Regarding Rape Culture: Its Presence and Method of Attack

[Des-Bal]

So why can't people err on the side of caution? If s/he seems to drunk, looks too drunk, or has drunk a lot, maybe just don't go there? Go home and jack off or flick the bean, or do whatever.

The problem is there is no side of caution. There needs to be a standard of how drunk is too drunk.

[Saint Jade IV]

So why can't people err on the side of caution? If s/he seems to drunk, looks too drunk, or has drunk a lot, maybe just don't go there? Go home and jack off or flick the bean, or do whatever.

The problem is there is no side of caution. There needs to be a standard of how drunk is too drunk.

And there is no way to determine or confirm this. Alcohol and other substances affect people in varying ways. A standard will result in both unfair prosecutions and offenders getting loose.

I don't see why people NEED to get laid. If the only person willing to have sex with you you suspect of being intoxicated, go home and masturbate.

[Des-Bal]

And there is no way to determine or confirm this. Alcohol and other substances affect people in varying ways. A standard will result in both unfair prosecutions and offenders getting loose.

I don't see why people NEED to get laid. If the only person willing to have sex with you you suspect of being intoxicated, go home and masturbate.

A standard will result in legal clarity and the actual possibility of teaching people about consent.

People don't need to get laid, or to drink, or to leave their homes.

[Nadkor]

So why can't people err on the side of caution? If s/he seems to drunk, looks too drunk, or has drunk a lot, maybe just don't go there? Go home and jack off or flick the bean, or do whatever.

The problem is there is no side of caution. There needs to be a standard of how drunk is too drunk.

Why are you so concerned about finding out just where the line is for what you can get away with and it not be rape?

Rather than saying "I guess I'd better not get involved in anything that could be fucking someone without their consent" you're saying "can I do this and get away with it?"

I mean, you appreciate how that makes you look - right?

[The Whispers]

So why can't people err on the side of caution? If s/he seems to drunk, looks too drunk, or has drunk a lot, maybe just don't go there? Go home and jack off or flick the bean, or do whatever.

The problem is there is no side of caution.

They're even a bit drunk, really off limits. Tada. That's really fucking simple. Rape can and does ruin peoples' lives, and saying "well technically I only took advantage of this person to the fullest extent of the law" is kinda sickening.

[Genivaria]

The problem is there is no side of caution. There needs to be a standard of how drunk is too drunk.

Why are you so concerned about finding out just where the line is for what you can get away with and it not be rape?

Rather than saying "I guess I'd better not get involved in anything that could be fucking someone without their consent" you're saying "can I do this and get away with it?"

I mean, you appreciate how that makes you look - right?

I mean good god I have issues with touching peoples property or stepping into their homes without express invitation and there are people who are confused about when it is or isn't rape? The fuck?

[Des-Bal]

Why are you so concerned about finding out just where the line is for what you can get away with and it not be rape?

Rather than saying "I guess I'd better not get involved in anything that could be fucking someone without their consent" you're saying "can I do this and get away with it?"

I mean, you appreciate how that makes you look - right?

Why am I so concerned about the difference between rape and consensual sex being clearly defined? Because I don't like rape.

They're even a bit drunk, really off limits. Tada. That's really fucking simple. Rape can and does ruin peoples' lives, and saying "well technically I only took advantage of this person to the fullest extent of the law" is kinda sickening.

So if the person has imbibed alcohol at any point during the night they are off limits?

[Saint Jade IV]

The problem is there is no side of caution. There needs to be a standard of how drunk is too drunk.

Why are you so concerned about finding out just where the line is for what you can get away with and it not be rape?

Rather than saying "I guess I'd better not get involved in anything that could be fucking someone without their consent" you're saying "can I do this and get away with it?"

I mean, you appreciate how that makes you look - right?

That's my view.

[Des-Bal]

I mean good god I have issues with touching peoples property or stepping into their homes without express invitation and there are people who are confused about when it is or isn't rape? The fuck?

Given there is no real definition confusion and ignorance are the only sides to this particular coin.

[The Whispers]

So if the person has imbibed alcohol at any point during the night they are off limits?

Yeah, pretty much. You don't get laid with randoms much, but you're also probably not ruining anything.

[Genivaria]

I mean good god I have issues with touching peoples property or stepping into their homes without express invitation and there are people who are confused about when it is or isn't rape? The fuck?

Given there is no real definition confusion and ignorance are the only sides to this particular coin.

I'd say lack of consent or lack of ability to GIVE legal consent is a pretty clear line.

[The Parkus Empire]

So why can't people err on the side of caution? If s/he seems to drunk, looks too drunk, or has drunk a lot, maybe just don't go there? Go home and jack off or flick the bean, or do whatever.

The problem is there is no side of caution. There needs to be a standard of how drunk is too drunk.

If it's not something you can judge (I personally feel it's about the safe-to-drive point), then just get prior consent while she's sober (does NOT mean you don't also need drunk consent later). Geeze.

[Des-Bal]

I'd say lack of consent or lack of ability to GIVE legal consent is a pretty clear line.

Where is it? There is no definition as to how drunk you have to be to become unable to give legal consent.

If it's not something you can judge (I personally feel it's about the safe-to-drive point), then just get prior consent while she's sober (does NOT mean you don't also need drunk consent later). Geeze.

The entire point is that "drunk consent" is not a thing.

[Saint Jade IV]

Why are you so concerned about finding out just where the line is for what you can get away with and it not be rape?

Rather than saying "I guess I'd better not get involved in anything that could be fucking someone without their consent" you're saying "can I do this and get away with it?"

I mean, you appreciate how that makes you look - right?

Why am I so concerned about the difference between rape and consensual sex being clearly defined? Because I don't like rape.

