Confusion continues surrounding drunken consent

[Freighter]

Having sex isn't something that a male does to a female. If he can consent while drunk the so can she, it is a very simple concept.

Do you not understand how responsibility works in criminal law or something? If you're the instigator in rape then you're violating others lack of consent. You're not violating your own and they're not violating your consent when you're violating them.

It's like claiming someone crashed into you when you drive your car into their car.

[Fugus]

She didn't fall asleep, she blacked out and could not remember what happened exactly.

If she blacked out and can't remember, I have had to deal with people who have done that before, just because they didn't remember doesn't mean they didn't consent at the time. I have had to deal with god knows how many people getting drunk and doing dumb shit around me and not remember it the next day.

She could have very well been an active participant if she just blacked out and not passed out. And then it comes back to the same thing, if he was drunk too, he was legally unable to consent as well meaning it was either both were raped or neither were.

Now if he was sober and took advantage, that would be a different thing, but two drunk people being drunk and consenting.....

- - - Updated - - -

That's not what the law says, so no. I've given multiple examples of how women can be found guilty.

- - - Updated - - -



Instigating party is always guilty.

If both of them consented, even while drunk, then they both were the instigating party as they both agreed to the act while they did it.

[Vyuvarax]

If she blacked out and can't remember, I have had to deal with people who have done that before, just because they didn't remember doesn't mean they didn't consent at the time. I have had to deal with god knows how many people getting drunk and doing dumb shit around me and not remember it the next day.

She could have very well been an active participant if she just blacked out and not passed out. And then it comes back to the same thing, if he was drunk too, he was legally unable to consent as well meaning it was either both were raped or neither were.

Now if he was sober and took advantage, that would be a different thing, but two drunk people being drunk and consenting.....

- - - Updated - - -



If both of them consented, even while drunk, then they both were the instigating party as they both agreed to the act while they did it.

You clearly don't understand the law. Instigating party is convicted when both are drunk. You're really embarrassing yourself.

[Deleted]

Do you not understand how responsibility works in criminal law or something? If you're the instigator in rape then you're violating others lack of consent. You're not violating your own and they're not violating your consent when you're violating them.

First you have to prove that there was a rape, that means that she didn't consent. Then you have to prove that he is the one that did the raping, nothing in this opinion piece suggests this. And no, asking for consent isn't the same as instigating sex.
Thus far all you have done is point a finger at the guy and scream "rapist", just because someone is drunk doesn't mean that they can not instigate sex.

- - - Updated - - -

If she blacked out and can't remember, I have had to deal with people who have done that before, just because they didn't remember doesn't mean they didn't consent at the time. I have had to deal with god knows how many people getting drunk and doing dumb shit around me and not remember it the next day.

She could have very well been an active participant if she just blacked out and not passed out. And then it comes back to the same thing, if he was drunk too, he was legally unable to consent as well meaning it was either both were raped or neither were.

Now if he was sober and took advantage, that would be a different thing, but two drunk people being drunk and consenting.....

- - - Updated - - -



If both of them consented, even while drunk, then they both were the instigating party as they both agreed to the act while they did it.

I know and i agree, was just mentioning it because it shows that there is even less of a case for rape and more a case of "i drank too much and did something stupid".

- - - Updated - - -

You clearly don't understand the law. Instigating party is convicted when both are drunk. You're really embarrassing yourself.

And you still do not know who instigated the sex.

[Freighter]

First you have to prove that there was a rape, that means that she didn't consent. Then you have to prove that he is the one that did the raping, nothing in this opinion piece suggests this. And no, asking for consent isn't the same as instigating sex.
Thus far all you have done is point a finger at the guy and scream "rapist", just because someone is drunk doesn't mean that they can not instigate sex.

In most cases it is. Most guys will eagerly stick their dick in you if you consent. Many even if you're not able to legally consent, they don't stop to think before they do and then they find themselves in trouble with the law.

[Findlyn]

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/instigate

To incite, stimulate, or induce into action; goad into an unlawful or bad action, such as a crime.
The term instigate is used synonymously with abet, which is the intentional encouragement or aid of another individual in committing a crime.`

So by the legal definition, it is only instigating if it is with the intention of commiting a crime. Two people having drunken sex is not instigating rape.

[Vyuvarax]

If both of them consented, even while drunk, then they both were the instigating party as they both agreed to the act while they did it.

It 100% does not matter that both of them did or did not consent because the woman is 100% considered by a court incapable of giving consent due to her intoxication. Talking about consent over and over when it doesn't matter for the outcome of the case makes you sound so dumb. Jesus, dude.

[Fugus]

You clearly don't understand the law. Instigating party is convicted when both are drunk. You're really embarrassing yourself.

Not embarrassing myself at all, just you showing me a poorly worded law that ignores the situation trying to place blame on a single party when it lies with both parties.

