I think some liberals view women as children.

[ZombieHorde]

Children need our protection because they are both physically weaker than adults and mentally weaker than adults. Special rules are created to help compensate for children's weaknesses.

Hurting a child is considered more heinous than hurting an adult. This is because a child is considerably weaker than the average adult. When a man attacks a woman, this is also considered heinous because men are generally much stronger than women. In my opinion, these views are reasonable.

Now let's consider mutilation. There is a story on DU about three men who castrated another man for dating a 17 year old. Generally speaking, three men are significantly stronger than one man. This difference in strength is considerably more than the difference in strength between one man and one woman. Some people have had some good fun with this story and made jokes, but what if the story was one man amputating the nipples of a woman for the same reason, or three women mutilating one woman? Would people still make jokes here on DU? I don't think so, and I believe the reason is because women are viewed as both physically and intellectually weaker than men, therefore, mutilating them is more taboo in our culture than mutilating men. In my opinion, this view is unreasonable.

Let's look at another example...

When we claim, 'having sex with an intoxicated woman is rape,' we are saying the woman is mentally weak. I am not talking about inebriated, or passed out, I am talking about being drunk. We are saying women are unable to control themselves, and require special rules to compensate for their intellectual weaknesses. If two men had some drinks, and then had sex, extremely few would consider the sex to be rape. This is because men are generally viewed as being able to drink responsibly and are more able make adult decisions concerning sex. In my opinion, this view is unreasonable.

To me, these two examples look like sexism disguised as feminism. What do you think?

I look forward to your thoughtful counterarguments.

[1955doubledie]

1. Mmm, I must be getting hungry...

:popcorn:

[kelly1mm]

2. Your 2nd example is interesting. Is it rape if a woman has sex with a drunk

man? My opinion would be if the "partner" in the sexual encounte is passed out drunk then they cannot give consent and thus it could be rape - of either gender. If someone is not passed out drunk then it is not rape (assuming no other indications of non-consent), again, for either gender.

[Recursion]

4. There's a level of, for lack of a better word, participation...

...required of the male in vaginal intercourse, which while not dispositive goes a long way towards establishing a presumption of consent.

But, yes, there's something off about the fact that if a man and a woman are both too drunk to give consent, and have sex, as a practical matter it's the man that might face a rape charge (not that those charges go very far, even in much less ambiguous circumstances).

[guitar man]

20. I've seen it happen

When you live in a band house with a rock band, you can see a lot of stuff, some of it that you really might not want to see. :o

One night at a gig after party I went upstairs and found my drummer passed out cold but this chick was on top of him and apparently had "coaxed him into participating". When I told him about it the next day he was like "damn, I'm sorry I missed that, she was hot".

So while probably not as likely, yes it is possible.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

93. sufficient cocaine can do that

[WingDinger]

21. Roofies dont make you pass out, nor does 4 loco.

So, when you are given sodium pentathol, and interrogated, as an american soldier, should you be prosecuted for treason, spying? You didnt pass out.

[Crunchy Frog]

52. It is possible for a man's physiology to act without the participation

of his concious mind.

[ZombieHorde]

54. Yes. Many men are sometimes "functional" when they are asleep. nt

[blondeatlast]

3. So society has no duty to protect those under mental impairment?

By your standards, it would almost be okay for a doctor to take liberties with a patient under sedation or anesthesia.

The law doesn't specify gender for a reason--it applies to men, women, children, the developmentally disabled, mentally ill, and chemically intoxicated (application varies, of course).

There's a reason we my ex-husband and I could not sign for our home the day after he had surgery even though he was fairly certain he wanted the house--society didn't want him to make a mistake (we signed the next day--no problem).

the standards apply in both tort and criminal law for a reason.

Edit: and yes, I absolutely believe that in cases such as the one you specify, drunk people are entitled to that protection and I'd say the same if two drunk males held up a liquor store and fingered each other.

Edit the second: OTOH--some liberals do view women as children and many others view them as manipulative harpies when it suits their agendas to do so. There's a lot of misogyny on the Left, too.

Just sayin'.

[Shandris]

11. They can legally waive Miranda, can't they? (n/t)

[ZombieHorde]

13. DU is difficult today. nt

[ZombieHorde]

14. I am having a hard time posting today.

I am not talking about US law, I am talking about attitudes.

I have seen people claim that having sex with a woman who has been drinking is rape, even if both people have been drinking.

I agree with your second edit, the left has all types of bigotry, but I do like to think we have less than the right.

[uppityperson]

5. 2nd example is wrong imo. Drunk people (men/women)are unable to legally consent to anything.

hence having sex with an intoxicated anyone is rape. What is the difference between "drunk" and "inebriated" since you say you are talking about being drunk, not inebriated and to me they mean the same thing.