You're essentially wanting to know exactly how much you can legally violate someone. Which shows little regard for the feelings or emotions of the people you sleep with.

[Genivaria]

I'd say lack of consent or lack of ability to GIVE legal consent is a pretty clear line.

Where is it? There is no definition as to how drunk you have to be to become unable to give legal consent.

Are they drunk? Yes? Then don't fuck them.
Real confusing that.

[Des-Bal]

But you're asking for a line in the sand in a situation which doesn't have one. Also, you're essentially wanting to know exactly how much you can legally violate someone. Which shows little regard for the feelings or emotions of the people you sleep with.

Sex is not about violation.

After a point "I would like to engage in sexual intercourse" ceases to mean anything.

[Des-Bal]

Are they drunk? Yes? Then don't fuck them.
Real confusing that.

How drunk? Does a person become unable to consent after one drink?

[Nadkor]

Why are you so concerned about finding out just where the line is for what you can get away with and it not be rape?

Rather than saying "I guess I'd better not get involved in anything that could be fucking someone without their consent" you're saying "can I do this and get away with it?"

I mean, you appreciate how that makes you look - right?

Why am I so concerned about the difference between rape and consensual sex being clearly defined? Because I don't like rape.

You're concerned about precisely how drunk someone can be before fucking them becomes legally rape. You don't care about consent. You don't care about fucking someone who isn't into it. You don't care about anything other than you.

You don't give a shit about the people who might feel, and you clearly don't give a shit about rape. You're only in this conversation for self-preservation - precisely how questionably can you act and still get away with it - without the law calling you on it?

It's really fucking questionable behaviour, but we shouldn't be surprised to see it coming from someone who believes in presumed consent and happily had his name applied to fucking someone who has been drugged, believing that that cannot be rape because they had not expressed"anti-consent".

Your views on this are so fucked up that, frankly, nobody is shocked that you want to know just how questionably you can behave and still get away with it legally.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Where is it? There is no definition as to how drunk you have to be to become unable to give legal consent.

Are they drunk? Yes? Then don't fuck them.
Real confusing that.

The sad part is that some people really think that fucking a drunk person is not going too far. In fact, a few months ago I was reading about a case of these 2 guys who raped a girl and one of them showed, when explained, surprise that what he did was rape. He didn't know, which is sad.

As you said, if the person's drunk out of their asses? Don't have sex with them.

[Nadkor]

Are they drunk? Yes? Then don't fuck them.
Real confusing that.

How drunk? Does a person become unable to consent after one drink?

Is that person drunk after one drink? If so then yes.

Would I be drunk to the point of being unable to consent after one drink? No.

Unfortunately reality isn't black and white.

If you can't tell if someone is too drunk to consent then don't fuck them - unless your insatiable desire to get your dick wet is more important to you than not raping someone.

Which, as we know, it is.

Perhaps you should just not fuck anybody to be sure? I mean, I suspect that this would be quite easy for you to manage, but perhaps start trying to actively not get laid from now on.

[Genivaria]

Are they drunk? Yes? Then don't fuck them.
Real confusing that.

How drunk? Does a person become unable to consent after one drink?

Stop. Just stop, I already feel like I need to bath after this conversation.

[Des-Bal]

You're concerned about precisely how drunk someone can be before fucking them becomes legally rape. You don't care about consent. You don't care about fucking someone who isn't into it. You don't care about anything other than you.

You don't give a shit about the people who might feel, and you clearly don't give a shit about rape. You're only in this conversation for self-preservation - precisely how questionably can you act and still get away with it - without the law calling you on it?

It's really fucking questionable behaviour, but we shouldn't be surprised to see it coming from someone who believes in presumed consent and happily had his name applied to fucking someone who has been drugged, believing that that cannot be rape because they had not expressed"anti-consent".

Your views on this are so fucked up that, frankly, nobody is shocked that you want to know just how questionably you can behave and still get away with it legally.

I don't believe in presumed consent I said several dozen times that I do not believe in presumed consent and I disagree with the legal definition of rape for this exact reason. What you're saying is the difference between rape and consensual sex is arbitrarily assigned, the idea you're espousing is the delightfully republican notion that "rape" is just when they regret it after they wake up.

You are Roger fucking Rivard.

[Des-Bal]

The sad part is that some people really think that fucking a drunk person is not going too far. In fact, a few months ago I was reading about a case of these 2 guys who raped a girl and one of them showed, when explained, surprise that what he did was rape. He didn't know, which is sad.

As you said, if the person's drunk out of their asses? Don't have sex with them.

How drunk is "out of their ass?"

[Saint Jade IV]

But you're asking for a line in the sand in a situation which doesn't have one. Also, you're essentially wanting to know exactly how much you can legally violate someone. Which shows little regard for the feelings or emotions of the people you sleep with.

Sex is not about violation.

After a point "I would like to engage in sexual intercourse" ceases to mean anything.

Except that you want a clear definition on exactly how drunk someone can be before it becomes rape. Just how far can you push the envelope and still get off legally. Not considering your partner's feelings. Not concern with whether the person you are fucking might feel violated. Not whether they have the emotional or mental capacity to consent. Just whether they have had the right amount of alcohol for you to be legally in the clear, regardless of the effect on them.

It seems that sex for you is expressly about your own gratification, rather than any kind of mutual pleasure. That kind of thinking means you probably shouldn't be having sex.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

The sad part is that some people really think that fucking a drunk person is not going too far. In fact, a few months ago I was reading about a case of these 2 guys who raped a girl and one of them showed, when explained, surprise that what he did was rape. He didn't know, which is sad.

As you said, if the person's drunk out of their asses? Don't have sex with them.

How drunk is "out of their ass?"

Do you really need to ask? I assume you've been to bars and parties, I assume you have seen drunk people before, on several levels. Right?