NATION

PASSWORD

Booze and Rape

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
The Rich Port
Post Czar
 
Posts: 34348
Founded: Jul 29, 2008
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The Rich Port » Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:12 am

The Parkus Empire wrote:I consented, she consented. Who are you to tell us we didn't?


I could be a juror being presented the facts a particular way by a prosecutor with an axe to grind.

But I'm happy to hear you could trust each other to do such things. People often exclude such things from hypotheticals.

Ah... I'm happy now. ^.^
LAUGH, AND GROW FAT
FIRE. IF IT TAKES YOU TO BURN.
FIRE. IF IT TAKES YOU TO LEARN.
FIRE. TO DESTROY ALL YOU'VE DONE.
FIRE. TO DESTROY ALL YOU'VE BECOME.
THOSE THAT SOW THORNS SHOULD NOT EXPECT FLOWERS.
YOU NEVER KNOW JUST HOW YOU LOOK THROUGH OTHER PEOPLE'S EYES.

Tracking | History | Factbook | Dharma
Economic Report | Regional Forum | Political Compass
CAPINTERN | OMSA | OZZY | PACT | APAC
Summary | Vanguard | The Book Of Sue
THE BILLION BIT BRONY
AHAHAHAHA PONY PONY PONY PONYYY


LOVEWHOYOUARE~


User avatar
The Parkus Empire
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43030
Founded: Sep 12, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby The Parkus Empire » Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:19 am

The Rich Port wrote:I could be a juror being presented the facts a particular way by a prosecutor with an axe to grind.


Sexist juror, racist juror, whatever.

But I'm happy to hear you could trust each other to do such things. People often exclude such things from hypotheticals.

Ah... I'm happy now. ^.^

You don't have the social position or the emotional prowess to manipulate a drunk into sex when you yourself are drunk. It's that simple. A drunkard masturbating is not being sexually assualted
American Orthodox: one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.
Jesus is Allah ن
Burkean conservative
Homophobic
Anti-feminist sexist
♂Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know men and women aren't the same.♀

User avatar
The Rich Port
Post Czar
 
Posts: 34348
Founded: Jul 29, 2008
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The Rich Port » Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:21 am

The Parkus Empire wrote:
The Rich Port wrote:I could be a juror being presented the facts a particular way by a prosecutor with an axe to grind.


Sexist juror, racist juror, whatever.

But I'm happy to hear you could trust each other to do such things. People often exclude such things from hypotheticals.

Ah... I'm happy now. ^.^

You don't have the social position or the emotional prowess to manipulate a drunk into sex when you yourself are drunk. It's that simple. A drunkard masturbating is not being sexually assualted


I'm just being realistic here. This country isn't the most progressive. Or maybe my perception is just rose-tinted because it's Florida.

... Wait... Obviously.

I can't... Assault myself... Can I?
LAUGH, AND GROW FAT
FIRE. IF IT TAKES YOU TO BURN.
FIRE. IF IT TAKES YOU TO LEARN.
FIRE. TO DESTROY ALL YOU'VE DONE.
FIRE. TO DESTROY ALL YOU'VE BECOME.
THOSE THAT SOW THORNS SHOULD NOT EXPECT FLOWERS.
YOU NEVER KNOW JUST HOW YOU LOOK THROUGH OTHER PEOPLE'S EYES.

Tracking | History | Factbook | Dharma
Economic Report | Regional Forum | Political Compass
CAPINTERN | OMSA | OZZY | PACT | APAC
Summary | Vanguard | The Book Of Sue
THE BILLION BIT BRONY
AHAHAHAHA PONY PONY PONY PONYYY


LOVEWHOYOUARE~


User avatar
The Parkus Empire
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43030
Founded: Sep 12, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby The Parkus Empire » Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:24 am

The Rich Port wrote:I'm just being realistic here. This country isn't the most progressive. Or maybe my perception is just rose-tinted because it's Florida.

... Wait... Obviously.

I can't... Assault myself... Can I?

If someone used a special hpyoethical remote control and forced you to masturbate somehow, then yes, you could. Otherwise no, because it cannot possibly happen without your consent.
American Orthodox: one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.
Jesus is Allah ن
Burkean conservative
Homophobic
Anti-feminist sexist
♂Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know men and women aren't the same.♀

User avatar
Zottistan
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14853
Founded: Nov 26, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Zottistan » Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:29 am

The Parkus Empire wrote:
The Rich Port wrote:I could be a juror being presented the facts a particular way by a prosecutor with an axe to grind.