As far as mutilation and people objecting or laughing at a man or woman being mutilated by an angry parent, I don't think they are laughing/objecting due to women being "physically and intellectually weaker than men".

I do think there is sexism here, just not in those examples. In the example of the castrated man, I think people are going "ouch" due to thinking of it happening to themselves.

[uppityperson]

6. let's see if this one shows in "my du" or if replying to bug reply doesn't

[ZombieHorde]

15. No doubt, something is wrong today. nt

[TexasObserver]

8. So, according to you, when two drunk adults have sex they're both rapists?

That seems to be what you said.

[uppityperson]

12. Yes. It may seem odd, but yes. Being intoxicated means they cannot give legal consent.

Not "according to you" but to the law.

[Xicano]

28. I would ask: To what law do you refer to?

Not being a smart ass or anything, just curious to read it.

[lonestarnot]

36. Prollee to the one that voids any contracted signed while under the influence.

[TexasObserver]

37. Then you should be able to cite the statute which makes it so.

Maybe it's the law and maybe you just think it's the law.

Each state has its own laws regarding rape and consent.

Why don't you provide the state statute which makes it rape if two adults who are drunk have sex?

[uppityperson]

47. I'm not an attorney. Maybe you could contact one to find the specific law?

Here some are links to those who may be able to give you the exact law.
http://www.sdcda.org/helping/prevent-rape/index.html
http://www.knowtheprice.org/resources/faqs.html

http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2010/02/25/25295/

(clip)The first question is simple to answer from the perspective of current American law: Rape exists whenever either party was incapable of giving consent. But what if neither party regrets the encounter? Or what if they both regret the sex but choose to forget the subject entirely?

Under American law, rape is a criminal matter: It is an offense against the people and is prosecuted by district attorneys, and victims can be legally summoned to appear in court to testify that they were raped. Whenever notice of rape reaches a district attorney or police officer, the state can decide, unilaterally, to prosecute. The victim can be compelled to testify under threat of subpoena, even if the victim doesn’t think any rape occurred. So this situation is, at law, a crime. But of course, if both parties choose to forget the subject, nobody will ever know.

As to who raped whom: This is much more complicated. There are 50 different answers, one for each American state. Some crimes require both actus reus (the deed) and mens rea (“guilty mind”). Mens rea requirements for rape differ by jurisdiction. In some states, rape is a crime of strict liability, and the non-consensual sex itself is sufficient to establish rape. So in some states — as Katie Rodriguez ’11, Avital Ludomirsky ’11, Amanda Yamasaki ’11 and Jillian Hewitt ’11 said in their response column to Neagu — whoever initiates the sex — guy or girl –— is responsible for the rape. But besides these strict-liability jurisdictions, some American states also require intent to commit sex with knowledge that the conditions for rape existed: So, in theory, a very drunk person could mount a legal defense that he or she did not realize that the other party was also too drunk to give legal consent. This could be grounds for acquittal....(more)

http://www.sexlaws.org/what_is_sexual_assault
http://www.sexlaws.org/node/10/print

Physical contact is "unwanted" if the victim did not legally consent to such contact. Saying "No!" clearly demonstrates a lack of consent. However, someone doesn't necessarily have to say "No!" nor physically object to demonstrate this lack of consent. While it does vary from state-to-state, in many states, if the person is intoxicated, he/she is incapable of giving legal consent to such contact.
Sexual contact with an intoxicated person then becomes sexual assault, regardless of what type of intoxicating substance the victim was under the influence (e.g., alcohol, narcotics, "date-rape" drug). If you think that you may have been the victim of a sexual assault, you are urged to call the police immediately. Please visit our answer board; you may find pertinent information on laws in your State.

http://www.sexlaws.org/answer_board_question-17_and_intoxicated

State:
California
Question:
My 17 year old daughter recently got drunk and had sex with a 19 year old boy. She had been kissing him, then passed out and came to with him on top of her. She told him to stop and he did. Does this qualify as rape. If so, should we take further action or should both of the kids be held equally responsible for their actions?

Answer:
In California, a person cannot consent to sexual activity while intoxicated. This would be treated as a forcible rape case, a felony.

Also, it is illegal for a 19 year old to have intercourse with a 17 year old, regardless of intoxication.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informed_consent

Informed consent is a phrase often used in law to indicate that the consent a person gives meets certain minimum standards. As a literal matter, in the absence of fraud, it is redundant. An informed consent can be said to have been given based upon a clear appreciation and understanding of the facts, implications, and future consequences of an action. In order to give informed consent, the individual concerned must have adequate reasoning faculties and be in possession of all relevant facts at the time consent is given. Impairments to reasoning and judgment which may make it impossible for someone to give informed consent include such factors as basic intellectual or emotional immaturity, high levels of stress such as PTSD or as severe mental retardation, severe mental illness, intoxication, severe sleep deprivation, Alzheimer's disease, or being in a coma.

