You did say that, but I guess I was confused because I'm not sure how using gender neutral terms makes the statement better. The thrust of the statement is that one person is forcing another person to get drunk. That's the infantilizing part. Men aren't "getting" women drunk (or vice versa). Adults make choices for themselves. I got shitfaced on purpose in Paris during/after an M83 concert once, and spent the whole night passed out on the Paris metro. If I had been robbed blind, that would have been my fault. I did that. Nobody did it to me. The girl I was with didn't get me drunk. I got me drunk.
The wording of one person "getting" another drunk. That's infantilizing.
If you had been robbed blind someone would still have broken the law. It's not legal to steal from someone because they're drunk.
And yes, I did say that insisting a drunk person can't be raped if they have no memory of what happened and have no signs of physical resistance basically endorses the idea of anyone being able to rape anyone by "getting them drunk enough". That doesn't mean that that's the only way rapes can occur. I'm saying that if you say it's OK to rape someone if they're drunk enough not to remember it, you will have people taking advantage of that (both men and women) by, yes, "getting someone drunk enough". You can accuse me of the "slippery slope" fallacy if you like, it's probably apt. However, none of that matters when the main point I'm trying to make is that getting someone who doesn't want to fuck you to fuck you by exploiting their inability to make rational decisions does count as rape.
In an attempt to maintain internal consistency, many of you claimed that waking up with a assful of semen and no memory of what happened the night before wouldn't necessarily mean you've been raped. I think part of the reason such a ridiculous claim is being made is that, in all likelihood, it's a scenario none of us will ever actually face. It's fun to play hypothetical and say "well if it happened to
meI'd be totally cool with it".
Well, I'm calling bullshit. If I go out and get smashed and I wake up with an oozing asshole, I was fucking raped. That's an "out" hole, not an "in" hole, and there's no fucking way anybody is ever getting in there if I'm in any way in control of myself whatsoever. HAVING SAID THAT, it in no way means I need to see somebody go to jail no matter what. If there is insufficient evidence that I've been raped, that's something I'd be forced to live with. I don`t believe my rapist should go to jail on the strength of my words alone. That would be ridiculous. Best case scenario: there is enough evidence (circumstantial or otherwise) that would prove beyond a reasonable doubt that I had been raped. Worst case scenario: Either there isn't enough evidence
orI actually wasn't raped, despite my convictions. In those cases everything that could have been done has been done and I'd just have to accept it anyway. None of this is unreasonable, by the way.
