Forum menu
OK ,boy meets girl at a party, both are drunk have they have sex and the next day she [b]changes her mind[/b] and says I didn't give consent because of alcohol .
is that rape ?
eh?
The only possible way to rape someone is to have sex without their consent (save for statutory rape).
If you had their consent and they then withdraw it, you must stop at that point otherwise you are now raping that person. All action until that point is legal.
If you had consent when you actually had sex with them, then they withdraw their consent the [i]next day[/i] then it cannot possibly be rape
is that rape ?
Unfortunately yes, just ask Craig Charles.
Be careful where you put your Wheaton's Law is the rule -
and we taught this mantra to our lad when he was under 16 and feeling horny..."statutory rape"
I think that's where it gets complex fettler, rape can encompass a very wide set of circumstances
While a woman's behaviour could never be regarded as 'inviting' or 'justifying' rape, there are certainly situations where a woman's behaviour could lead to the existence or denial of consent being far from a clear cut issue.
If you had consent when you actually had sex with them, then they withdraw their consent the next day then it cannot possibly be rape
The argument against that logic is, was she too drunk to reliably give consent?
Is it fine to ply a girl with drinks all night, to lower her inhibitions with the end goal of some horizontal jogging later?
How about just a couple of drinks? Or conversely, how about Rohypnol?
Thorny issue you've got there with your "cannot possibly" I'm afraid. At what point does "morning remorse" cross the line into "hey, you raped me"?
The argument against that logic is, was she "too drunk to reliably give consent"?
Thank cougar that's the point I was trying to make
The argument against that logic is, was she too drunk to reliably give consent?
The test is that, regardless of the amount of alcohol consumed, she was capable of making the decision at the time.
Entirely subjective and difficult to establish.
It's possible to be completely capable of giving consent at the time and then not even remember it the next day, such is the nature of alcohol.
Equally, someone could have a few drinks and due to intolerance be lacking in the ability to give consent quite quickly. You would hope that this would be quite obvious and most men would take this as a sign to not progress any further - however obviously this is not always the case.
Is it really though? Any stats? Aren't the majority of rapes NOT in circumstances like that?In any event, statements like this run the risk of being victim blaming, and take focus away from the crime itself.
Did you bother to read the whole of my post or just chose to read one sentence?
Let me spell it out for you:
[i]Possible[/i] increased risk of a crime happening does not equate to any percentage of 'blame' being passed onto the victim.
Just like leaving your phone on the bar increases the risk of it [i]possibly[/i] being stolen, rather than being in your pocket. Fault is 100% with the thief/rapist/person who committed the crime.
You would hope that this would be quite obvious and most men would take this as a sign to not progress any further - however obviously this is not always the case.
To be honest, that's probably a better yardstick of guilt. Did the bloke think "she's a bit drunk, I'd best back off" or did he think "she's a bit drunk, fantastic!"?
OK ,boy meets girl at a party, both are drunk have they have sex and the next day she changes her mind and says I didn't give consent because of alcohol
is that rape ?
Yes it is, drunk people can't give consent. The answer to "come back to mine" is:
"No, your drunk, I'll get you home, call me when you wake up with that banging hangover and we'll have breakfast"
kudos100 - Member
Did you bother to read the whole of my post or just chose to read one sentence?
I did, seems you didn't read mine at all.
Is it really though? Any stats? Aren't the majority of rapes NOT in circumstances like that?
Regardless, that's a non sequitur. The majority of eye injuries aren't from spoons*, but jamming a teaspoon in my face is significantly likely to increase the risk of a cutlery-related ocular incident.
(* - I imagine, I've not actually looked it up. Shoddy posting, I know.)
Yes it is, drunk people can't give consent. The answer to "come back to mine" is:
This is incorrect (from a legal perspective anyway), although I agree it's different from a moral one.
Drunk people are capable of giving consent (otherwise, amongst other quirks, it would be difficult for them to legally become intoxicated in the first place).
Another scenario. Husband and wife, married a long time. Wife is in bed sober, husband comes home drunk, gets into bed. Wife initiates sex. Man is initially reluctant but he goes with it, he goes for the wrong hole. Wife asks him to stop but he doesn't straight away, she had to ask twice again and push him away. He has hurt her. Wife get's out of bed and goes to a friends to stay.
After discussion with friend, the next morning she reports husband to police for rape. He is arrested and charged with rape.
The husband has almost zero recollection of the incident.
[quote=peterfile ]
Yes it is, drunk people can't give consent. The answer to "come back to mine" is:
This is incorrect (from a legal perspective anyway), although I agree it's different from a moral one.
