I think I was date-raped last weekend, what should I do?

and if that is the case no one is responsible for any crime ones commit while drunk because they was incapable of making sane discussions
there for temporally insane

that has been tried a few times as a defense it never worked

 

Self-consent is not the same as giving consent to another person, a drunk person can certainly give consent to themselves to have sex with themselves (if that were possible), there is no violation by a third party.

 

Also I will add the following;

rape is a general-intent crime, meaning prosecutors just have to prove a rapist was being negligent or reckless. Unlike specific-intent crimes, rape doesn't require prosecutors to prove a rapist specifically intended to rape somebody. (Other general-intent crimes are assault or reckless endangerment of a child; premeditated murder is a specific-intent crime.)

General-intent vs Specific Intent - http://www.miblaw.com/lawschool/general-intent-vs-specific-intent/

 

I call it WhiskeyDick (since Whiskey is my liquor of choice)..... and it's quite the opposite affect for me.... I can have sex for hours and basically can't finish. It's not because I've gone soft....

I've had regular hookups that would get all drama-queeny about that thinking it was their fault I couldn't finish.... so after a few times, if I realized I wouldn't finish.... I'd fake it (there's a Seinfeld episode about it even)

 

yeah, can I get off for deciding to drive while drunk? Sober me knows better, drunk me is incapable of making sound judgements about driving.


sounds pretty silly when not backed by feminist propaganda that women who don't want to be called drunk sluts can simply claim rape and get out of all responsibility of poor choices.

 

What woman would want to be called 'drunk sluts'?

And why would you want to call any woman a slut?

This is an old, old thread and has a desperate twinge of bitterness to it.

You seem to think it is unfair that a woman can accuse someone of rape if she is intoxicated beyond her ability to provide legal consent and a man has sex with her.

Then you equate your own experience- where you didn't feel raped- and didn't accuse anyone of rape- and claim that means something.

If a woman is drunk and has sex with someone, and doesn't feel raped the next day- then like you, she will not accuse someone of rape. Could she? Of course- just like you could have.

But if either you or a woman is intoxicated and unable to provide consent- and some man has his way with your or her- it will be considered rape.

If you don't think that is fair- or you don't think it is fair that the onus is upon the sober one to know that they have consent- well then don't have sex with someone who has been drinking.

 

Well, I must have been raped the last couple times. Had sex with a couple people I wouldn't usually consider, one was when I was pretty much black out drunk, and the other was when I was (*)(*)(*)(*) faced. They were sober.

I could cry rape, I could say I was taken advantage of, but I ought to just take responsible for my actions:
1. I consumed too much liquor.
2. I was horny.
3. I tagged the first prospect to cross my path.

Lesson learned? It has been about a year since I have consumed liquor. I noticed that when my standards are not lowered to the nearly non-existent level, I don't get laid as often. But fewer "oh my (*)(*)(*)(*)ing god, Jesus Christ up on a cro... (*)(*)(*)(*)... god.. no... I didn't... *looks at phone *reads text messages... no... no... no... no..." are worth it. Totally worth it.

 

But if he were a woman, you would be making generalizations about men right now.

Funny how feminism resembles an all whites club excluding minorities, rather than a truly egalitarian philosophy.

 

According to the law a woman is not responsible for her actions if she's drunk and she has sex. In fact, in such cases, she has been raped.

However, if the same woman drives drunk and kills someone , she will be charged with vehicular homocide and driving while intoxicated.

Which is it American Justice system is a woman responsible for her actions when she's drunk or isn't she.

Talk about another instance of the American Justice system having it's cake and eating it too. No wonder America has the highest rate of incarceration in the world, higher than even Russia and China combined, and most Americans think Russia and China are police states, but America isn't??? No America is free-lol. In fact it's the freest country in the world-right-lol.

Anyways I wonder if a man is still guilty of rape if he is drunker than the women, and the woman regrets the sex the next day. I bet he would still be guilty of rape-right.

 

Technically if the woman is drunk and consents its still consent. She may try to prove otherwise, but most courts are pretty savvy about those hijinks.

The mans family, employer, and community may not be.

 

good for you .. still doesn't change the fact that a person who is not of 'sound mind' cannot give consent to another person to engage in sex.

 

Then you obviously need a lesson in law.

There is a difference between self-consent, where you decide to do something yourself to yourself and consent to another person for them to do something to you.

 

and still people do not understand there is a difference between self-consent, where you give consent to yourself to carry out an action (like driving a car) and consent given to a third party for them to do something to you (like sexual intercourse). For the self-consent it doesn't matter how much you drink, you are still responsible for your own actions, for consent to another person it does matter as they could be using your drunken state in order to further their own desires.

 

Technically if a woman (or man) is drunk she(he) is incapable of giving consent and any sexually intercourse would be rape. that is the law plain and simple.

 

so if a guy or girl makes a (drunk) decision to assault their spouse.... it can be written off as unable to make sound judgement due to their self-imposed impairment? or just sex

 

you self-consent to have sex with another person (as the "victim" of date-rape, too)




I will say, at least you are consistent with the law applying to both females and males in that regard.... I still think date-rape like we're discussing is just an built in excuse for those who regret sleeping with a fat cow, or a creeper....

real date-rape - drugging a person without their consent, having sex with a passed out person

simply getting drunk and waking up to someone you said yes to, but regret in the morning is you're a slut that doesn't want people to think of you that way.

