Skip to main content

clipart of the Scales of Justice
The Steubenville, Ohio rape trial is over and both boys were found guilty. News reports of some of the testimony on Saturday really ticked me off. It is real simple guys, if the girl is shitfaced drunk she can't give consent for sex - period. Taking advantage of a woman who is drunk is rape. It also makes you a coward since you have to have her intoxicated to get your jollies.

Here's a bit of the report that pissed me off:

She said she believed she was assaulted when she later read text messages among friends and saw a photo of herself and a video made that night. She said she suspected she had been drugged because she couldn't explain being as intoxicated as defense witnesses have said she was.

Earlier Saturday, defense attorneys went after the character and credibility of the alleged victim, calling witnesses to the stand to accommodate their schedule, although the prosecution had not yet rested. Two former friends of the girl testified that the accuser had a history of drinking heavily and was known to lie about things.

West Virginia high school student Kelsey Weaver said the accuser told her what happened two days after the alleged attack then, sometime afterward, told Weaver she couldn't remember what happened.

"So two different versions?" asked Mays' attorney Adam Nemann.

"Yes," Weaver replied.

Earlier, Weaver testified that the accuser was flirting at the party with Richmond.

Both Weaver and schoolmate Gianna Anile testified they were angry at the accuser because she was drinking heavily at the party and rolling around on the floor. They said they tried unsuccessfully to get her to stop drinking.

Anile said she also tried to get her friend to stay at the party rather than leave with others, including the two defendants.

"When I told her not to leave, I was trying to, like, pull her back into the party. She was trying to shrug me off," Anile testified. "She kind of hit me."

Ohio school rape trial ends; verdict to be Sunday

First of all what kind of "friends" did the victim have? They knew she was in trouble and didn’t do enough to help her. I don’t care if she hit you, she wasn't right in the head. As for the accusation of lying, there are pictures and video that she was assaulted while passed out. How could she lie about that?

I get sick and tired of rape defenses that attack the character of the victim. Why does the woman have to be stone cold sober, not dress sexy, not flirt…. and on and on. Why can't the boys and men just leave a woman alone and not try to take advantage of her, espeically when she is intoxicated or passed out.

It is dead simple guys, if she is drunk off her ass she can’t give consent for sex – period. I don't care if she rips off her clothes, lies down with her legs wide open and begs you to have sex, if she is drunk it is rape.

Imagine if you were extremely blotto and your best buddy used that to have you give him a blow job? You would feel violated and hurt.

This whole event is why teenagers shouldn’t be drinking in the first place and is a terrible lesson to learn for all the youngsters involved.

Update/clarification

Based on several comments let me say this:

It is clear I wasn't talking about "a couple of drinks..." Drunk in the whole context of the diary is pretty clear. If I was going to split hairs on the definition of "drunk" I would have written about that. If the woman is passed out or so drunk she would be arrested for DUI then it is common sense.

I would have concern even if the woman was just tipsy. There is also the other consideration if the woman and the man is in a relationship compared, like in the case, the woman is a stranger or not in a relationship with the man. But that is over thinking this. If a guy wants to ride that third rail then that is up to them but again if the girl is drunk then you are treading dangerous ground.

I am not anti-sex I am anti-stupid. Very rarely does alcohol and sex turn out well.

Again why does the woman have to behave a certain way why can't the men just leave her alone??



Originally published on Doug's Views

Originally posted to Doug's Views: DK Edition on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 12:06 PM PDT.

Also republished by Sex, Body, and Gender and Sluts.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Some say she was also drugged.... (15+ / 0-)

    Anonymous claims she was given a date rape drug. IF a woman cannot consent due to unconsciousness it is RAPE! If a woman cannot consent because she is debilitated by illness/injury/mental impairment it is RAPE! Unless a woman agrees to have sex it is RAPE!

    Eric Cantor can kiss my big old Missouri butt!

    by cyncynical on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 12:18:02 PM PDT

  •  Well (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JBNathan85, cryonaut, FrankRose
    It is dead simple guys, if she is drunk off her ass she can’t give consent for sex – period. I don't care if she rips off her clothes, lies down with her legs wide open and begs you to have sex, if she is drunk it is rape.
    Alot of people should lawyer up real quick then.




    Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us.
    ~ Jerry Garcia

    by DeadHead on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 12:22:29 PM PDT

    •  Or maybe they should fucking take (29+ / 0-)

      responsibility for where they put their penis? And behave decently?

      Most males/boys know this. But obviously some don't or believe the law doesn't apply to them.  Frankly, sex ed needs to come down hard on this subject, explicitly stating the law in that state on consent and impairment--and making it damned clear that if she's too drunk to drive, she can't consent to sex. And that there is no exception because you're a jock. There'd be a lot fewer date rapes if this were hammered home. Better they get hammerd in class than go to jail. Sadly, with abstinence only sex ed the norm in many school systems, this won't happen.

      Back in the 90s, Phil Donahue, the talk show host, did a show on this topic. His conclusion was that we need to teach our boys that "NO" means "NO" and that anything but a definite "YES" is a "NO".

      The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

      by irishwitch on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 12:29:34 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I was responding to the part of the diary (5+ / 0-)

        I quoted, not defending the actions of rapists.