Drunk people are capable of giving consent (otherwise, amongst other quirks, it would be difficult for them to legally become intoxicated in the first place).
I was a juror at a rape trial (in Scotland) where it was quite clearly stated, by the judge, that a drunk person cannot be considered to have consented.
I like to make up increasingly complicated and unlikely situations in these threads too.
Pretty girl: Licking an ice cream.
Pervy bloke: "Hey baby, what else can you lick?"
Pretty girl: "Your blood off my fingers after I've sacrificed you to Satan".
Also, interestingly from the point of view of the effect self-blame has on it's victim, Chrissie always used to refer to her all-male band as girls, as in (before starting a song) "You ready, girls?". Odd.
sorry peterfile, I wasn't trying to provide a legal perspective. "I'm not a lawyer" etc etc
I was just suggesting a course of action that involves no rape... 😕
was a juror at a rape trial (in Scotland) where it was quite clearly stated, by the judge, that a drunk person cannot be considered to have consented.
Which raises the question: If two lesbian women are drunk and have sex are both guilty of rape?
a drunk person cannot be considered to have consented
Couple of things:
- there are degrees of drunk - my wife says I'm drunk long before I lose the ability to make decisions in law. It isn't (AFAIK) a blood alcohol concentration measure, it's a "did I know what was happening?" measure.
- in the UK at least, if A reasonably believes that B consents then A isn't raping B when B is drunk, as long as it isn't unreasonable for A to think everything is OK. But A doesn't get to think it's OK because A is too drunk to judge it right.
So if B is a habitual drinker who is probably going to be blacking out but hasn't lost the ability to form sentences, and A is a bit too pissed to realise that that's the scenario, A can end up, entirely without meaning to, having sex with someone who he's slightly too pissed to realise is far too pissed to consent. There's no doubt that's a rape in the UK, if it becomes a police matter. It's a moderately common sort of sex.
[edits for clarity]
consent, it's like making a cup of tea...
I always like a cup of tea. Usually end up making it myself though.
Just like leaving your phone on the bar increases the risk of it possibly being stolen, rather than being in your pocket. Fault is 100% with the thief/rapist/person who committed the crime.
Try explaining that to your insurance company, who could argue you hadn't taken sufficient care of the phone and had 'invited' the crime to take place.
Try explaining that to your insurance company
I believe this falls under "false authority syndrome." To wit, insurance companies are not lawyers, they are bastards.
OK ,boy meets girl at a party, both are drunk have they have sex and the next day she changes her mind and says I didn't give consent because of alcohol
is that rape ?
Yes it is, drunk people can't give consent. The answer to "come back to mine" is:"No, your drunk, I'll get you home, call me when you wake up with that banging hangover and we'll have breakfast"
Serious question . How would that work from a legal perspective if they were both drunk surely neither would be able to give consent or does it assume that because the male has achieved an erection he has given consent ?
Which raises the question: If two lesbian women are drunk and have sex are both guilty of rape?
Nope, as rape can only be committed by a person with their own penis
A strange lacuna within the law that women don't seem to be up in arms at getting overturned in the name of equal rights.
Which raises the question: If two lesbian women are drunk and have sex are both guilty of rape?
Nope, as rape can only be committed by a person with their own penis
Ok, substitute gay men.
Serious question . How would that work from a legal perspective if they were both drunk surely neither would be able to give consent or does it assume that because the male has achieved an erection he has given consent ?
I was wondering similar.
Ok, substitute gay men.
Arguably, yes, they could be, because drunkenness is no defence.
However they may have a defence that they 'reasonably believed' they had consent, under the rules of it being goddamned common courtesy to return the favour.
How would that work from a legal perspective if they were both drunk surely neither would be able to give consent or does it assume that because the male has achieved an erection he has given consent ?
The Ched Evans case suggests that assumption is made. The girl had no recollection if she had consented or not. AFAIK CHed Evans was also drunk. On that basis the jury decided that a) it was rape and b) the male drunk person was the culprit and not the victim.
Which is why in the case of teachers bonking students, female teachers get charged with indecent/sexual assault, the men; statutory rape.
I was a juror at a rape trial (in Scotland) where it was quite clearly stated, by the judge, that a drunk person cannot be considered to have consented.
It's not that clear cut though.
Define drunk.
If I take a girl out for one drink and then we sleep together, is she deemed to be incapable of consent and I have raped her?
What about 3 drinks?
What about 10 drinks?
At what point is she "drunk". At what point did her level of drunkenness affect her ability to give consent? The law doesn't try to tell us. It's completely subjective. A court will make that decision based on all available evidence.