[TexasObserver]

50. When an adult couple is arrested for raping each other, it will be a first.

Every week, every night, all over America, drunk adults have consensual sex.

The blanket statement "a drunk person cannot give consent to have sex" is simply not true in most jurisdictions. A drunk person can give consent, and they do all the time. If you're drunk and you allow another drunk person to operate your car, and they kill someone, guess what? Your drunken decision makes you responsible for their harmful action.

It's a jury question as to whether the consent was given. Obviously, a passed out person cannot give consent, but a drunk person can give consent to sex.

I'd love to see a real case where a man and woman were prosecuted for raping each other by having drunk sex. To my knowledge, there's never been one. Two minors can be charged with having sex illegally, and have been, but two drunk adults charged with raping each other? Never once heard of it. If you have, I'd love to hear all the details.

It's a misstatement to claim a drunk adult cannot give consent to sex. They can and do every night of the week in every city in America. It's up to each jury to decide if the facts in their particular case establish consent, and the extent to which one or both parties are drunk is merely one factor in that decision.

[uppityperson]

51. I doubt it would happen, a lawsuit like that, but it could.

I give you info to find out what you want, specific laws. If I were an attorney or trained in the law, I'd let you know directly, but alas, I am not. I am only a nurse who has worked with raped women and women's shelters.

Since I know what I have been told, and assumed my bosses were informed by a legal person, I can tell you what I know. I suggest to you that you reread my post above as it gives more information than I can, and some links of places/people to contact, including the3 San Diego County District Attorney.

Maybe they can help you.

Of COURSE drunk people have sex. However, according to what I have read and been told (see above) a drunk person is LEGALLY unable to give LEGAL consent. Whether or not any one files anything, whether or not it becomes a legal case is another thing.

It is a misstatement to claim a drunk adult can LEGALLY give consent to sex as LEGALLy, they can't. But they do. All the time.

[TexasObserver]

56. We're talking about criminal cases, not civil lawsuits.

As I've said, drunkeness is but one element to consider regarding consent.

Did the person consent? Depends on the facts, drunk or not.

[uppityperson]

57. Drunk people (men/women)are unable to legally consent to anything.

Start of this subthread. That is what I wrote and I am sticking to. If you disagree, I'd suggest you contact a lawyer. I've given you links, including San Diego District Attorney. Good luck.

[TexasObserver]

62. That is simply incorrect.

I am a lawyer. That's why I know you're misinformed.

That's why I asked you to cite statutes or case law.

There are 50 states. I asked you to cite controlling law from any one of them which is consistent with your claim that drunk adults cannot consent to sex and that sex with such a person is rape. You have not done so. There may be such a state, but I'd have to read their statute and/or court holdings to see it for myself. Find statutes or cases, and I'll read them. I'm not interested in what an advocacy site says. That's not law. That's advocacy.

[darkstar3]

64. A point of clarity:

There's a big difference between "anything", which uppityperson said above, and sex.

It IS true regarding cases of contractual law that people under the influence cannot consent. While IANAL, I do have examples: You cannot consent to a tattoo while intoxicated (learned from my artist). You cannot consent to close on a house while intoxicated (learned from my loan officer). In fact, as far as I am aware in my state, you cannot sign any contract while visibly under the influence.

The laws of our patriarchal system most definitely do NOT include protection regarding sex and consent. However, I think with the above examples of consent requirements, it is reasonable for people to advocate for this "no consent while under the influence" rule to apply to sex.

[uppityperson]

66. Can't sign a consent to surgery either.

There is a big difference between "anything" and sex. And there is a big difference between "legally consent" and "consent". I bet you can legally consent to walking down the street, unless you are way intoxicated. Maybe you can consent to taking a nap, or drinking a cup of coffee also.

But as far as things that have "legal consent", then no, you can't consent legally while you are drunk. Probably SOMETHING you can, but "legally" not sex, not surgery, not closing a house, not getting a tattoo.

[Name removed]

65. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[guitar man]

70. Every week, every night, all over America, drunk adults have consensual sex.

Exactly.... And many of us probably wouldn't be here if they didn't ! :silly: :D

[uppityperson]

78. Well bully for your parents. Of course we do. Just need to be careful

because of what could happen. Rather like wearing a seat belt. People all over drive without wearing one and don't get into accidents. But be aware that you could, like be aware that someone COULD claim rape if they were drunk. That is my point.