Sexist juror, racist juror, whatever.

But I'm happy to hear you could trust each other to do such things. People often exclude such things from hypotheticals.

Ah... I'm happy now. ^.^

You don't have the social position or the emotional prowess to manipulate a drunk into sex when you yourself are drunk. It's that simple. A drunkard masturbating is not being sexually assualted

"Drunk" isn't an absolute. There are degrees of drunkenness.

User avatar
The Parkus Empire
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43030
Founded: Sep 12, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby The Parkus Empire » Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:31 am

Zottistan wrote:
The Parkus Empire wrote:
Sexist juror, racist juror, whatever.


You don't have the social position or the emotional prowess to manipulate a drunk into sex when you yourself are drunk. It's that simple. A drunkard masturbating is not being sexually assualted

"Drunk" isn't an absolute. There are degrees of drunkenness.

And?
American Orthodox: one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.
Jesus is Allah ن
Burkean conservative
Homophobic
Anti-feminist sexist
♂Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know men and women aren't the same.♀

User avatar
Zottistan
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14853
Founded: Nov 26, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Zottistan » Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:34 am

The Parkus Empire wrote:
Zottistan wrote:"Drunk" isn't an absolute. There are degrees of drunkenness.

And?

A slightly drunk person can manipulate a very drunk person. And depending on the person, a moderately drunk person could probably manipulate a very drunk person.
Last edited by Zottistan on Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:35 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
The Parkus Empire
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43030
Founded: Sep 12, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby The Parkus Empire » Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:43 am

Zottistan wrote:
The Parkus Empire wrote:And?

A slightly drunk person can manipulate a very drunk person. And depending on the person, a moderately drunk person could probably manipulate a very drunk person.

What do you mean by "slightly drunk", exactly? And what do you mean by "very drunk"?
American Orthodox: one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.
Jesus is Allah ن
Burkean conservative
Homophobic
Anti-feminist sexist
♂Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know men and women aren't the same.♀

User avatar
Zottistan
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14853
Founded: Nov 26, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Zottistan » Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:45 am

The Parkus Empire wrote:
Zottistan wrote:A slightly drunk person can manipulate a very drunk person. And depending on the person, a moderately drunk person could probably manipulate a very drunk person.

What do you mean by "slightly drunk", exactly? And what do you mean by "very drunk"?

There's no objective measurement system for drunkenness. That's the problem. But it would be possible for somebody to manipulate somebody who is much drunker than they are.

User avatar
The Parkus Empire
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43030
Founded: Sep 12, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby The Parkus Empire » Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:46 am

Zottistan wrote:
The Parkus Empire wrote:What do you mean by "slightly drunk", exactly? And what do you mean by "very drunk"?

There's no objective measurement system for drunkenness. That's the problem. But it would be possible for somebody to manipulate somebody who is much drunker than they are.

Not really.
American Orthodox: one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.
Jesus is Allah ن
Burkean conservative
Homophobic
Anti-feminist sexist
♂Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know men and women aren't the same.♀

User avatar
New England and The Maritimes
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 28872
Founded: Aug 13, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby New England and The Maritimes » Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:47 am

Zottistan wrote:
The Parkus Empire wrote:What do you mean by "slightly drunk", exactly? And what do you mean by "very drunk"?

There's no objective measurement system for drunkenness. That's the problem. But it would be possible for somebody to manipulate somebody who is much drunker than they are.

There is no objective anything. That's kind of a fact of human existence. Our systems are methods of interpretation and as such the manner in which they are utilized depends on the person utilizing them.
All aboard the Love Train. Choo Choo, honeybears. I am Ininiwiyaw Rocopurr:Get in my bed, you perfect human being.
Yesterday's just a memory

Soviet Haaregrad wrote:Some people's opinions are based on rational observations, others base theirs on imaginative thinking. The reality-based community ought not to waste it's time refuting delusions.

Also, Bonobos
Formerly Brandenburg-Altmark Me.

User avatar
Zottistan
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14853
Founded: Nov 26, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Zottistan » Wed Aug 28, 2013 11:01 am

The Parkus Empire wrote:
Zottistan wrote:There's no objective measurement system for drunkenness. That's the problem. But it would be possible for somebody to manipulate somebody who is much drunker than they are.

Not really.

...Go on.
New England and The Maritimes wrote:
Zottistan wrote:There's no objective measurement system for drunkenness. That's the problem. But it would be possible for somebody to manipulate somebody who is much drunker than they are.

There is no objective anything. That's kind of a fact of human existence. Our systems are methods of interpretation and as such the manner in which they are utilized depends on the person utilizing them.