Logically, either both are being raped or neither of them are because they both consented to it while drunk. Whomever asked first should be beside the point when both agree to it at the time.

[Freighter]

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/instigate

To incite, stimulate, or induce into action; goad into an unlawful or bad action, such as a crime.
The term instigate is used synonymously with abet, which is the intentional encouragement or aid of another individual in committing a crime.`

So by the legal definition, it is only instigating if it is with the intention of commiting a crime. Two people having drunken sex is not instigating rape, unless there is a unlawful context to it.

instigate
ˈɪnstɪɡeɪt/
bring about or initiate (an action or event).

instigator
ˈɪnstɪɡeɪtə/
a person who brings about or initiates something.

[Fugus]

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/instigate

To incite, stimulate, or induce into action; goad into an unlawful or bad action, such as a crime.
The term instigate is used synonymously with abet, which is the intentional encouragement or aid of another individual in committing a crime.`

So by the legal definition, it is only instigating if it is with the intention of commiting a crime. Two people having drunken sex is not instigating rape.

@Vyuvarax , here. I was correct. Guess it was you embarrassing yourself.

[Vyuvarax]

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/instigate

To incite, stimulate, or induce into action; goad into an unlawful or bad action, such as a crime.
The term instigate is used synonymously with abet, which is the intentional encouragement or aid of another individual in committing a crime.`

So by the legal definition, it is only instigating if it is with the intention of commiting a crime. Two people having drunken sex is not instigating rape.

You understand that a semicolon denotes two seperate definitions, correct? So the part that comes before the semicolon stands on its own as one definition and the part that comes after stands on its own as another definition? Lol good god...

[Deleted]

In most cases it is. Most guys will eagerly stick their dick in you if you consent. Many even if you're not able to legally consent, they don't stop to think before they do and then they find themselves in trouble with the law.

No it isn't, it is even taught that you have to ask consent for every new action you undertake. So for a guy to ask for consent doesn't mean that he instigated it.
Sex isn't something that males do to females, most females want their cunts stuffed as much as guys are willing to do it.

[Vyuvarax]

@Vyuvarax , here. I was correct. Guess it was you embarrassing yourself.

lol I guess you don't understand dictionaries, either.

[Freighter]

No it isn't

Yeah, it is. Guys will gladly stick their dick into you once they know you consent.

[Findlyn]

It 100% does not matter that both of them did or did not consent because the woman is 100% considered by a court incapable of giving consent due to her intoxication. Talking about consent over and over when it doesn't matter for the outcome of the case makes you sound so dumb. Jesus, dude.

and again, as it has been pointed out; if he is guilty of rape, then so should she. You keep acting like she was the only one intoxicated/impaired, if you think any level of intoxication makes you unable to give consent, that goes for ALL parties. Sort of how like if a <18 year old person, sends nude pics to another, both parties are actually guilty of having/distributing child pornography.

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah, it is. Guys will gladly stick their dick into you once they know you consent.

And girls will cry wol...err rape every chance they get when they feel like the regret/are embarrassed about a night of sex.

See, i can do hyperbole too!

[Deleted]

Yeah, it is. Guys will gladly stick their dick into you once they know you consent.

And what is wrong with guys liking sex? Girls like sex just as much, as i've said, they like to get their cunts stuffed as much as guys like to put their dicks in it.

[Freighter]

And girls will cry wol...err rape every chance they get when they feel like the regret/are embarrassed about a night of sex.

See, i can do hyperbole too!

I've heard of people reporting regretting sex as rape in an amount that I count on one hand. On the other hand, I can't keep count of how many times a guy has eagerly stuck it in me.

And what is wrong with guys liking sex? Girls like sex just as much, as i've said, they like to get their cunts stuffed as much as guys like to put their dicks in it.

I haven't said it's wrong.

[Fugus]

lol I guess you don't understand dictionaries, either.

"goad into an unlawful or bad action, such as a crime."

I understand that wording perfectly fine.

[Vyuvarax]

and again, as it has been pointed out; if he is guilty of rape, then so should she. You keep acting like she was the only one intoxicated/impaired, if you think any level of intoxication makes you unable to give consent, that goes for ALL parties. Sort of how like if a <18 year old person, sends nude pics to another, both parties are actually guilty of having/distributing child pornography.

I'm citing US law. I don't have to insert my opinion. The courts have ruled that the instigating, or acting, party is guilty. That's how it is in these cases. Arguing with me outside the confines of the law doesn't really change the law.

[Findlyn]

You understand that a semicolon denotes two seperate definitions, correct? So the part that comes before the semicolon stands on its own as one definition and the part that comes after stands on its own as another definition? Lol good god...

No, a semi colon just is a break of a sentence with two clauses that compliment each other, but are not separate. So more like they are in conjunction with each other. Most definitions will list them separately if they have multiple definitions.