        To say that anyone who is consumes alcohol to a point where they are intoxicated is incapable of giving consent, even as they "rip their own clothes off and beg to have sex" seemed a bit overboard.

        "Begging to have sex," as stated by the diarist in the context of the above quoted text, is consenting, is it not?

        I don't condone the behavior of these Steubenville criminals, or anyone else who rapes, any more than anyone else does.




        Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us.
        ~ Jerry Garcia

        by DeadHead on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 12:59:19 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Too drunk to drive? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        FrankRose

        If you're going to argue that being above the legal limit for operating a potentially deadly motor vehicle makes someone so horrendously impaired they can't even tell if they're willing to consent to sex or not, wouldn't that necessarily mean we can't prosecute someone for DUI because they didn't know what they were doing when they decided to get behind the wheel and drive? Sounds like an ironclad temporary insanity defense to me if that's how we're going to think about this.

        •  ugh. we prosecute people for DUI, even though (3+ / 0-)

          their judgement is impaired, because they put other people's lives at risk.

          Raping someone who has impaired judgement is harm being caused by someone else. Even if the rapist is drunk, they are accountable for harming someone else.

          How hard is it to simply accept the fact that one should be getting explicit, unimpaired consent before having sex?

          •  I'm guessing this post puts a severe (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Silvia Nightshade

            dent in the social prospects of some.

            "Til you're so fucking crazy you can't follow their rules" John Lennon - Working Class Hero

            by Horace Boothroyd III on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 06:08:01 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  You seem to be missing my point (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            FrankRose

            It is being argued that any legal impairment means you are no longer able to give consent. That would mean a couple drinks in most states. I don't know if you've ever been a little tipsy before, but since I'm not much of a drinker one glass of wine will do it for me, and I don't think that makes me unable to give consent. Arguing that being above the legal limit - which is nowhere near being so shitfaced you don't know which way is up - makes you completely incapable of consenting to sex is the same thing as saying you can't make decisions for yourself under those conditions. If you truly believe that and accept that as true, why would you find a drunk driver at fault? They didn't know what they were doing after all, right?

            If you really think someone should be vulnerable to criminal prosecution for rape because their partner had a couple glasses of wine beforehand, then I'm the victim of multiple rapes and should be seeking justice. And yeah, Horace, I get that this is the law in some places and some people are going to become victims of an overzealous prosecutor. I'm also arguing that's not how it should be. And I say this as a boring homebody who avoids parties where this becomes an issue, so I'm exceedingly unlikely to ever find myself in this position. I'm still flabbergasted by the position expressed by this diarist and some of the comments here. This went way overboard into prosecuting normal human social norms.

      •  In a state where sex ed is abstinence only, (3+ / 0-)

        I wish to Ceiling Cat, FSM and all the gods that would include:
        ABSTAIN FROM RAPE.

        If she's drunk, if she's stoned, if she's under 18, if she says no, if she says stop -- it's rape. Period.

        Too few women haven't got somebody to ask this on their behalf when they're being forced past "no."

        I was damn lucky, back in '79, that I did have somebody -- somebody big enough and bad enough to scare the guy who wasn't hearing me say no.

        LBJ, Lady Bird, Van Cliburn, Ike, Ann Richards, Barbara Jordan, Molly Ivins, Sully Sullenburger, Drew Brees: Texas is NO Bush League!

        by BlackSheep1 on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 06:59:05 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Stoned? (0+ / 0-)

          Seriously? Have you smoked marijuana before?

          •  I'm allergic to it. Causes migraines. (0+ / 0-)

            Can't even be around the stuff without literally blinding headaches.

            Do you deny that an impaired person cannot give consent to sex?

            LBJ, Lady Bird, Van Cliburn, Ike, Ann Richards, Barbara Jordan, Molly Ivins, Sully Sullenburger, Drew Brees: Texas is NO Bush League!

            by BlackSheep1 on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 07:17:20 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  *I* have, but I only smoked it with my husband. (0+ / 0-)

            AN fairly frequently in the distant 890s. And if you get stoned enough, horniness may accompany it (at leasy with me; I can't speak for any other woman)--but you may also be too stoned to consent. Hence the "only around my husband" part. One would hope someone wouldn't take advantage of someone stumbling stoned, any more than stumbling drunk.

            The first time I recall being stupidly stoned was ahving cramps and watching WKRP in Cincinatti--the "As God as my witness I thought turkey could fly" episode.  I laughed so ahrd I fell out of a queensize bed.  Turned out to be funny a year alter when I watched it sober.

            The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

            by irishwitch on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 08:28:24 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  If you truly think that sex while inebriated (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              JBNathan85

              constitutes rape, then it doesn't matter if it is your husband.

              If you truly think that sex while inebriated is rape, then if your husband had sex with another woman, would you support him as a rape victim, or would you divorce him as an adulterer?

              Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

              by FrankRose on Mon Mar 18, 2013 at 10:25:09 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  You're playign stupid games. (0+ / 0-)

                Worse, you know it.