By objective I mean effective and measurable.
Last edited by Zottistan on Wed Aug 28, 2013 11:09 am, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
Tsiryli
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 106
Founded: Aug 11, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Tsiryli » Wed Aug 28, 2013 1:18 pm

Zottistan wrote:By objective I mean effective and measurable.


Well, the more you must qualify your statements, the less correct you are. I believe you might take the advice of your own avatar/flag.

There are ways of testing for intoxication, such as the "walk a straight line" bit or a breathalyzer test. Blood Alcohol Content is a good quantifier, though it doesn't account for tolerances. The point is that it doesn't matter how drunk they are. It does not matter if they are slightly buzzed or absolutely choke-on-their-own-vomit WASTED. Once alcohol enters the bloodstream (and consequently, the brain), the person's ability to make judgements is impaired and they might be less inhibited to do things that they normally wouldn't. As such, it is wrong to take advantage of that, even if the margin between their drunken state and their sober state is barely noticeable.

User avatar
Zottistan
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14853
Founded: Nov 26, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Zottistan » Wed Aug 28, 2013 1:22 pm

Tsiryli wrote:
Zottistan wrote:By objective I mean effective and measurable.


Well, the more you must qualify your statements, the less correct you are. I believe you might take the advice of your own avatar/flag.

There are ways of testing for intoxication, such as the "walk a straight line" bit or a breathalyzer test. Blood Alcohol Content is a good quantifier, though it doesn't account for tolerances. The point is that it doesn't matter how drunk they are. It does not matter if they are slightly buzzed or absolutely choke-on-their-own-vomit WASTED. Once alcohol enters the bloodstream (and consequently, the brain), the person's ability to make judgements is impaired and they might be less inhibited to do things that they normally wouldn't. As such, it is wrong to take advantage of that, even if the margin between their drunken state and their sober state is barely noticeable.

If they could put numbers on walking a straight line, sure. Breathalyzer estimates blood alcohol, which doesn't take into account resistances or tell how much a person is influenced by alcohol.

And the thread is about two drunk people having sex. So none of that has any relevance.

User avatar
Tsiryli
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 106
Founded: Aug 11, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Tsiryli » Wed Aug 28, 2013 1:41 pm

Zottistan wrote:
And the thread is about two drunk people having sex. So none of that has any relevance.


Is any person in any better a position to make a decision to have sex with someone when you're drunk and they're drunk than when just they are drunk?

And yes, it does have relevance, because you refuted (incorrectly, I might add) that drunkenness is not measurable or quantifiable. If you ask someone to walk a straight line when they're drunk, you're going to see some wobbling or possibly even watch them fall on their ass. Should a person who can barely walk straight be considered of sound enough mind to have their consent be considered legitimate whether or not their partner(s) are drunk or sober? Should anyone drinking a physical and mental depressant drug in any amount be considered rational enough to make sexual advances or consent to them?

No, probably not, in my opinion. Though in the instance that two people are pissed drunk out of their minds and they screw like rabbits for a few hours, I don't know who the rapist would be. I don't know if they're both rapists, or if neither of them are. If it becomes a legal issue, maybe the two parties should receive counseling both as a group and as individuals. You'd have to take their intention into consideration (and this is difficult because people can lie). Was one of them intentionally getting somewhat drunk in order to exploit this grey area, like, premeditated self-intoxication? Did both? (In that case, we'd have a double dilemma.) These are difficult questions to answer, but I suppose that both parties involved would have friends who might be able to provide a look at their behaviors or intentions.

Though I think as a general rule of caution, it'd be a better idea to avoid drunken sex, be it with strangers or intimate friends or even married couples, if only for the sake of avoiding this dilemma.

User avatar
Zottistan
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14853
Founded: Nov 26, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Zottistan » Wed Aug 28, 2013 2:06 pm

Tsiryli wrote:
Zottistan wrote:
And the thread is about two drunk people having sex. So none of that has any relevance.


