It's probably true if you count just plain aggressive sex as a rape. Which you could, fairly, call softer forms of manipulation than hiding in the bushes with a knife still a rape. Or if you count drug induced sex as a rape. Which I don't think you fairly can -- unless she is straight up roofied she needs to take some responsibility for her actions. This is not gender discrimination. Men assume this exact same repsonsibility, it is only the dangers that are slightly different. If you get drunk and suck a cock you were not raped. You just sucked a cock.
The Principles of Communism
rape between men and women spreads to about 60/40.
The way I've always seen it, if BOTH parties are under the influence to the point of neither being in control of their actions, then it can't be called rape. If one party intentionally gets the other party intoxicated for the purposes of having sex, or takes advantage of an already intoxicated person, then that's definitely rape.
Unless the guy forced it down her throat somehow, she still got willingly intoxicated. If she's an adult, she knows she might make bad decisions while intoxicated. Unless she's intoxicated to the point of unconsciousness, she's still consenting. If she's consenting, it's not rape. It might be a douchey thing to do, definitely taking advantage of an intoxicated person, but again, if they willingly became intoxicated they are responsible for their own decisions. That is absolutely not rape. When she sobers up and realizes it was a mistake, she might wish she could take back her consent and willingness, but that doesn't make it rape either.
considering the amount of drinking and fucking going on in college, 20% does seem plausible.
If you actually think that way, then you might be a rapist. That you fully admit it's taking advantage of someone, but then somehow distinguish that from rape, is really just a way of rationalizing rape.
More than a few times, I've had sex while I was very intoxicated. The women were generally were about as intoxicated as I was, sometimes more, sometimes less. Does that mean I'm a rapist when they were more drunk than me? Or that they are when I'm more drunk than them? Because I really don't see how a drunken hook-up automatically equals rape when both parties were willing participants just because intoxication was a factor.
I covered this a few posts up. *I* don't think it's rape when both parties are intoxicated, unless of course one party specifically got both parties intoxicated for the purposes of making the other more vulnerable while getting themselves in a rapey kinda mood. This is one of the ways women rape men btw.
Now now, Trollie, Mist actually made a great suggestion. What better way to say "fuck you" to the feminist movement than by using their own weapons against them?
You know what? Unless one party is unconscious being drunk doesn't make it rape! If you get hammered and ride some guyyou weren't raped.