I think another poster put it better than me, to be aware that it is a possibility, be aware of whom you have having sex with if alcohol or another drug is involved.

[TheKentuckian]

94. I think you have a skewed interpretation that should be rebuked.

You have just painted a scenario where if I decide I'm going to get drunk and go out and get some that either we are raping each other (logically resembling impossible) or that if she isn't drunk that she is a rapist and I am an accessory to rape because I intentionally got fucked up and wanted to go out and have random sex?

If you can't handle your buzz then maybe you need to reevaluate your intake and/or choice of poison. I've said yes and no under all sorts of influence. I might drink to have an "excuse" for having sex with someone I wouldn't want to cop to sober but never someone I wouldn't sleep with if it was a "nobody knows, nobody knows".

I dispute the very nature of intoxication you describe (minus some very specific and/or extreme situations). Generally, it is exposing the true character rather than replacing it with a will o the wind.

The "wouldn't sleep with sober" line of thinking doesn't wash with many years of experience and observation as well as conversation with those whom we can keep it real with.

Your mileage may vary but I'll tell ya that I honestly believe your logic is busted and rather extremist.

[uppityperson]

98. Have you ever driven and come across a stop sign and no cars around?

If not in town, even in the country. Driving down a country road, no other traffic for miles and miles and there is a stop sign. If you don't stop, you legally have broken the law. However, I doubt a trooper will come tearing out of nowhere and ticket you.

What I meant is the same sort of thing. Since legally people cannot legally consent legally to things while drunk, legally it could be considered rape. Of course many have sex while drunk and or course most cases would be laughed out of court as frivolous. However, like running that stop sign, legally is different than practicality.

You cannot legally sign legal documents while drunk as you cannot give legal consent while drunk. Same with consent for sex. Doesn't mean it can't or shouldn't or doesn't happen, just be aware that it could get you into trouble.

[The Straight Story]

10. Does that include a sobriety test?

:evilgrin:

[ZombieHorde]

16. Drunk is not safe to drive, inebriated is not safe to walk.

I don't think they are laughing/objecting due to women being "physically and intellectually weaker than men".

We don't mock women or children who are mutilated, but we do sometimes mock men who are mutilated. I think, in some cases, women who are mutilated are not teased for the same reason children who are mutilated are not teased.

[Occam Bandage]

7. I do. The ones under 18, at any rate. nt

[ZombieHorde]

17. I call them girls, as opposed to women, but I do appreciate a smart ass. ;) nt

[Warren DeMontague]

9. Oh, boy.

I'll say this; if every time someone who is drunk has sex it is "rape", there is a ridiculous amount of rape going on.

[ZombieHorde]

19. My wife and sometimes share a bottle of wine and have fun.

I feel we are being perfectly ethical.

[blondeatlast]

22. Between committed partners I can see some degree of implied consent (morally as well as legally).

With a lack of commitment, however, it's anybody's guess. No prude am I, not at all, but it's that sort of situation that makes this newly single-again woman shy very much away from quick encounters.

There's simply no way to know what you'll find when you wake up whether you started out impaired or perfectly sober.

People, in general, are just a little nuts anymore. I suppose I strayed off-topic a bit--mea culpa.

[apocalypsehow]

24. Yep - 99% of the student body, male & female, at my alma mater, for starters. n/t.

[LanternWaste]

18. I imagine we often infer only those things that validate our opinions...

In example one, you appear to conflate sexism with a visceral reaction to the punishment received rather than the crime itself. For myself, I see those two things as wholly separate concepts... one not being predicated on the other.

In example two ("having sex with an intoxicated woman is rape..."), I have seen the converse argued also (and more than rarely)-- taking advantage of an intoxicated male is also rape.


A funny thing about insults is that if we look hard enough, we may find them anywhere... even in places where they do not exist. I imagine we often infer only those things that validate our opinions, and rarely infer those things which do not.

[Liquorice]

23. When you say "some liberals," do you mean some liberal men or are women included? It's not

just some liberals who have the attitude that having sex with an intoxicated woman is wrong, or who would think castrating that man would not be the same as castrating a woman for the same actions. Where you go wrong is in thinking it's a reflection on the attitudes about women. It's a reflection about the attitudes regarding men. Men rape, men do most murders, most crimes, etc. Women do commit crimes, but it's a small fraction of the crimes men commit. Men are seen as the pursuers and aggressors, and they usually are.

[ZombieHorde]

27. Are you saying some people feel mocking men is more OK because men are the cause of

most of the world's horrors? If so, that is an interesting alternative point of view.

