Pickup Artists Preyed on Drunk Women, Brought Them Home, and Raped Them

[Deleted]

So you're saying it's ok to have sex with someone that's unconscious because they haven't said no.

No that is not what i said - The case before us was that a person had sex with their spouse.
This is a special case, because marriage confers a right to have sex with the other party.

Or are you one of those people that thinks a marriage certificate is a permission slip?

Then i would just have said 'spousal rape is nonsense' (which it is, but clearly more nuanced than what you are able to comprehend).

[Nitro Fun]

No that is not what i said - The case before us was that a person had sex with their spouse.
This is a special case, because marriage confers a right to have sex with the other party.

Found the rape apologist.

[Deleted]

You cannot give consent while intoxicated.

That is categorically a lie, a necessary part of which requires infantilizing women.

- - - Updated - - -

Found the rape apologist.

your reading comprehension is clearly not that well developed.

[Nitro Fun]

your reading comprehension is clearly not that well developed.

Yeah, it is. Being married does not give any right to have sex with someone.

[Raelbo]

Jonas Dick. Talk about a case of nominative determinism

[Deleted]

Absolutely terrible and every rapist should be fined and locked up.

That said, why are so many young women walking in the street barefoot and comepltely smashed in the middle of the night?

[Raelbo]

but I also don't have much sympathy when the woman knowingly hangs out with men they don't know while drinking themselves into a stupor.

And I guess that's your prerogative. That being said, regardless of whether you feel sympathy for the victim, it does not entitle the rapist to proceed with raping said drunkard.

[Deletedaccount1]

And I guess that's your prerogative. That being said, regardless of whether you feel sympathy for the victim, it does not entitle the rapist to proceed with raping said drunkard.

It might if I was serving on a jury.

[Raelbo]

Pointing out that the legal definition of 'to drunk to consent' is Barely conscious, is not victim blaming.
It is quite possible to be so drunk you wont remember anything while still being cognizant enough (by far) to be able to consent.
So putative person A, who wakes up not remembering anything about last night, Cant know if they were raped or not, because the part of their brain that processes memories shuts down before the other parts.

And a reasonable person says that if someone is so drunk that they their memory processes shut down, then you should not take for granted anything they say.

Of course it's a grey area. People like you would argue that the alleged rapist should be given the benefit of the doubt. I would argue that doing so just creates a nice loophole that rapists will, and have for years, exploit.

A far more reasonable approach is to simply that if you have sex with a heavily intoxicated person, you are putting yourself at risk of a rape accusation. Act accordingly.

[Deleted]

Yeah, it is. Being married does not give any right to have sex with someone.

Marriage explicitly confers a right to have sex with the spouse.
It does not confer a right to force anything.
Hopefully that helps.

[Nitro Fun]

Marriage explicitly confers a right to have sex with the spouse.

Nope, it doesn't.

[Deleted]

That said, why are so many young women walking in the street barefoot and comepltely smashed in the middle of the night?

because they confuse the way things augth to be with the way things are.
Also one key part of this is that young women now a days act more and more like young men, not realizing that young men are one of the most victimized groups in society.
In short, it is a necessary and logical consequent that more shit happens to young women when they act like young men, we just selectively care about the women..

- - - Updated - - -

And I guess that's your prerogative. That being said, regardless of whether you feel sympathy for the victim, it does not entitle the rapist to proceed with raping said drunkard.

Rape is generally about discerning about if it is reasonable to assume that consent to sex was in fact obtained.
A man saying that a young partying woman went home with him and had sex is a much more plausible story than if a person says that another person consented to sex at 6.15 am while they meet jogging.

[Deleted]

dont know if troll or not.
Your right, these girls behave like real ladys, badmen. kill all men.

Just because a girl likes to have sex doesn't mean she wants to be raped. Are you serious?

[Mormolyce]

Oh that must be why there are no white rapists in Jail atm in Australia.

OH WAIT THERE IS!

I don't think you're following what I wrote.

- - - Updated - - -

Marriage explicitly confers a right to have sex with the spouse.

Ooh boy.

Looks like someone wasn't paying attention for about a century and a half of social reform.

[Deleted]

And a reasonable person says that if someone is so drunk that they their memory processes shut down, then you should not take for granted anything they say.

The problem is, at this point the person is still cognizant and capable of interaction.
Because memory processing shuts down before those things.

Of course it's a grey area. People like you would argue that the alleged rapist should be given the benefit of the doubt. I would argue that doing so just creates a nice loophole that rapists will, and have for years, exploit.

