• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Sexual Assault Ignored at Baylor

And then you can loop them in for a threesome
But then you need a fourth. And then a fifth. And pretty soon your simple bathroom HJ turns into a full blown clown orgy.


No ones got time for all that.
 
Well the scary part was that once she takes 1 drink, it's not consensual.

So...yes lol

I'm fine with a legal system that lets men bear the risk of initiating sex with a drunk girl. If you are that worried about a drunk girl claiming rape the next day then you probably shouldn't have sex with her in the first place.
 
So I missed the unresponsive part... So more interested in the case, which is highly frequent, where both parties are similarly drunk. No, I don't think it is reasonable to place all of the burden on the man. I am sure it's a pretty rare case where a woman claims rape on this scenario, but my understanding is that in that case the man would be held responsible for rape. Or even in a case where the man was drunk and the woman was just 'buzzed'. It does not make sense to me that the man is held responsible for the decision when the woman is not. This assumes verbal consent, which presumably didn't happen in this case (although it could have).

Fwiw, I am gay so this discussion does not directly affect me. Well, it does just not directly.
 
So I missed the unresponsive part... So more interested in the case, which is highly frequent, where both parties are similarly drunk. No, I don't think it is reasonable to place all of the burden on the man. I am sure it's a pretty rare case where a woman claims rape on this scenario, but my understanding is that in that case the man would be held responsible for rape. Or even in a case where the man was drunk and the woman was just 'buzzed'. It does not make sense to me that the man is held responsible for the decision when the woman is not. This assumes verbal consent, which presumably didn't happen in this case (although it could have).

Fwiw, I am gay so this discussion does not directly affect me. Well, it does just not directly.

Glad to hear that no one has ever been gay raped.
 
I'm fine with a legal system that lets men bear the risk of initiating sex with a drunk girl. If you are that worried about a drunk girl claiming rape the next day then you probably shouldn't have sex with her in the first place.

Exactly my point.
 
So I missed the unresponsive part... So more interested in the case, which is highly frequent, where both parties are similarly drunk. No, I don't think it is reasonable to place all of the burden on the man. I am sure it's a pretty rare case where a woman claims rape on this scenario, but my understanding is that in that case the man would be held responsible for rape. Or even in a case where the man was drunk and the woman was just 'buzzed'. It does not make sense to me that the man is held responsible for the decision when the woman is not. This assumes verbal consent, which presumably didn't happen in this case (although it could have).

Fwiw, I am gay so this discussion does not directly affect me. Well, it does just not directly.

1. I think assigning equal responsibility ignores the reality of how most heterosexual sexual relationships are initiated.

2. A better rule would be for the intoxication of the victim to create a rebuttable presumption that consent was lacking. That being said I'm not that worried about the rule as is because I think the scenarios where the guy gets screwed are incredibly rare.
 
Why?

I certainly think drunk men and women can consent to sex (up to a point), but I think the "drunk woman clearly consents to sex, regrets it the next morning and claims rape" situation is incredibly rare.

I'm fine with a legal system that lets men bear the risk of initiating sex with a drunk girl. If you are that worried about a drunk girl claiming rape the next day then you probably shouldn't have sex with her in the first place.

Exactly my point.

Ok guys...clearly the intent of my post was over your head.

It was slightly tongue-in-cheek (as much as you can be on this topic) about consent not being available after ONE DRINK. When I initially read it, it read as the first sip, not one whole drink...but the point remains the same. Very, very, very few women would be drunk enough after ONE DRINK that sleeping with them would be non-consensual. (Again, at the time of the post I had just read it as one sip of a beer, not an entire Long Island Iced Tea, which even then I don't agree would put someone out of the range of consent)

I was not literally saying that the only way I have sex is by getting women drunk enough. But I WOULD say that a fair number of my encounters have been had after at least a single drink for both parties.

Now move on.
 
I am sure I will get slammed for this... but why is it the drunk male's fault only? Because he has a penis?

Huh? It's not like they were both drunk and decided to have sex....he raped her when she was unconscious. How would that be her fault?
 
It's really hard to discuss stuff like this without sounding like a fucking asshole.

This guy (Stanford story posted above) was clearly in the wrong and should have been and has been punished.



But when two people are equally intoxicated (to be clear, NOT to the extent of the girl in this case), why is one to blame more than the other. Again....I'm talking extremely less severe cases than this.

But it does seem odd for one person to be a victim of their intoxication and the other be a criminal of it. If a girl drinks and is thus considered unable to make decisions effectively, couldn't the same be said about a guy that drinks and makes questionable decisions?

I fully expect to be lambasted for even bringing something like this up, and it has nothing to do with this case...the guy in this story did things to someone who was most definitely 100% a victim. I'm just curious about the subject when it's a less extreme situation where both parties are equally intoxicated, and of course where violence is not involved.

There probably aren't many here who haven't had sex while drunk. If your partner was also drinking or drunk, were those all just unreported assaults?

You're arguing against a straw man. Show me the case where two people were equally intoxicated but only one got convicted

Also I think that you think the law of rape is a lot more favorable to women than it actually is. In most states, it's the opposite
 
You're arguing against a straw man. Show me the case where two people were equally intoxicated but only one got convicted

Also I think that you think the law of rape is a lot more favorable to women than it actually is. In most states, it's the opposite

I wasn't saying that happens a lot, but it seems like it could. Like I said before, some issues just cause internal conflict and I like to hear the discourse.

You are correct in that I thankfully have never had to know much about the laws of rape...or had to worry about consent.
 
I wasn't saying that happens a lot, but it seems like it could. Like I said before, some issues just cause internal conflict and I like to hear the discourse.

You are correct in that I thankfully have never had to know much about the laws of rape...or had to worry about consent.

You should know the laws of rape and worry about consent. Everybody should.
 
I know the definition and I know about consent.

I know neither will ever be something of which I either engage, or approach the limits.
 
Ok guys...clearly the intent of my post was over your head.

It was slightly tongue-in-cheek (as much as you can be on this topic) about consent not being available after ONE DRINK. When I initially read it, it read as the first sip, not one whole drink...but the point remains the same. Very, very, very few women would be drunk enough after ONE DRINK that sleeping with them would be non-consensual. (Again, at the time of the post I had just read it as one sip of a beer, not an entire Long Island Iced Tea, which even then I don't agree would put someone out of the range of consent)

I was not literally saying that the only way I have sex is by getting women drunk enough. But I WOULD say that a fair number of my encounters have been had after at least a single drink for both parties.

Now move on.

Nah I think we got the intent. Just pointing out that the situation you are scared of (a woman having one sip of alcohol, clearly consenting to sex, and then accusing someone of rape) simply doesn't happen.
 
Back
Top