[Liquorice]

31. No I'm not saying that. I'm saying that men are the aggressors in most

crime, including the overwhelming majority of violent crimes committed against women. So it makes sense that many people would hold the view that a man should not try having sex with a woman who is wasted on drugs or alcohol, and also hold views like the other examples you mentioned. It has nothing to do with how women are viewed, and everything to do with how men are viewed. I have never known anyone who sees women as children.

[Nikia]

25. Some men use alcohol as a rape drug

They use alcohol for the sole purpose of getting women to have sex with them. They don't believe that she'd have sex with them otherwise and are often correct. I believe that this behavior isn't only legally wrong but also morally wrong. I tend not to drink with men who believe that this is alright because in my eyes they are potential rapists. Almost all case where a man is prosecuted for rape due to the other party being intoxicated, there are moer than a couple of drinks involved.

[ZombieHorde]

30. I feel like I am still in control of my sexuality when I drink.

If I cheated on my wife while I was drunk, I would still feel completely reasonable for my actions.

Do you feel in control of your sexuality when you drink? Or are you talking about being barely conscious? If a woman is barely conscious, then I understand your point of view.

[Hello_Kitty]

43. Your experience isn't universally applicable. eom

[ZombieHorde]

44. You make a good point. Some humans may have a will which is easily conquered by alcohol, but

I don't think we should just assume women have a weak will. Many women have a strong will.

[Hello_Kitty]

46. I'm not really liking your rhetoric here. eom

[ZombieHorde]

49. I am trying to clearly state my interpretation of the replies I am reading.

If my interpretation is inaccurate, please correct it.

[darkstar3]

26. You put both feet in it with your second example.

Firstly, you're making an assumption about what I would and would not consider rape. Secondly, NO ONE is able to control themselves properly under the influence of alcohol or other drugs. There's a reason we tell school-age children that alcohol lowers inhibitions. We don't just tell this to the girls to protect them, do we? No, we tell it to all the kids, because they are ALL susceptible to this problem.

As pointed out elsewhere in this thread, alcohol is often used as a date-rape drug, sometimes separately, sometimes in conjunction with other drugs.

I will never change my opinion on this: If they won't fuck you sober, it's rape.

[ZombieHorde]

38. "If they won't fuck you sober, it's rape."

OK, that is probably a solid rule, but it is very different than claiming all drunk sex with a woman is rape. You made a concrete distinction which allows an established couple to enjoy drinks before they enjoy each other.

As pointed out elsewhere in this thread, alcohol is often used as a date-rape drug, sometimes separately, sometimes in conjunction with other drugs.

I completely agree with the claim some drunk sex is rape. I understand some men push alcohol on women so they can take advantage of them. I have a daughter, and I think about this.

eta: If both the man and the woman would not have had sex with each other when they were sober, did they rape each other?

[darkstar3]

45. Internal consistency would dictate "yes".

I don't know that you could prosecute it legally, but from a strictly consent-based point of view, sex was had without consent given.

(Of course, that's assuming we follow my rule from before and call that "consent". You probably get the idea.)

It's a tough rule that I've chosen, because it definitely puts a ton of one-night-stands into the rape column, but I don't care. Not only has it saved friendships on past nights of drunken revelry, it draws a clear line regarding consent and alcohol. If you think they wouldn't fuck you sober, you shouldn't fuck them. A night's lack of sex is better than a lifetime of guilt and possible legal repercussions.

[ZombieHorde]

48. Pretty much any rule about human behavior is going to have some weird exceptions, but I think your

rule is good.

it definitely puts a ton of one-night-stands into the rape column

I think this exception could be added, if neither party regrets the sex, then the sex was not rape. If two people get drunk at a party, and have sex they would not have otherwise had, but then they both decided it was fun when they sobered up, then no problem. What do you think about this exception?

[darkstar3]

53. "if neither party regrets the sex, then the sex was not rape."

It's an interesting caveat, I must admit, but it could also be a dangerous thing if applied in reverse. What if one party wakes up the next morning after completely sober and consensual sex and regrets their decision?

I'm sure we've all made "informed consent" decisions that we regretted later. With that, I'm not sure I like your exception.

[ZombieHorde]

58. Would the caveat have to be applied in reverse?

We punish lawbreakers, but we don't reward those who don't break the law.

[darkstar3]

60. You're not talking about a law,

but about an exception. If a decent study of jurisprudence should show you anything, it's that exceptions and interpretations can cut both ways very quickly.

[ZombieHorde]

67. God dammit, I thought I had a wicked point.

I concede your argument, for now. :hi:

[ZombieHorde]

83. If one's spouce gets drunk and has sex with someone outside of the marriage,

did the spouse cheat? Married victims of rape are not usually considered adulterers in modern day America.