                I knew that I smoked with my husband, sex mighr be the result, which is why we smoked with each other--not ther est of the known world.  It was ALWAYS consensual.  ANd never before we were married, did he get me drunk or stoned to get me into bed. He was an honorable man--you know that old-fashioned concept of honor which these two assholes lacked completely.  And if he'd slept with someone, divorce wouldn't have been an issue, because I knew all the same women he did, and he owuld have told me. It wasn't and isn't a dealbreaker for me--nor now, with my second husband whom I met and married after my first died. Oh, yeah, both played sports in high school--lacrosse, soccer and fencing for my first, football and track for my second--and neither of them would have gotten a girl drunk to get laid.

                On the rape charge--if someone had gotten my husband so drunk they were staggering and had ex with them, yes, it 0oculd be rape. And certainly if it a date rape drug. IN fact I know of one case that involved a submissive male who ws meeting two potential Dommes for the first time. He got up to go to the bathroom, leaving his drink there.  When he came back, he finished it, and started feeling really bad.  They suggested he come back to their place and lie down--they'd drove him back to his car in the morning.  He passed out, and came to for a couple of minuites to realize he was being beaten and sodomized with a large dildo, then passed out again. He wokr up the enxt morning with  heavy bruises on his back, legs and chests and a lot of pain.  THAT was rape. MEN can be raped too. Most won't report it however--because the police treat them evenb worse than female victims

                You see, they beleived honor and being a gentlemen. Oddly I knew a numbr of men like them.  I actually was there when one of the younger members of my SCA group who was borderline alcoholic, got herself plowed and and had propositioned  a guy. He carried her back to his tent, put her on the bed, then grabbed a spare sleeping mat from someone, plus a blanket and spent the night under the rain flap / porch thingie making sure no one else got a chance to take advantage ofher. Those ar ethe kind of men I know.

                The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

                by irishwitch on Mon Mar 18, 2013 at 01:12:40 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  If a person is unconscious it is rape. No one (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  JBNathan85

                  denies that.
                  However, if intoxication is the threshold for rape, then it is irrelevant if it is your husband. It is irrelevant if you gave consent before or after intoxication. If you cannot, legally, give consent to have sex while in an intoxicated state, then any and all sex while under the influence constitutes rape.

                  That being the case, if your husband, while being married to you, had some drinks and, while conscious, gave  consent (while intoxicated) to having sex with another woman, would you comfort him as if he were a rape victim, or would you divorce him as if he was an adultorer?

                  Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                  by FrankRose on Mon Mar 18, 2013 at 01:26:33 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Read the statute and weep. (0+ / 0-)

                    In quite a few states you'd find yourself charged with rape. Kansas and Ohio are two .

                    And stop with the personal insults.  I answered this.  You just didn't like my answers .And we're not talking about a few drinks. We're talking about the point where the bartender takes your keys and calls a cab. And yoiu fucking know that.

                    Don't bother responding unless for your personal satisfaction at showing how big an asshole you can be--because I won't be reading it. I have better things to do with my time.

                    The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

                    by irishwitch on Mon Mar 18, 2013 at 03:03:26 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  "personal insults"? Like what? Quote me. (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      JBNathan85

                      And you still haven't answered....if your husband gets drunk and has sex with another woman, would you consider him a rape victim or an adulterer?

                      Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                      by FrankRose on Mon Mar 18, 2013 at 04:20:33 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

    •  I wanted to scream "exactly"... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JBNathan85, FrankRose

      after seeing the title, but then came this circle of reasoning:

      Why does the woman have to be stone cold sober, not dress sexy, not flirt…. and on and on. Why can't the boys and men just leave a woman alone and not try to take advantage of her, espeically when she is intoxicated or passed out.
      So I have to ask the diarist, exactly at what alcohol level and what form of "go ahead" is needed before sex can begin?

      The more you learn the less you know.

      by quiet in NC on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 12:43:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Opt in (4+ / 0-)

        Men should assume the answer is "no," unless the woman says "yes."  

        Since alcohol is understood to impair judgement, the discussion about whether to have sex or not should happen before either party drinks any alcohol.

        •  If a woman has a glass of wine (5+ / 0-)

          and then decides she would like to have "fun",
          the man should say no to ?
          Any woman who has had a drink should be protected from the mistakes she is making ?

           

          Drop the name-calling MB 2/4/11 + Please try to use ratings properly! Kos 9/9/11

          by indycam on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 01:09:27 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Whaaaaaaaat? (4+ / 0-)
          the discussion about whether to have sex or not should happen before either party drinks any alcohol.
           I love my girlfriend and one of the reasons is because she is a living, human being who thinks, and walks, and talks at the same time.  Your suggestion here sounds like rules I can imagine might possibly exist in the Romney household.

          The more you learn the less you know.

          by quiet in NC on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 01:10:08 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I don't know what that means. Don't save (4+ / 0-)

            important decisions until after you've had a drink. Make the decision ahead of time.

            Seems sensible to me. If you haven't made the decision ahead of time, assume no and wait for another time to have sex.

            It's not like anyone is going to die if they don't have sex. Why is having sex so much more important than maintaining respectful relations?

            •  A respectful relationship (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              JBNathan85, FrankRose

              is different from a legal relationship, which is what I think is discussed here.  Also, what is respectful for one couple is prudish for another.  If a couple wants to enjoy a completely legal beverage or two and have completely legal consensual sex after the fact, it doesn't matter if that's not sensible to you.  

              Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

              by Mark Mywurtz on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 06:22:25 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Since user names don't necessarily connote gender (0+ / 0-)

                it is a bit hard to see who is arguing where the legal limit for consent should be.  I have a feeling that men and women have very different perspectives on this topic.  I've been reading how some don't understand why men can't restrain themselves when a women "rips her clothes off and begs for sex".  My guess is that response came from a woman.  Clearly that person doesn't have a clear understanding of male sexual response.  A male who has had a few too many doesn't necessarily have the capacity to restrain himself as he would sober.  The male sexual drive is strong and if a woman is considered impaired, the man is similarly impaired but likely in the opposite direction.  Men clearly should equally restrain himself in matters of drinking, the end result is not nearly as life changing as it can for a woman.  I'm not trying to excuse men from backing off when they can't get clear consent, all I'm saying is that both genders get impaired where alcohol is consumed and both genders need to be capable of being responsible.  Men are typically raised to be the sexually aggressive sex mostly because biology tends to cause the male of all species to "spread the seed" wherever possible.  The male human is no different than a male dog, horse or rat.  When it comes down to animal instinct, it is hard to fight millions of years of animal behavior.

                "War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength", George Orwell, "1984" -7.63 -5.95

                by dangoch on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 07:32:12 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  JESUS FUCK! (3+ / 0-)

                  Now all men are savage dogs and rats.  JESUS FUCK!  Maybe we all should just decide on the day of our marriage that we will engage in sex at this hour on this day in this year.  That way there is no surprises and everyone is happy happy happy forever and ever amen.

                  The more you learn the less you know.

                  by quiet in NC on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 07:42:49 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  bullshit. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  eru

                  Straight up bullshit.  It has nothing to do with biologically males being more aggressive and needing to spread their seed - it has everything to do with a culture that enables men to believe they have a RIGHT to sex because they want it and will take advantage of the weak and powerless to get it.

                  A man has every capacity to restrain himself if he chooses to - but in a society where about 3% of rapists have any real life consequences - he doesn't have to.

                  Not the same thing at all.

                  And we sail and we sail and we never see land, just the rum in the bottle and a pipe in my hand...

                  by Mortifyd on Mon Mar 18, 2013 at 05:02:52 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  May I ask you (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JBNathan85

          How many people do you think are going to sit down at the negotiating table prior to consuming alcohol?

          Your first sentence is absolutely true, but your second sentence is unrealistic.




          Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us.
          ~ Jerry Garcia

          by DeadHead on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 01:12:44 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Oh yeah, thats really going to happen in America (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JBNathan85, Dr Swig Mcjigger
          Since alcohol is understood to impair judgement, the discussion about whether to have sex or not should happen before either party drinks any alcohol.
          You don't get out much, do you

          Happy just to be alive

          by exlrrp on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 06:42:52 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  If you have to ask then you don't get it (2+ / 0-)

        It is pretty clear I wasn't talking about "a couple of drinks..."

        If the woman is passed out or so drunk she would be arrested for DUI then it is common sense.

        I would have concern even if the woman was just tippsy.

        Again why does the woman have to behave a certain way why can't the men just leave her alone??

        •  Those are two VERY different standards.... (4+ / 0-)

          ...and they absolutely should be.

          passed out or so drunk she would be arrested for DUI
          The current BAC required nationwide for a DUI, .08, is nowhere near "passed out" for most people. That is good, since the point at which you are considered legally unable to drive a vehicle that could kill other people should occur long before the point at which you are no longer able to remain conscious.

          But let's not pretend that someone beyond the point where they should be driving is the same as someone who is "passed out." I've been the former many, many times (one of the reasons I'm glad I live in a city with mass transit). I've been the latter maybe twice in my life.

          Whether or not someone who is beyond the legal limit to drive should be considered able to consent to sex is a matter I'm not qualified to decide, but let's at least be honest enough to draw a line between "shouldn't get behind the wheel of a car" (which, in my opinion, is still a bit too high at .08), and "passed out."

          "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." --Dom Helder Camara, archbishop of Recife

          by JamesGG on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 07:51:33 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  What if BOTH parties are drunk? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JBNathan85, NC Yankee, FrankRose

      I'm the plowman in the valley - with my face full of mud

      by labradog on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 05:34:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yes they should (0+ / 0-)

      "Til you're so fucking crazy you can't follow their rules" John Lennon - Working Class Hero

      by Horace Boothroyd III on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 05:39:21 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  that quote from the diary (0+ / 0-)

      is bogus.

  •  I see what you're getting at (11+ / 0-)

    but how drunk is drunk?  Is it the same as "drunk off your ass"?  If I have a girlfriend and she has 2 or 3 glasses of wine and is all over me, am I a rapist?  Depending on what definition you use, .08 BAC is drunk...I'm pretty sure you'll have a hard time convincing someone that at .08 BAC it's impossible to give consent.  

    Can a man give consent to a woman when he's drunk?  How about to another man?  

    What happened in Steubenville was the rape of a completely incoherent woman and actions that nobody capable of giving consent would ever consent to.  Your diary leaves open the possibility of labeling a rapist anyone who has ever had sex with someone who has been drinking.  

    Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

    by Mark Mywurtz on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 12:43:35 PM PDT

  •  I had a girlfriend who like to (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DeadHead, wilderness voice

    drink and have "fun" . She was more than just consenting .
    So a black and white rule does not work 100% of the time for everybody .

    I saved a girl from being raped , a low life was feeding her drinks to get her drunk , with bad intent . She would not have consented sober , she had a boyfriend and wasn't looking for another .

    Drop the name-calling MB 2/4/11 + Please try to use ratings properly! Kos 9/9/11

    by indycam on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 01:05:25 PM PDT

  •  Rape is a serious topic, and warrants serious... (9+ / 0-)

    discussion.
    This diary headline is unserious and reflexively anti-sex.

  •  Strictly speaking, this reasoning would (3+ / 0-)

    make me a serial rapist of the same woman at least once a year for the past 15 years. I'm pretty sure (absolutely effing positive) my wife has never felt like the victim of anything, so I think you need to allow for factors other than intoxication here.

    Furthermore, don't you have to also allow for the possibility that the man may be the one who's too drunk to consent?

    Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

    by NMDad on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 01:31:48 PM PDT

  •  Does This Apply The Other Way Around? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JBNathan85, FrankRose

    What if the guy is drunk and begging a woman to have sex with him and she is sober?

    Did she just rape him?

  •  It's common sense, guys. (8+ / 0-)

    The diarist is not talking about you and your girlfriend having some fun with booze and bootie.

    •  The diarist is under the misapprehension that (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      FrankRose

      "drunk enough to get a DUI" is anywhere near "passed out", and conflates the two.

      Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

      by Robobagpiper on Mon Mar 18, 2013 at 04:38:04 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Yup, when you can get a pocket breathalyzer (0+ / 0-)

    for $19.95 over the internet, there's no excuse for this to happen - always check first, it only takes a minute.  And only slightly dampens the mood.

    Just wondering, though, is the standard for "drunk" the same for this as for driving a car?

  •  If you are being serious (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Horace Boothroyd III, UnaSpenser

    about the sex with someone you love and are in a relationship with them then talking things over before either one gets drunk shouldn't be a problem.

    If all you want is to get your rocks off with the first drunk girl or guy  you find then you deserve any legal trouble you get just like the danger of catching an STD.

    I won't shed a tear for you.

    Most rational people try to avoid legal trouble and STDs.

    YMMV

  •  Shit-faced drunk is different than having a couple (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dopetron, yella dawg

    of drinks.  Shit-faced means there's no consent possible.  Would you rent an apartment, buy a car or do anything that needed consent when you are shit-faced which means you don't know what is going on around you or with the people you are with or with yourself.  Should someone be held responsible for what they drink, yes, but you need to know if  you have consent to have sex with anyone especially a person who is totally shit-faced which should say to you, no, there is no consent and can't be until he, she or whoever gets sober enough to give consent.  There was substantial evidence from witness and social media and the woman involved to justify a rape charge.

  •  Wow, MRA sure is all over this diary. (2+ / 1-)
    Recommended by:
    Horace Boothroyd III, Derfel
    Hidden by:
    Mark Mywurtz

    I feel sorry for you diarist, apparently they picked your diary as their latest target.

    "I don't want a unicorn. I want a fucking pegasus. And I want it to carry a flaming sword." -mahakali overdrive

    by Silvia Nightshade on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 04:35:39 PM PDT

    •  I'll HR that (5+ / 0-)

      The diary is an apparent attempt to define rape based on intoxication, but the diarist has not only not been clear about what intoxication actually is--because it's not always cut and dried--but he has actually found a need to clarify himself in an update.  Not to mention, he has chastised commenters and stated that people involved in consensual sexual relationships deserve STDs and rape charges.

      There is plenty to disagree with or expect clarification of here.  If you write a diary with this many holes that demonizes people for fairly common behavior, such as hooking up at a bar, you open yourself up for questions.  

      But then you come along and sling "MRA" at those of us who think the diarist has made his point pretty weakly.  Suggesting that anyone on this comment thread is "pro-rape" or that anyone here is targeting the diarist is a crock of shit.  There is nothing helpful about the diarist defining decidedly consensual behavior as rape just as there is nothing helpful about you insinuating that anyone who questions that is a rape apologist.  Good grief.  If you want my opinions on rape in general, you can peruse my comments since the Steubenville incident.  

      I suspect you'll have a hard time slinging around "MRA" so easily if you do.  

      Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

      by Mark Mywurtz on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 04:59:58 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Why are you HRing? (3+ / 0-)

        Disagreement is not a reason to HR.

        And the law is clear about intoxication and consent. If someone is intoxicated consent can NOT be granted. There is no wiggle room. There is no grey area.

        Despite the wishes of many commenters.

        "Til you're so fucking crazy you can't follow their rules" John Lennon - Working Class Hero

        by Horace Boothroyd III on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 05:53:08 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Disagreement, no (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JBNathan85, cryonaut

          But calling those of us who question this diary "the MRA" is definitely HRable.  

          The law may be clear, but this diary isn't.  

          I don't think anyone "wishes" for gray area.  Just like I hope you don't want clearly consensual behavior--like having sex wanted by both parties after a few drinks--to put someone at risk of conviction.  