The only possible outcomes here is that we either get rid of the burden of proof or we forbid women from being outside absent a male guardian.
And doing the former will lead to doing the later eventually.

A far more reasonable approach is to simply that if you have sex with a heavily intoxicated person, you are putting yourself at risk of a rape accusation. Act accordingly.

So women are special snowflakes with special protections - Wonder when you become positive to the sharia system, its the logical consequent.

- - - Updated - - -

Nope, it doesn't.

Yes it does -

It does not confer a right to force anything.

That was the important part.
It confers the right to do A, but not the means to do A.

- - - Updated - - -

Ooh boy.

Looks like someone wasn't paying attention for about a century and a half of social reform.

It confers the right to do A, but not the means to do A.

[Deleted]

The story is rapeists rape?

No the story is this group those rapists belonged to are also rapists by association.
Just like all Muslims are terrorist, and all black people are drug dealers.

[Raelbo]

The problem is, at this point the person is still cognizant and capable of interaction.
Because memory processing shuts down before those things.

Please don't be disingenuous. We all know what happens when people get drunk. People make poor decisions that they would not make when sober. It's not ok that other people take advantage of that. It's even worse when those same people are the ones getting someone drunk in the first place.

Consent isn't just about ticking a checkbox ie, "the word yes came out of his/her mouth". It's about establishing that this is something the person actually does want. Trying to find a way to get someone to say "yes" even though they don't really mean it is the art of the modern day rapist.

This wouldn't even be an issue if people were more interested in finding people who actually want to have sex with them rather than trying to trick, coerce or manipulate people into having sex with them. It's absolutely appropriate that the law starts to see things this way as well.

When we see a person getting themselves drunk to a stupor, we should look out for that person and help them to stay safe until they're sober again, not just see them as an easy lay. People who do the latter should be punished by society. Plain and simple.


Last point: You are more than happy to allow someone to be raped because they were foolish enough to get drunk and then consent, yet you are vehemently opposed to anyone being punished for being foolish enough to have sex with a drunk person without bothering to establish how that person would feel about if they were sober.

You display incredible double standards.

- - - Updated - - -

Again, where's the proof that she's a "slut"?

Although I agree 100% with you, I would argue that it's not even relevant if she were. It's a classic red herring.

[AndaliteBandit]

Drinking tons of alk alone in a bar and going to some random dudes appartment.
Sorry but no lady would do that. only sluts do that kind of shit.

Do you often comment on articles that you clearly didn't read?

[starlord]

Absolutely terrible and every rapist should be fined and locked up.

That said, why are so many young women walking in the street barefoot and comepltely smashed in the middle of the night?

the san diego gaslamp district is the big "bar/club" area, especially for tourists.

[Deleted]

Please don't be disingenuous. We all know what happens when people get drunk. People make poor decisions that they would not make when sober. It's not ok that other people take advantage of that. It's even worse when those same people are the ones getting someone drunk in the first place.

what is not 'okay' is not illegal.

Consent isn't just about ticking a checkbox ie, "the word yes came out of his/her mouth". It's about establishing that this is something the person actually does want. Trying to find a way to get someone to say "yes" even though they don't really mean it is the art of the modern day rapist.

Yes but see it is not in fact about what the 'victim' thinks, but rather whetter or not a reasonable person believes the 'victim' consented or not.
If we had super duper mind control technology, a 'victim' may feel raped as much as humanly possible, but it would still not matter if the accused reasonably believed there was consent.

This wouldn't even be an issue if people were more interested in finding people who actually want to have sex with them rather than trying to trick, coerce or manipulate people into having sex with them. It's absolutely appropriate that the law starts to see things this way as well.

you know what this means though? women are not equal actors to men, which then leads to special protections to protect them.
I don't know about you but treating all women as if they are retarded or children is, Misogynist.
oh and by the way, the logical consequent is second class citizenship for women.

When we see a person getting themselves drunk to a stupor, we should look out for that person and help them to stay safe until they're sober again, not just see them as an easy lay. People who do the latter should be punished by society. Plain and simple.

No, not plain and simple - People who are drunk are capable of consent.

Last point: You are more than happy to allow someone to be raped because they were foolish enough to get drunk and then consent, yet you are vehemently opposed to anyone being punished for being foolish enough to have sex with a drunk person without bothering to establish how that person would feel about if they were sober.
You display incredible double standards.

because legally this do not and should not matter.
yes, because one gives the benefit of the doubt to the accused, and the other gives it to the state -