[darkstar3]

87. Tough to answer based on that small amount of information.

Under the rule I'm sticking to, I'd have to know more about the spouse who got drunk.

Would this spouse ever risk their marriage while sober?
Would this spouse have chosen sexual partner X while sober?

See why consent laws are so hard to write? Even a rule that you and I can agree on as "solid" is tricky to apply in the real world. The fact is, people can't read minds.

[ZombieHorde]

88. I agree human behavior is complex and varied.

I wish this subject was easy, but it is not.

[darkstar3]

89. It would be easier if people could separate

the ideas of sexuality and predator/prey.

It might help if people stop calling it "the hunt".

It might also help if people stop trying to be masters of "the game."

[lumberjack_jeff]

109. A person has the right to say no at any point... except afterwards. n/t

[uppityperson]

61. I am in agreement with you here.

It does put a lot of sex into the rape column and I can understand why others have a problem with this. However, it may never be prosecuted, but it is rape since a person is legally unable to consent while drunk. Most will never ever go to any sort of legal prosecution, but still, it was without legal consent.

Thanks for writing on this topic as you are able to put what I am thinking in a lot better way than I am.

[darkstar3]

63. Well, in order, thank you, and you're welcome.

[lumberjack_jeff]

86. How is she to know that I wouldn't have sex with her if I was sober? n/t

[bettyellen]

29. I think guys just have a sicker sense of humor about castration but also rape etc... I don;t think

anyone here thinks that this is more okay than mutilating a woman. I just think it's easier to joke about because it;s rarer.
And it seems like you're upset that more women aren;t prosecuted for rape or some such nonsense. I'm sure we would be if we were out in big numbers forcing ourselves on men and slipping them roofies or tripling up the vodkas in their punch to try and render them unconcious. The reason things seem skewed to you is because life is skewed, Men are bigger stronger and more aggressive. Don;t even try and blame women for being the less violent sex. It's bullshit.

[Liquorice]

32. I agree. nt

[ZombieHorde]

33. I don't think more women should be prosicuted for rape, I just don't think drunk sex

is automatically rape. Sometimes drunk sex is rape, sometimes it is not. Sometimes my wife and I drink and fool around, but I am not raping her.

[Lucian]

34. So when a drunk man and woman have sex...

who is at fault for rape? The man, or the woman? Or both?

[ZombieHorde]

40. I think each situation is different. In some situations, neither of them are rapists. nt

[undeterred]

35. I think Bill Maher is a sexist pig.

I know, that's not what you asked.

[ZombieHorde]

39. Some of his jokes about women don't seem like jokes.

He gets some great guests on his show, but he does seem sexist sometimes.

[undeterred]

42. He truly seems to believe that all women exist for the purpose

of providing him sexual pleasure. He doesn't seem to be capable of much on an interpersonal level.

[Skittles]

41. he is absolutely disgusting

[Odin2005]

55. You just HAD to dig up this topic, didn't you?

I thought this was flamed to death in the Seth Rogan rape scene thread. :eyes:

[ZombieHorde]

69. I think this tread has been mostly constructive, and many of the replies have been

thought provoking in my opinion.

[HEyHEY]

59. I'm sorry, I'm trying to understand this...

You're saying that women wouldn't be made fun if mutilated because they are seen as weaker than men? So, somehow this becomes the fault of men again? How about this, it's seen as okay to make fun of men because men are seen as something it is okay to ridicule due to the fact men accept it. Men don't stick together like women on this stuff, that's why. It has nothing to do with any sexist attitudes towards women.

[ZombieHorde]

68. I don't think women always stick together. I don't see a lot of

gender based loyalty here. Perhaps I am just blind to it?

[Jim__]

71. How do you think conservatives view women?

As fully empowered members of society? Is this a political viewpoint? Or more of a cultural viewpoint?

[ZombieHorde]

72. I think many conservatives view women as designed by God to be inferior.

Not all conservatives, but many.

[Jim__]

73. I'm not clear on how your observation pertains to liberals, as liberals.

I think it is a cultural view that is common to some liberals and some conservatives.

[ZombieHorde]

75. I grew up Roman Catholic, so that is the religous group I pick on the most.

Yes, many Mormons are homophobic, but I am not as familiar with them as I am with Catholics.

I spend less than 1 hour per month on FR, I spend a couple of hours each day on DU. If you wish to attribute different types of sexism to different groups, I won't stop you.

[okieinpain]

74. "thoughtful", now that's funny.... n/t.