          Again, I HRed for the nasty comment suggesting a bunch of us here are rape apologists and I take issue with the diary because the diarist attempts to define rape based on intoxication but does little to clear up what "intoxication" is....and that matters.  

          Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

          by Mark Mywurtz on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 06:04:34 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Since so many of us have been raped (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            UnaSpenser

            I think a little over caution is in order.

            "Til you're so fucking crazy you can't follow their rules" John Lennon - Working Class Hero

            by Horace Boothroyd III on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 06:14:15 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I guess this would qualify as caution: (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              cryonaut, DeadHead, FrankRose
              I don't care if she rips off her clothes, lies down with her legs wide open and begs you to have sex, if she is drunk it is rape.

              Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

              by Mark Mywurtz on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 06:16:26 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Exactly. With the neurological effects of alcohol (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                UnaSpenser

                impairing judgement, making ones senses go into overload their brain may not even remember the event. Having sex with them would not be consensual in any sense of the word.

                 What you describe is clearly impairment.

                "Til you're so fucking crazy you can't follow their rules" John Lennon - Working Class Hero

                by Horace Boothroyd III on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 06:22:23 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  It is? (4+ / 0-)

                  I am interested to find out:  At what point between a sip of beer and complete blackout is a person drunk enough to be impaired and incapable of consent?  I think I could see it, I think you could see it, but apparently a lot of people can't or won't.  

                  Am I incapable of consent after one beer?  Three?  Twelve?  What if I'm giggling a lot?  Slurring?  Stumbling?  

                  I know I'm going to get a bunch of crap, but if you're saying that sex with a drunk person is rape as both you and the diarist clearly are, you should be able to say what "drunk" is.  I'm guessing it isn't a beer.  I'm guessing it isn't .08.  But I'm sure not clear on what it IS.  

                  Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

                  by Mark Mywurtz on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 06:33:26 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Are you a doctor? (0+ / 0-)

                    Why are you raising the strawman of levels of intoxication?

                    There is no way we can tell those that may rape someone that is drunk to verify levels of inebriation.

                    That is ridiculous.

                    We tell them if alcohol or drugs are involved consent can not be obtained.

                    Safe, Sensible, and Logical.

                    As well as legal because the law considers any alcohol in their system in the case of rape as intoxication.

                    "Til you're so fucking crazy you can't follow their rules" John Lennon - Working Class Hero

                    by Horace Boothroyd III on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 06:38:34 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Strawman? (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      JBNathan85, melfunction, FrankRose

                      That's real world, Horace.  People have sex at every level of intoxication, from a single sip to blackout.  Your apparent position is that if I have sex after a single sip of alcohol, I've been raped.  

                      If that isn't an accurate assessment of your position, you sure aren't willing to be more specific than that.  If that IS your position, I consider that just as ridiculous as verifying inebriation levels.

                      Your last sentence is a little weasel-y.  You state:  

                      As well as legal because the law considers any alcohol in their system in the case of rape as intoxication.
                      But it DOESN'T consider any alcohol in the system in the case of SEX to be RAPE.  Your statement implies that some other standard of rape has been met.  

                      ANY sex that occurs after a single drop of alcohol is sex.  Got it.  That's sensible and logical.  

                      Courts will be very busy.  

                      Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

                      by Mark Mywurtz on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 06:48:36 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  Mouthwash (0+ / 0-)

                      "We tell them if alcohol or drugs are involved consent can not be obtained.

                      Safe, Sensible, and Logical.

                      As well as legal because the law considers any alcohol in their system in the case of rape as intoxication."

                      This would then apply to mouthwash then too since it has alcohol in it.

                      Now you can't rinse out your mouth before sex or you are a rapist.

                      •  Do you drink the mouthwash? (0+ / 0-)

                        You could get more alcohol from a brown banana if you just rinse.

                        "Til you're so fucking crazy you can't follow their rules" John Lennon - Working Class Hero

                        by Horace Boothroyd III on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 06:59:10 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  It's on your breath (0+ / 0-)

                          This was clearly illustrated in a study conducted with Listerine mouthwash on a breath machine and reported in an article entitled "Field Sobriety Testing: Intoxilyzers and Listerine Antiseptic" published in the July 1985 issue of The Police Chief (p. 70). Seven individuals were tested at a police station, with readings of 0.00%. Each then rinsed his mouth with 20 milliliters of Listerine mouthwash for 30 seconds in accordance with directions on the label. All seven were then tested on the machine at intervals of one, three, five and ten minutes. The results indicated an average reading of 0.43 blood-alcohol concentration,

                          •  Continued (0+ / 0-)

                            indicating a level that, if accurate, approaches lethal proportions. After three minutes, the average level was still 0.020, despite the absence of any alcohol in the system. Even after five minutes, the average level was 0.011.

                            In another study, reported in 8(22) Drinking/Driving Law Letter 1, a scientist tested the effects of Binaca breath spray on an Intoxilyzer 5000. He performed 23 tests with subjects who sprayed their throats and obtained readings as high as 0.81—far beyond lethal levels. The scientist also noted that the effects of the spray did not fall below detectable levels until after 18 minutes.

                          •  When you are arrested you get a breathalyzer (0+ / 0-)

                            If you are raped in a civilized country you are taken to the hospital and your blood is drawn and tested.

