Butthurt white guys, an Asian virgin and an angry lesbian walk into a bar...

Tanoomba_sl said:

See? This is why you keep missing the point. Being taken advantage of meanshaving something done to you. Being coerced into something you wouldn't normally agree to by somebody well aware of your susceptible state meansthey are the ones doing something wrong.Otherwise, why ever void a contract at all? Why not just say "Dude, you were drunk, too bad for you, suck it up"? The reason is because, as a society, we don't like people to take advantage of others in a susceptible state, especially if it involves their finances, body or physical well-being. Plus, we like to be able to get a nice buzz going without having to worry about being targeted by opportunistic exploitative assholes.

Seems to me the only difference between our points of view is that you guys draw the line right after "contract", saying anything else someone convinces you to do when drunk is your own problem. I (and, from what I've seen, society at large), draw the line a little further down, including "putting parts of you inside parts of me" as something that's not OK to do when someone's decision-making capability has been compromised.

Again (again, again), most people can drink and fuck and have no problems. But I would venture that most people who fucked while drunk didn't end up feeling like they were "taken advantage of". If a guy knows a girl has no interest in him, but keeps buying her drinks and slowly building up the pressure until something gives, he is damn well risking rape charges, and with good reason. It isnot OKto use alcohol to push someone into doing something they wouldn't do. Itis OKto use alcohol as a social lubricant to bring about a conclusion both parties desire. If you can't tell which situation you're in, for fuck's sake ABANDON SHIP, spend a little more time learning about social interaction and members of the opposite sex, and try again later.

Click to expand...

So here's the $10 question. Can a woman consent to sex when she's been drinking? Universities have decided that the answer is no. "We heard that students don't understand that it is illegal to have sex with someone who is drunk because they can't give consent," says the Saint Mary's task force report. Although that sentence is crafted to be gender-neutral, its warning is directed at men. It means that drunken sex is tantamount to rape.

*snip*

As Wayne MacKay,the law professor who wrote the Saint Mary's report, told Maclean's: "Clearly the focus needs to be on the fact that men need to have a better understanding and stop raping."

Click to expand...

Benedet discovered many judges have determined that unless the victim was practically unconscious, she was still able to consent to sex. Her 2010 paper, The Sexual Assault of Intoxicated Women, cited cases in which judges or juries set the standard almost impossibly high.

Judges have ruled that a woman who was so drunk she was unable to speak, a woman who was stumbling and falling when the accused initiated sex in a public place and even a woman who was passed out in the road while two men fondled her breasts, were able to provide consent - in the latter case, because the judge thought it was possible she could have consented to the act before she passed out.

Click to expand...

Tanoomba_sl said:

Has anybody on this boardever had sex ever???

Click to expand...