[lightningandsnow]

76. No. Regardless of gender, you cannot properly consent if you're impaired by drugs or alcohol.

I've never heard that it only applies to women. What I've always heard is that you should never sleep with someone under the influence of drugs or alcohol because it makes consent murky. There's a reason that BDSM play parties always have strict rules about no drugs and no alcohol. It's because, regardless of gender, sex and/or BDSM play under the influence breaches the SSC (safe, sane, consensual) or RACK (risk-aware consensual kink) ethos.

Sex or play under the influence is not safe because your judgement and motor skills are impaired in ways you are not aware of. (This is different from an ongoing deficit in these areas, where someone is aware of their limitations and able to compensate.)

It is not sane because your impaired judgement reduces your ability to look out for the emotional health of yourself and others.

It is not consensual because if you are impaired, you may give the impression of consenting to things that you may not otherwise. Consent is dubious in a chemically-altered state.

It is not about women being weaker than men. It's about being responsible. It's about being safe, sane, and consensual.

[ZombieHorde]

77. My wife and I sometimes have some drinks and then have some fun.

Do you think we are being unethical? Are we being irresponsible?

If a married man is intoxicated, and has sex with a sober woman other than his spouse, was he raped, or did he cheat? Rape victims are not cheaters.

[snooper2]

79. you ain't got no pancake mix

[ChairmanAgnostic]

80. Especially those under 18.

In my practice, I have, not infrequently, dealt with abused men. Their spouses take advantage of their reticence, their training, their unwillingness to ever raise a hand against their spouse

[caty]

81. After many years

I have figured out that men talk about women as though women were children to boost their male ego. Women, on the other hand, treat men like children because men also want to be taken care of in a motherly way by the women in their lives. Women are weaker physically, but are stronger emotionally than men. I know a lot of men who are more intellegent than some women, but I also know just as many women who are more intellegent than some men.

Women need more protection when it comes to men using their physical strength against them. But men need more help and attention when something affects them emotionally. Instead of using differences as weapons, we should use them to help each other.

[ZombieHorde]

82. "Instead of using differences as weapons, we should use them to help each other."

Very wise. I completely agree.

[DirkGently]

91. Nice. Can we not want to "take care" of each other without implying diminution?

We can all do for each other, in different ways, at different times. Sure, we can make that an ugly thing, about insinuating one person is weak and the other one is strong. Or we can just be nice to each other. Let me get that for you. I'll take care of that. I'd like to take you out tonight. No one's required to do it. No one's obliged to be grateful. We can just do it out of a genuine desire to be good to someone. There's not enough opportunity to do that as it is, without overburdening it with dark meaning that's only there if we make it so.

[ismnotwasm]

84. Here you go

http://www.mencanstoprape.org/

You're right about Liberals. They're no better than anybody else as far as sexism and sometimes a lot worse, but don't be putting down feminism until you understand what feminism is--to this day I see terms like 'bra burner's' or 'feminazi' and other weird shit like that. A little historical to current perusal of history might help.

Women mutilating women happens every single day in the form of FGM, and I don't think that's funny either. It's done to make women chaste and apparently more sexually attractive.

[ZombieHorde]

85. I am hoping to take a women's study course at my university.

I have had the professor for a different class, and I think she is extremely intelligent and wise.

[DirkGently]

90. I disagree for the most part.

I agree regarding the mutilation. There's a situation where a man is a sexual predator, and we speak of "cutting them off" with a certain degree of (primitive) justice. But the simple fact of a man being attacked and dismemembered isn't any "funnier" or less tragic than a woman being attacked and hurt.

Intoxicated sex is different, because the differences between men and women in that regard are real, in my opinion.

Sure, there's an old patriarchal theme regarding men besmirching the virtue of women, who are (or were) presumed to resist any kind of sexual advance outside of marriage, that is inaccurate.

And I would agree that people, male or female, who have drunken sex, are having drunken sex, and share any blame to be had.

But there are differences between men and women, physically and socially, that we can't pretend aren't there. For one, it is difficult-to-impossible for a women to force sex on an unconscious, inert, or mostly unaware man.

The reverse is not true, and not only are men aware of this, but there is an age-old tradition of men taking advantage of this fact, and either raping a drunken women, after which her intoxication is held against her as evidence of consent, or blurring the line between consent and rape with a woman who is near enough to incoherence that it isn't clear what she wants or whether she is resisting. This is (and I plagiarize my response in another thread) the basic theory behind frat parties.

The fact is that male-female anatomy make it possible for a man to "force the issue" of sex where the circumstances make consent unclear, or will make evidence of consent or lack of consent unclear later, whereas the likelihood of a woman forcing a man who is too intoxicated to communicate or resist into sex is very low.

It is also a fact that despite all social equality, whether due to culture or biology, or the anatomical realities of how heterosexual incourse works mechanically, women are not nearly as frequent sexual attackers / molesters of men as men are of women.