                            "Til you're so fucking crazy you can't follow their rules" John Lennon - Working Class Hero

                            by Horace Boothroyd III on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 07:24:05 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                    •  Aside from my "Strawman?" post (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      DeadHead

                      which you didn't respond to, I still think you need to provide a little more to go on.  I mean if this is true and not just "good advice":

                      There is no way we can tell those that may rape someone that is drunk to verify levels of inebriation.

                      That is ridiculous.

                      We tell them if alcohol or drugs are involved consent can not be obtained.

                      Then how can a would-be rapist even always know if the person he thinks is consenting is under the influence?  Not everyone is capable of just looking at someone and knowing if they have used drugs or alcohol--and by your standards, any use at all makes consent impossible.  By your standards, unless I have been watching the person for hours, I can't possibly know if they are actually consenting.  That's kind of unrealistic and not at all like the Steubenville case, don't you think?

                      Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

                      by Mark Mywurtz on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 07:17:51 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  Can you define "drugs"? (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Horace Boothroyd III

                      Besides the obvious, like benzodiazepines and GHB. Do all scheduled drugs fall into this category?

                      •  . (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Dopetron
                        What is a Legal Drug?

                        A legal drug or intoxicants are drugs which are not prohibited by the United Nations Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs. This classification therefore enables legal drugs to be sold over the counter in various retail stores or food-suppliers throughout the world and the United States.

                        Individuals will consume legal drugs for a plethora of reasons; a legal drug may be used for a medicinal purpose or may be purchased as an intoxicating agent. The most commonly used intoxicant, throughout the world, is alcohol; however, many other legal drugs are used for intoxicating purposes, including various native plants and tobacco.

                        Similar to illicit substances, the field of legal drugs is divided into categories depending on what the makeup of the drug and what kind of affect the drug has on its user.

                        "Til you're so fucking crazy you can't follow their rules" John Lennon - Working Class Hero

                        by Horace Boothroyd III on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 07:33:56 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

      •  And after seeing how (0+ / 0-)

        the conversation has devolved and gotten worse after I posted that comment, I stand by it.  I'll take that HR and wear it proudly.

        "I don't want a unicorn. I want a fucking pegasus. And I want it to carry a flaming sword." -mahakali overdrive

        by Silvia Nightshade on Mon Mar 18, 2013 at 04:37:28 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I shouldn't have to offer clarifcations (0+ / 0-)

        I responded as I did with an update because it was obvious that people weren't reading my post completely and were inserting their own bias into it.

        You can construct all the straw men you want but don't twist my words please.

        I wished you would spend as much time teaching men to control themselves as you do trying to poke holes in my post.

    •  Can you clarify for me (0+ / 0-)

      If I am on the list of those you consider "MRA" participants in this diary?

      If I am, please specify the comment(s) of mine you feel are indicative of my association with this group.

      Thanks for your time.




      Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us.
      ~ Jerry Garcia

      by DeadHead on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 05:32:30 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Another thing to remember: (4+ / 0-)

    When it comes to rape/sexual assault, silence DOES NOT equal consent.

    There's only one rule that I know of, babies -- goddammit, you've got to be kind. -- Kurt Vonnegut

    by Cali Scribe on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 06:14:58 PM PDT

  •  Impaired should not mean fair game. (3+ / 0-)
    Again why does the woman have to behave a certain way why can't the men just leave her alone??

    "Til you're so fucking crazy you can't follow their rules" John Lennon - Working Class Hero

    by Horace Boothroyd III on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 06:31:09 PM PDT

  •  I once received rape awareness training (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JBNathan85, Mark Mywurtz

    from a rape victim's advocate that said pretty much the same thing:  If she's drunk, she can't give consent.  How drunk, was asked.  He said, "Drunk enough that her judgment is impaired."

    So then I asked:  What if both parties are similarly drunk?  Ie, both have consumed enough alcohol so that each person's judgment has been impaired.  I swear, even though I thought I was asking the most obvious question (maybe after "How drunk?") it was like the guy had never heard or considered the question before.  The best he could come up with is "Well, if the woman is nearly passed out --"  I responded that in that case it would be obvious that an unconscious or semi-conscious person can't give consent, but that the original standard offered was the impairment of judgment.  At a frat party, everybody's at least that drunk and staggering.  Too drunk to drive, and too drunk to consent to sex under the level of intoxication offered.

    So, as we struggled to answer the question, it became clear that the question couldn't be answered without exposing the stereotypes about men and women that he harbored when it comes to sex (and who knows what else).

    Perhaps somebody here can take a stab at it:  How drunk?  And what if both parties are that drunk?

    •  I'm not going to venture to quantify it. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sviscusi, Silvia Nightshade

      Especially since I don't drink at all (Allergic, not puritanical.)

      I think both partners being drunk is a bad idea. (I actually think either partner being to the point where they make decisions that they would make differently sober is a bad idea. But that's me.)

      I just tend to think that if you're doing sex right, you don't need anything else.

      When you come to find how essential the comfort of a well-kept home is to the bodily strength and good conditions, to a sound mind and spirit, and useful days, you will reverence the good housekeeper as I do above artist or poet, beauty or genius.

      by Alexandra Lynch on Mon Mar 18, 2013 at 12:04:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  At what level of intoxication would sex be a (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        FrankRose, JBNathan85

        "bad idea" was not the question. The question is: at what level of intoxication does it rise to the level of a criminal offense?