The law (in Scotland) says:
is incapable of consenting because of the effect of alcohol or any other
substance
The test is "incapable of consenting", because of the effect of alcohol. It is possible to be under the effects of alcohol and capable of consent. It must be this way otherwise we would all lose the legal ability to consent after a beer.
In England (and Scotland too I'm sure) the court will look at all circumstances surrounding the event to try to establish whether the level of drunkenness was sufficient that they were incapable of consent.
If two lesbian women are drunk and have sex are both guilty of rape?
Hmmm, I'm going to have to think about that, (for quite a while) 8)
In England (and Scotland too I'm sure) the court will look at all circumstances surrounding the event to try to establish whether the level of drunkenness was sufficient that they were incapable of consent.
This is basically what I was trying to point out earlier - it's not always 100% clear cut, and to say the victim is 100% blameless is not IMO correct.
Nope, as rape can only be committed by a person with their own penis
https://www.rt.com/news/hairdresser-turns-robber-into-sex-slave/
Not highly probable, but it is possible........
Consent. It's really very simple as this video shows.
http://magazine.good.is/articles/tea-never-looked-so-good
[quote=kudos100 ]
Nope, as rape can only be committed by a person with their own penis
> https://www.rt.com/news/hairdresser-turns-robber-into-sex-slave/
Not highly probable, but it is possible........
The law in the UK is quite clear.
She's a rocker, one of the best, writes great songs, sings greats, plays a Tele. Her quotes have always been quotable. " Better be a prostitute than a butcher, hope the Muslims win... ".
"All these fifty-year-old guys wearing baseball caps and shorts and acting like children. It winds me up. Men don't have to take responsibility anymore. Most of the guys I know would punch me on the nose for saying this, but maybe we do have to bring back conscription."
[url= http://www.azquotes.com/author/7126-Chrissie_Hynde ]and some others.[/url]
Anyhow I'm now aware she's released a book and wouldn't have been otherwise.
Go Chrissie !!!
Just a story to highlight how different people think of this. I had a music PR company and at one point employed 8 people, all young 'types' who got themselves around the club scene etc etc. one of them was a figure head on the dub step/Grime scene. He was generally a liberal & level headed guy (well read Hitchens/Fry/Chomsky). A rapper friend of his was charged & convicted of serious sexual assault & under age sex with a girl that had got into a VIP area to mix with the bods there. She was drunk and said rapper took 'advantage' of her. This guy who worked for me couldn't & wouldn't see what his mate had done wrong (he knew she was underage) he and others were convinced it was ALL the girls fault and she shouldn't have entered the VIP lounge if she didn't know what was gonna happen to her. I eventually sacked him 🙂
Whilst I completely condone rape and any sort of sexual assault (just incase we get into the drunk lesbian discussion.....)
In a scenario where a man and a woman are both drunk, go back to bed, naked, have sex, wake up the next morning, woman claims rape.
Is it fair that a woman can claim she was raped and could not consent because she was drunk? How is a male supposed to identify that a woman is too drunk to consent? Have men got to start breathalysing women?
Don't have drunk sex with people?
daniel_owen_uk - Member
Whilst I completely condone rape and any sort of sexual assault
Reported
The point I struggle with is that a girl can consensually get drunk (ie without being unwillingly plied or Micky finned), go home with a guy who has got himself in the same situation, sex ensue, and then she can claim rape the next morning. And be deemed to be unable to give consent through intoxication and use that as a reason for why it's rape.
Yet he cannot say that he's not culpable either because by being intoxicated he was incapable of being able to determine that when she said yes last night, she wasn't capable of meaning it.
I'm not saying it's completely defensible but I struggle with why the act of willingly getting drunk is effectively the act that condemns him yet defends her?
The Julian Assange case springs to mind. I assume "condone" was meant to read "condemn", Daniel.
Edit: now I've found what I was looking for.
Assange is the exception (which suggests political motivation) a very low percentage of reported rapes end in conviction [url= http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6313479.stm ]5%according to this[/url] It seems in most cases any doubt benefits the rapist.
Can a womens behavior ever be seen as a mitigating factor?
No.
The victim's behaviour [i]might[/i] play a part in the perpetrator forming reasonable belief that the victim consented, in which case the crime of rape is not complete as the mens rea or guilty mind is not present.
But if the perpetrator did not reasonably believe that the victim consented, then the crime is complete, and however the victim acted or behaved is therefore irrelevant and provides no mitigation whatsoever.
It's so straightforward that I suspect mitigation isn't really what the writer meant.
Reported
Genuine completely missed the "don't" in that sentence.