I think it would be unreasonable to assume that social equality means that men are not somehow a greater threat of sexual violence in any ambiguous situation than women are. Women simply do not "take" sex from men by force with any frequency, whatever the reason, so I don't think it's patronizing that we act as though they at greater risk of being raped when both parties are drunk.

They are.

Just my take.

[ZombieHorde]

95. Not all sex is male + female. Some is male + male, or female + female, etc.

No one is claiming men and women are of equal risk.

I am claiming equal intellectual ability.

[DirkGently]

97. Don't disagree with that. But male + female + booze = more threat to the woman.

[ZombieHorde]

100. Are you saying women are intellectually inferior to men? nt

[DirkGently]

101. What does intellectual capacity have to do with rape?

[ZombieHorde]

110. The ability to consent comes from the mind. nt

[Sparkly]

92. These neat reversals never work for me.

There are important PHYSICAL differences in the sexual experience for men and for women,
AND,
There are important CULTURAL differences in the sexual experience for men and for women.

Those two issues alone make a simple reversal invalid, imho.

[ZombieHorde]

96. I am not reversing anything other than the opinion men are intellectually superior to women. nt

[Sparkly]

99. No, you are using "reversal" as a test of gender bias.

"If we don't view it this way for women, is it fair to view it this way for men?"
"If we don't view it this way for men, is it fair to view it this way for women?"

That kind of thing.

It doesn't work, in my opinion, because the gender bias is inherent in our culture (not to mention our physiology). In a vacuum, it would make sense; but we don't live in a vacuum. In an ideal, fair, even, everything-the-same world, it would make sense; but that's not what we're dealing with.

So to me, there's no simple reversal when it comes to these questions of rape-while-intoxicated.

Similarly (and very controversially on DU), I don't think there's a simple equation of reversal on the question of female teachers with high school boys, vs. male teachers with high school girls. It is not exactly the same.

[DirkGently]

103. Yes. Moreover, equality is not sameness.

Men and women are deserving of equal respect, consideration, and regard. But they are not the same. The number of men raped by women is miniscule. The number of women raped or otherwise sexually assaulted by men is enormous, and that is the case in most human cultures and always has been. It is not bias, but fact that causes people to regard a woman, intoxicated or otherwise, to be exponentially greater risk of sexual assault by a man than the other way around, and it's certainly not because men are superior in some way.

[ZombieHorde]

106. There is nothing in our culture and there is nothing in a women's physiology which makes her

less competent than men at giving consent.

Similarly (and very controversially on DU), I don't think there's a simple equation of reversal on the question of female teachers with high school boys, vs. male teachers with high school girls. It is not exactly the same.

Well there is fun OP. If you make one, PLEASE send me a pm with a link.

[Sparkly]

107. "less competent than men" -- of course not.

And who is saying that in ALL cases where a woman has had ANY alcohol sex with her MUST be rape? Come on.

About the "fun OP," I've argued this many times here. As I said, it's not a popular opinion. :)

[ZombieHorde]

111. You have not seen the claim, if she's drunk, it's rape?

If people did not mean it, me posts on this subject would be controversial.

[lumberjack_jeff]

108. If the genders are not interchangeable, they are not equal.

If the line between drunk sex and rape depends on the gender of the victim, then one of the genders is less capable of rational and prudent self-determination.

Physical strength has nothing to do with the topic. There is no force involved, just poor judgment and post-facto regret.

[DirkGently]

102. The poster is correct. No neat reversal is possible here. Rape is not an intellectual contest.

There's nothing patronizing about the notion that when men and women get drunk, the women, and not the men, tend to get raped. Or assaulted. Or nearly raped. There are reasons for this, but they don't include any intellectual superiority on the part of men. Women generally don't rape men, and groggy and unconscious men generally can't be raped by women. Basic anatomy allows a man to force himself on a woman who has a reduced capacity to consent or to fight back.

The fact that this is something men do to women and not the other way around has zero to do with anyone's intellect, and if any superiority is to be inferred, it's in favor of the women.

Edit: I see on further review that your premise includes (an argument against) the idea that sex with an intoxicated woman is always rape. I'd agree that's unsupportable. An intoxicated woman is much more likely to be raped than an intoxicated man, but an intoxicated woman can certainly consent to sex.

[ZombieHorde]

104. Your edit is what I am talking about. We both seem to agree on this subject.

I also agree many women are raped by men while drinking.

[DirkGently]

105. Sorry, maybe I missed the point at the jump. I wouldn't assume sex with a drunken woman must be rape

My point was only that there is a legitimate basis for greater concern that a man would exploit a woman's intoxication to assault her.