        Not every bad idea should see one of the parties thrown into prison.

        Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

        by Robobagpiper on Mon Mar 18, 2013 at 04:45:47 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Regardless of the "quantity" (4+ / 0-)

        or level of intoxication.  Once we determine what that is, ie, once we determine what the level of intoxication is that a person cannot consent to sex (even if it appears that consent was given) -- what do you do when both people have reached that level?   Which one is the victim and which one is the rapist?

        I remember having sex with a drunk person.  The thing is, I was more intoxicated than they were.  If I had signed a contract with that level of intoxication, I'm certain it would be held invalid due to lack of capacity.  I stumbled to the bed.  So while the sex was great, was I raped?  Did I rape them because they also were drunk, though not as much as I was?  I am purposely concealing genders here because I'd like to see how we answer these questions without reference to which party has the penis and which one has the vagina.  If the answer depends on that distinction, let's be honest about it.

        Seriously, I'm not trying to be coy.  These are serious questions somebody needs to be able to answer before we make categorical statements from which charges of rape flow.

        Honestly at this point it's become apparent to me that "if she's drunk, it's rape" is an axiom that doesn't withstand scrutiny.  If it's not quite so simple, then let's not state it so simply.

  •  So Here's A Question (0+ / 0-)

    If a guy is passed out drunk or a girl slips a date rape drug in his drink and then proceeds to rape the guy and get pregnant, should he be required to pay child support if she decides to keep the child?

  •  Why is there argument about this? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    madhaus

    Since most rapes and sexual assaults are never even reported, I don't think any of the men contesting the diary need to worry.

    I assumed the diarist was exaggerating for effect and not being completely literal. But the law in the state the case was tried is pretty clear -- if she's drunk, it's rape.

    So none of the comparisons to wives, girlfriends, or consensual sex partners apply here -- this was the case of two teens taking advantage of a girl who was PASSED OUT -- not tipsy, not a little drunkish, but not even away of what was happening to her, and clearly not able to even fight back.

    There's a shit load of sexism expressed in the comments, which is so disturbing for a progressive blog site!!

    I say if you are ever in doubt about a woman's consent, BACK OFF.  You will have sex (consensual sex) again.

    Finally, to those dudes who keep splitting hairs, what if another guy (someone physically stronger than you) took advantage of you while you were passed out? Would you just say, shit happens?

    The civil rights, gay rights and women's movements, designed to allow others to reach for power previously grasped only by white men, have made a real difference, and the outlines of 21st century America have emerged. -- Paul West of LA Times

    by LiberalLady on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 08:06:09 PM PDT

    •  Please re-read (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DeadHead, Mark Mywurtz, FrankRose

      You won't find a single comment arguing that having sex with someone who is passed out is not rape. The issue is that some people seem to think that any ingestion of any amount of any substance capable of causing impaired judgement is the same thing as having sex with an unconscious person. I don't call that splitting hairs.

      •  But the law (0+ / 0-)

        in the state where the case we're all talking about was tried says it was rape. They didn't need to measure her alcohol level to make that determination. The problem with resistance to the issue of impairment contributing to rape is that no man can know with any certainty how impaired a woman is, whether she has had one, two, three or more drinks. He can't know what she's experiencing internally, and as we all know, different people have very different levels of tolerance for alcohol. That's why I said, if there's any doubt, men should take a step back and walk away. Depending on the state you're in, going ahead with sex could be criminal. (And I am NOT talking about girlfriends or wives who consent to sex while inebriated.)

        The civil rights, gay rights and women's movements, designed to allow others to reach for power previously grasped only by white men, have made a real difference, and the outlines of 21st century America have emerged. -- Paul West of LA Times

        by LiberalLady on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 08:40:22 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Who's splitting hairs about being passed out? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      flycaster, Mark Mywurtz, FrankRose

      Perhaps I missed the comments, but I haven't seen anyone questioning the fact that being passed out removes one's ability to consent.




      Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us.
      ~ Jerry Garcia

      by DeadHead on Sun Mar 17, 2013 at 08:45:50 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I think this diary/diarist goes too far (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FrankRose, Roadbed Guy, JBNathan85

    in sweeping generalizations and edicts about what grown adult women can and can't do and enjoy, and frankly imo I think it gives ammo to those posters currently in the Hiddens for downplaying Steubenville. Have you all seen the picture where those two guys are carrying the Sville victim by her arms and legs? That's not the same thing as an aggressive adult woman choosing you out of the bar crowd that night.

    I see what you did there.

    by GoGoGoEverton on Mon Mar 18, 2013 at 04:25:24 AM PDT

  •  The limit for a DUI is .08. That is "just a couple (4+ / 0-)

    of drinks"

    If someone gives consent, it isn't rape.
    Drunken sex or sex under the influence isn't rape. That is an unworkable & impractical criteria. (Usually both parties are under the influence, in that case who 'raped' who?)
    Consent is the criteria.

    The Steubenville case was a rape b/c the victim was unconsious and unable to give consent.

    Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

    by FrankRose on Mon Mar 18, 2013 at 08:17:52 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site