 

?? No, I have personal knowledge of a case where the accuser tried this. The evidence that lost her the case is that she disrobed herself. The woman would have to be so drunk that she could not move. Which really is rape in my book.

The defendant in the case though lost his job, and his wife and children, despite winning in court.

 

here you go... perfect.... passed out sex is date-rape.....


wanting to have sex, and then realizing the guy is a dork the next day and regretting your stupid decision.... not date rape.




I was not date-raped in my story because, despite waking up next to a regrettable mistake....who then turned into a stage 5 clinger..... and despite being so drunk I puked twice on the way home.... I wanted sex..... I shouldn't have with her, and would have been just as well served stroking off to porn, and she took my drunkness as an opportunity for her to 'boyfriend me up', it is not really a crime what she did....

- - - Updated - - -

here you go... perfect.... passed out sex is date-rape.....


wanting to have sex, and then realizing the guy is a dork the next day and regretting your stupid decision.... not date rape.




I was not date-raped in my story because, despite waking up next to a regrettable mistake....who then turned into a stage 5 clinger..... and despite being so drunk I puked twice on the way home.... I wanted sex..... I shouldn't have with her, and would have been just as well served stroking off to porn, and she took my drunkness as an opportunity for her to 'boyfriend me up', it is not really a crime what she did....

 

You have answered your own statement, if the woman was capable of removing her own clothing then she was not in the state of not being of 'sound mind' ie if she was able to decide to remove her clothing then she was able to decide whether to have sex or not .. if the man involved had removed her clothing for her then he she would have had a better case to claim rape.

as to the man losing his job, that is something he could probably fight against, though I suspect him losing his wife is more to do with him being unfaithful to her than anything else.

 

you are still missing the point, in the anecdotal case provided the woman was able to remove her own clothing, this points to the fact that she was capable of forming a decision and as such able to consent to sex .. had the man removed her clothing because she was incapable of doing so then her case would have been stronger to claim she was no capable of giving consent.

 

it is based on the degree of 'drunkenness' .. if the drunk guy or girl decides to assault their spouse and is not so drunk that they can accomplish that assault then they are deemed capable of making the decision, on the other hand if they decide to assault but due to the level of the drunkenness they cannot actually achieve the assault no crime is committed.

 

no you don't, you give consent to another person .. self-consent does not involve a third party.

As it should be

That is not my decision to make, it is up to the courts/jury to look at the evidence and make a decision based on that evidence .. based on the OP provided IF you had felt violated in the morning I would think you would have had a strong case for rape .. as you were incapable of making a 'sound mind' decision and the woman was capable of ensuring a condom was used ie she was of sound mind.

That is no different to getting a man or woman really, really drunk in order to fulfil your own desires.

Again not my call to make .. it really depends on the level of drunkenness involved of the person claiming rape.

 

the problem with a girl (or guy like I did) choosing to get smashed, and while horny, beds the first person that says yes should not be date-rape for the person who simply obliged.

The girl I took home was a stage 5 clinger, and I saw that on our first date and decded not to pursue.... yet, while drunk and horny, I figured why not. That doesn't make her a (real) criminal had I pressed charges, which I could have. I mean.... I knew I screwed up.... but again, not her fault.

 

I am not necessarily disagreeing with you .. the point I am trying to make is that the courts have to have a level to look to, in most cases like yours nothing will ever come of it for the same reasons you have given ie you were drunk, horny and up for it and as such even though you regretted it in the morning you knew that it was partly your own doing .. but .. as soon as you became unable to communicate with the woman she should have stopped - same goes for a man - this is where the 'reasonable person' thing comes in, the question the court would ask is what would a responsible person do in the same situation, it is pretty obvious that the woman in question was not drunk and as such the court would see her actions as illegal.

when both parties are drunk then the evidence needs to be evaluated in order to ascertain if either party were in a less drunk state than the other .. it can be noted that in cases where both parties are drunk the sentence will be considerable less than if one of the parties involved is sober in fact I believe there have been cases where due to the level of drunkenness of both people the court ruled there was no case to answer.

I suppose the obvious thing to do is for neither party get so drunk that they are unable to make 'sound mind' decisions, that way there are no grey areas

 

there was no 'unable to communicate' for me. and not every girl that gets "date-raped" is passed out before or during either....

not remembering is not the same as passed out.



Here's another scenario.... I took a (prescribed) Ambien one night and purposely drank a beer while my then flavor of the month girl that was spending the night. All by my own choice.... and we had sex. I remember everything when I get smashed drunk.... I do things I wouldn't normally do as I let down my filters, but I certainly remember it all. but Ambien took huge chunks of my memory of the night. I remember bits and pieces.... different positions, then remembering being in another room, still having sex.

and bear with me, this isn't a "bragging" type of thing I'm doing here... I'm trying to make a point. at no point in time was I unable to communicate.


so if I then regret my ambien sex night.... and claim date-rape due to my state of mind.... or even just convince myself that during my memory lapses, I was unable to communicate and she just continued to have sex with me..... it's complete garbage as she didn't really do nothing wrong.


Now, had she been the ambien taker, and I did everything that she did to me, to her.... and she complained.... it's not different. Neither of us should be deemed a rapist is self-induced states of condition.


now, if I slip her an ambien with the intentions of doing things... that's 100% different.... and I understand that. but how many men have lost careers because they took home a drunk chick that later regretted the decision and then accused the guy who obliged of rape?