Was I raped

Original post by So Instinct

the state deems individuals who drink excessively to not hold any responsibility for their actions in social environments.

The state deems that people who are so drunk they are vomiting on themselves and can't even shower themselves are not sufficiently compos mentis to consent to sex and that if someone creep decides to have sex with such a person, they are a rapist.

That seems reasonable to me

And people whose drinks are spiked? Are you also saying she is responsible for that too?

Reply 82

Wade-

10

Original post by So Instinct

Even if the above scenario was to be true then with the way the law and society is structured the responsibility would still fall on him not to allow the act of sex to happen or be faced with possible rape charges, because unfortunately the state deems individuals who drink excessively to not hold any responsibility for their actions in social environments.

The law takes the view that if you do something when you're drunk you're responsible but if you do something that isn't wrong then you aren't responsible

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 83

Original post by TurboCretin

I agree, but how well do you think that would hold up in court when deciding whether to sentence a man to life imprisonment?

You are confusing two completely separate aspects. One is the trial in which it is determined whether the offence took place.

Once guilt has been determined, and after the trial, the judge will determine a sentence.

And rape almost never results in life imrisonment. The fact it might **** up his life to be a convicted rapist has no actual bearing on whether he did it

Reply 84

Wade-

10

Original post by young_guns

The state deems that people who are so drunk they are vomiting on themselves and can't even shower themselves are not sufficiently compos mentis to consent to sex and that if someone creep decides to have sex with such a person, they are a rapist.

That seems reasonable to me

And people whose drinks are spiked? Are you also saying she is responsible for that too?

So if I'm very drunk in a club and buy a girl a drink should she be looked at as thief because I lacked the capacity to make that decision?

Like I just said above:
Do something wrong when you're drunk = you're responsible
Anything else = you aren't

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 85

Original post by young_guns

The state deems that people who are so drunk they are vomiting on themselves and can't even shower themselves are not sufficiently compos mentis to consent to sex and that if someone creep decides to have sex with such a person, they are a rapist.

That seems reasonable to me

And people whose drinks are spiked? Are you also saying she is responsible for that too?

Stop taking sentences out of context. I was explicitly talking about his above scenario where the female wants to have sex even though she's been drinking not when she's passed out, I replied to a specific scenario and you're applying it to other ones which is just stupid.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 86

tim_123

16

Original post by young_guns

She was so drunk that she was vomiting all over herself. So he took her home, showered her and put her in bed. And then had sex with her.If that is the case and she was that out of it, it is rape. End of.I'm sorry that you're so sex-starved and creepy that you think having sex with someone who has passed out is okay

if she was so drunk she couldn't remember what happened, how does she know she threw up on her self...

nice assumption about me though. Of course I don't think its ok to sleep with someone when they're passed out, don't be ridiculous. However, there is a massive difference between being passed out, and being drunk, but still initiating sex. You cant really accuse someone for doing something you asked them to do.

edited to add:
how can you presume to know whether she was that out of it. I know plenty of people who have one or two drinks and can't remember the previous night, but are still coherent during

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 87

Original post by Wade-

So if I'm very drunk in a club and buy a girl a drink should she be looked at as thief because I lacked the capacity to make that decision?

Like I just said above:
Do something wrong when you're drunk = you're responsible
Anything else = you aren't

I think you got the wrong end of the stick entirely. We are in agreement. We have exactly the same position, reread his comment, and then reread mine.

Reply 88

Original post by Wade-

The law takes the view that if you do something when you're drunk you're responsible but if you do something that isn't wrong then you aren't responsible

Posted from TSR Mobile

So the responsibility if dependent on the severity of the action. That's weak logic, either you're responsible for any action while under a certain state or you're not.

Regardless I'm talking above his explicit scenario where the female is the one pressuring the individual to have sex when she's been drinking. This isn't a general opinion that applies to any scenario.

Reply 89

Original post by So Instinct

Stop taking sentences out of context. I was explicitly talking about his above scenario where the female wants to have sex even though she's been drinking not when she's passed out

Your "scenario" doesn't make any sense. How are we "not holding her responsible"? You're saying that if someone is drunk they are therefore responsible for whatever criminal act happens to them?

Your comments are puerile and cranky

Reply 90

Original post by So Instinct

So the responsibility if dependent on the severity of the action. That's weak logic, either you're responsible for any action while under a certain state or you're not.

That makes no sense whatsoever

Someone who is drunk is responsible for their own actions. They are not responsible for what someone does to them (like raping them).

It's so ****ing simple, how do you not get it?

Reply 91

DorianGrayism

19

Original post by tim_123

if she was so drunk she couldn't remember what happened, how does she know she threw up on her self...

nice assumption about me though. Of course I don't think its ok to sleep with someone when they're passed out, don't be ridiculous. However, there is a massive difference between being passed out, and being drunk, but still initiating sex. You cant really accuse someone for doing something you asked them to do.

edited to add:
how can you presume to know whether she was that out of it. I know plenty of people who have one or two drinks and can't remember the previous night, but are still coherent during

Because the guy told her.

Reply 92

Original post by tim_123

if she was so drunk she couldn't remember what happened, how does she know she threw up on her self...

Because he told her? Because she needed a shower? Vomit stains on her clothes?

nice assumption about me though. Of course I don't think its ok to sleep with someone when they're passed out

Oh but you do. You were saying that she might have been the one who wanted it, which is obviously nonsensical because if she was so intoxicated that she couldn't even make her own decisions about where to go, when, how, that she needed someone to take her home, shower her, etc, then she was too drunk to consent.

If you have sex with a girl in that situation, you are a rapist.

Reply 93

Original post by young_guns

That makes no sense whatsoever

Someone who is drunk is responsible for their own actions. They are not responsible for what someone does to them (like raping them).

It's so ****ing simple, how do you not get it?

When did I say she's responsible for other peoples actions? I'm explicitly talking about a scenario where the female chooses to instigate sex which is her own action. Maybe you should learn to read.

Reply 94

Original post by tim_123

I know plenty of people who have one or two drinks and can't remember the previous night, but are still coherent during

You are embarrassing yourself.

Reply 95

Original post by So Instinct

I'm explicitly talking about a scenario where the female chooses to instigate sex which is her own action

How does that scenario have anything to do with this thread, except to bring it in as a kind of moralising, pseudo-she-wudna-got-raped-if-she- wasn't-dressed-like-a-slut.

Reply 96

TurboCretin

Original post by young_guns

You are confusing two completely separate aspects. One is the trial in which it is determined whether the offence took place.

Once guilt has been determined, and after the trial, the judge will determine a sentence.

And rape almost never results in life imrisonment. The fact it might **** up his life to be a convicted rapist has no actual bearing on whether he did it

I don't think I am conflating anything. I am simply saying that rape is a serious offence, and the argument of 'well she was drunk enough to black out so she was probably drunk enough not to be able to give valid consent' is unlikely to be persuasive in court.

Original post by Wade-

Most rapists don't get life. It would hold up quite well in my opinion when you layer other evidence. If you're drunk enough to black out then the chances are there'll be witness statements that will support how drunk you were

Again, I agree! Hence me saying 'go and ask your friends whether they think you were compos mentis'.

I'm not sure how to interpret you where you say 'most rapists don't get life'. The sentence for rape is life imprisonment, s.1(4) SOA. I think what you're talking about is the sentencing guidelines for rape. The sentencing guidelines don't support imprisonment literally for life even under the most serious circumstances. The upper end of the range for serial/multiple rape is 19 years.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 97