Quote:
|
Originally Posted by flstf
Under the law that f6twister quoted, I wonder if either one of us had a valid claim for rape since we were both drunk and probably would not have consented otherwise? In other words is the man exonerated if he was just as drunk as the woman who was consenting to sex if she claims later to have been too drunk to have given that consent? I don't think it is rape when both parties engage in a drunken fling and regret it later.
|
We were told that basically if the woman had impaired judgment it could be called rape. Obviously this is a wee bit vague, and mostly unenforceable. I can honestly say that in school that I never had sex with a woman who's judgment was more impaired than mine. On the other hand, they can't say the same to me as I was 'taken advantage of' a couple of times while I was drunk, oh god what horrible memories
(Just a word of advice to you young folk, if you are asked to a set up dance, and the girl shows up late, and the dark beer you were drinking starts tasting more like water before she gets there, your judgment may be impaired resulting in a make out session and more you would not have approved of had you been sober.)
Since proof of rape is so difficult in most cases, things can get a bit nutty. You have well meaning people saying that rapes are under reported, which I have no doubt is true, but often the changes they want shift the burden of proof to the accused which isn't right either. Trying to prove you didn't rape someone is even more difficult then proving you did. So you get these vague laws about alcohol impairment which sound ok on paper to some, but sometimes remove all aspects of common sense from the equation. That being said, finding a girl who is stupid drunk is not an excuse to 'go for it' in my mind.