Let's be honest. Trump coulda raped a woman on tape and at least 20% of the country would still have voted for him.
How drunk is too drunk? How is someone to judge? What is the criteria that a person needs to meet in order to be able to consent? How is someone else supposed to determine whether someone else meets those criteria? How is a judge or jury supposed to accurately determine that someone did or did not meet those criteria after the fact when there's no evidence either way?
This is the whole crux of your argument. How is someone in that situation, who is interacting with that person supposed to determine whether the consent they receive is ACTUALLY consent or it's really not because the person giving it is now doesn't meet some ambiguous criteria that's nearly impossible to determine.
I can kind of understand where you're coming from, but it's not even close to being as crystal clear as you seem to think it is.
Also, does this also apply to men? Because your statements seem to be focused entirely on a WOMAN being unable to give consent when she's drunk.
I agree about the "real rape less believable" part. It's horrible. But, and not to suggest you disagree, we shouldn't forget that the falsely accused is also a victim of a horrible crime. This is literally life ruining sometimes, as you point out. These cases need to end with the accuser being punished. Waste of time/money/justice system along with the two other issues mentioned. There are already laws about it, but there need to be severe punishments for this sort of false accusation.
If "Being Drunk" negates all accountability, we wouldn't be jailing drink drivers.
If you're only a "whore" when you're drunk and do not even remember being such, YOU shouldn't drink.
Or at least, don't bitch about the trouble you get yourself into, by being a drunk whore.
<~$~("The truth, is limitless in its range. If you drop a 'T' and look at it in reverse, it could hurt.")~$~> L.F.
<~$~("The most hopelessly stupid man is he who is not aware he is wise.")~$~> I.A.
I think thats a bit extreme. If they knowing made a false report, then yes, they should be prosecuted. The problem is when people drinking and both parties are functioning enough to consent but they wake up with the after effects and incorrectly think they were raped. I've investigated a couple where it turned out to be similar to this case, but the girls themselves legitimately thought they were drunk. They drank too much and didnt remember much afterwards, but at the time witnesses said they were functioning and not stumbling drunk. So while they werent raped, they werent intentionally or maliciously trying to get someone in trouble wrongly. They believed it to be true when they reported.