex with them!

What?

I'm only enquiring about the boundaries... relax

Furthermore, your idea remains a vague one. I agree with the idea of staying away if it feels wrong, however your idea also assumes that a person should also continue if they are "100% sure".

[rosee92]

In threads like this it's almost like some people, hopefully trolls, are looking for a loophole in which if they raped someone they'd be safe from legal action. Slightly worrying.

[Foghorn Leghorn]

(Original post by Ray Bradbury)
I have known two people like this, funny enough both women. One an old friend of my wife who to this day regularly gets so drunk that she cant remember the night before and another, a young girl who I worked with who used to binge drink at weekends and only stopped because she realised that she couldn't remember what had happened. I have seen both of them in this state and though well drunk they could both hold a beery conversation with you.

Yeah some people are just like that. Again like I said though not being able to remember isn't really a deciding factor in these sorts of rapes cases, infact it could be almost irrelevant to the argument other than she thought she may have been raped because she couldn't remember what happened. The deciding factor is was she too drunk to consent and can the prosectution prove it.

[marcusfox]

(Original post by rosee92)
In threads like this it's almost like some people, hopefully trolls, are looking for a loophole in which if they raped someone they'd be safe from legal action. Slightly worrying.

No, I think it's good that some people want to be sure that if they pick up a girl who is drunk, agrees to go home with them, consents to sex and participates, that consent is legally valid and they aren't stuck languishing in prison for years, even if she wakes up in the morning next to them in horror, because she didn't remember saying yes.

We're not talking about guys wanting to go around sticking it in what is practically a warm corpse.

They want to be sure PRECISELY under what circumstances would they be on a sticky wicket, and so would you if the circumstances were reversed.

[deathhead]

Here's my rule: if they are not drunk enough that they understand what is going on and don't say no. Then it's not rape. If they respond reciprocate sexual actions they are equally responsible.

[rosee92]

(Original post by marcusfox)
No, I think it's good that some people want to be sure that if they pick up a girl who is drunk, agrees to go home with them, consents to sex and participates, that consent is legally valid and they aren't stuck languishing in prison for years, even if she wakes up in the morning next to them in horror, because she didn't remember saying yes.

We're not talking about guys wanting to go around sticking it in what is practically a warm corpse.

They want to be sure PRECISELY under what circumstances would they be on a sticky wicket, and so would you if the circumstances were reversed.

Yes I understand that, but the way someone said something along the lines of 'if she's so drunk she can't remember anyway...' then it did seem a bit iffy. But I agree that there's a risk a girl could just decides to use it as an excuse, and then ruins someone's life, yes I can understand wanting to know the facts behind it. It really pees me off because it means real rape cases are less likely to be taken seriously by the police/justice system etc.

[That Bearded Man]

(Original post by Astronomical)
So, say a girl was fottaly tucked with alcohol, and you suggest having sex to her. She utters a grunt which sounds like a "yes" or a word to that effect.

You proceed to have sex.

Next morning she wakes up, (quite rightly) feels like a slag, and in an attempt to restore some pride in herself decides she was raped, and proceeds to tell the police that she was, indeed, raped by the man.

Is he guilty?

Well, surely she wouldn't have said no during sex, so she can't tell police that she did show a sign of disgust, thus they can't prove rape?

[NB_ide]

(Original post by Friar Chris)
Sleeping with a 'drunk' person is not automatically rape. Someone who is inebriated may still be competent to decide upon and indicate their consent.

Sleeping with a drunk person who is so drunk that they are incapable of even indicating (let alone make a decision) their consent or refusal has to be automatically treated as rape if they are aggrieved because they never had the opportunity to decide either way - consent is always given, it is not assumed until revoked.

The drunkenness itself is really not the key factor; it's your understanding of consent and rape. I shall re-iterate: consent is not present in the absence of verbal or physical objection; it is not the default state - it is not something that is there until directly revoked..

It has to be given in all scenarios, and thus if someone is drunk to the extent that they are incapable of giving consent, then intercourse with them is rape.

And how, in practical terms, can consent be given? What does and does not count as an indication that she, at that time, approves of the activity?

[ForKicks]

(Original post by NB_ide)
And how, in practical terms, can consent be given? What does and does not count as an indication that she, at that time, approves of the activity?

Common sense. If you are unsure about it then don't do it. How hard is that?