Is any person in any better a position to make a decision to have sex with someone when you're drunk and they're drunk than when just they are drunk?1

And yes, it does have relevance, because you refuted (incorrectly, I might add) that drunkenness is not measurable or quantifiable. If you ask someone to walk a straight line when they're drunk, you're going to see some wobbling or possibly even watch them fall on their ass.2 Should a person who can barely walk straight be considered of sound enough mind to have their consent be considered legitimate whether or not their partner(s) are drunk or sober? Should anyone drinking a physical and mental depressant drug in any amount be considered rational enough to make sexual advances or consent to them?3

No, probably not, in my opinion. Though in the instance that two people are pissed drunk out of their minds and they screw like rabbits for a few hours, I don't know who the rapist would be. I don't know if they're both rapists, or if neither of them are4. If it becomes a legal issue, maybe the two parties should receive counseling both as a group and as individuals. You'd have to take their intention into consideration (and this is difficult because people can lie). Was one of them intentionally getting somewhat drunk in order to exploit this grey area, like, premeditated self-intoxication? Did both? (In that case, we'd have a double dilemma.) These are difficult questions to answer, but I suppose that both parties involved would have friends who might be able to provide a look at their behaviors or intentions.

Though I think as a general rule of caution, it'd be a better idea to avoid drunken sex5, be it with strangers or intimate friends or even married couples, if only for the sake of avoiding this dilemma.

1. No. But it would be highly unlikely that anybody would be "taking advantage" of the other person being drunk when they themselves are drunk. Not impossible, that's been my whole argument throughout the thread, but without a systematic way of measuring how drunk a person is, you'd never be able to assess who was capable of manipulation.

2. Can you put a number on it? Not using any current system. You can put a number on blood alcohol and you can get a loose idea of drunkenness. But until we have a system for putting a reasonably solid figure on lucidity, we can't measure drunkenness in a way that's going to be useful in decided what qualifies as rape.

3. Depends, you can be drunk and still of sound enough mind to make a decision reasonably well. That's why we need a measurement, to scientifically decide who is capable of it and who isn't. And if both parties are too drunk to make such a decision, what exactly are you going to do about it if they both have sex? Arrest them both?

4. Well, that is, you know, what the thread is about...

5. I've maintained that throughout the thread.
Last edited by Zottistan on Wed Aug 28, 2013 2:06 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Distruzio
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 23841
Founded: Feb 28, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Distruzio » Wed Aug 28, 2013 5:50 pm

The Parkus Empire wrote:
Distruzio wrote:

I was in a jury determining the future of a young man for this very crime. They were both drunk yet she cried rape (upon finding out that, for him, it was just a hook up and he didn't want to date her - which she admitted on the stand). The reality is that she raped him as much as he raped her. So we let him off. He had served his time and received ample punishment.

My thoughts are that neither party should be reprimanded in any way save verbally. They need to be aware of what they've done to one another. Inhibited consent is NOT consent. For that reason I have NEVER had sex with anyone not even the women I have dated (especially not them because I care for them) while I, or they, were drunk or drinking. Never have. Never will. Not even my fiance. I will not rape.

So what you're saying is, that you have the capacity to choose not to have sex while drunk, but your fiancee does not?


Really, Parkus? You read all of that and had to twist a comment about myself to be a comment about someone else? I should say Im surprised but Im not. Shame on you. You know very well what my subject was.
Eastern Orthodox Christian

Anti-Progressive
Conservative

Anti-Feminist
Right leaning Distributist

Anti-Equity
Western Chauvanist

Anti-Globalism
Nationalist

User avatar
Llamalandia
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10637
Founded: Dec 07, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Llamalandia » Wed Aug 28, 2013 6:17 pm

Farnhamia wrote:
The Rich Port wrote:Being a college student as I am, booze and sex are constants in your life. At parties, at home, at bars, designated sober drivers shuttle me and many others like me to our beds, where we may sleep it off.

Often, the two combine, sometimes for better, but sometimes for worse. Acquaintance rape is on the rise, and has been for a while. I've been worrying about falling into it, and often just go to bars to drink, not to pick up chicks or even socialize. I would much rather avoid hurting someone and subsequently hurting myself with jail.

One question that has plagued me is this: if I'm drunk, and the girl I have sex with is drunk, is it rape?

The stereotypical acquaintance rape is when a man intoxicates a woman with a narcotic, directly or indirectly, to take advantage of her.

So, I ask: if both parties are drunk, is it double rape? Is rape nullified? Should either party report the other to the police? Should both parties be put in jail?

It's a sticky question and I daresay you'll be sorry you asked before the thread sinks away to oblivion. Allow me to suggest that you have a law student draw up a no-fault declaration for you covering all those contingencies and that you ask each young woman you meet to sign it. It will be a little embarrassing but may save you a lot of trouble later on.


Wait is that actually possible, I mean Dave Chappell made jokes about a kobe bryant "sex contract" but i can't believe that such consent could actually be given in a durable way by contract. I mean what if one party to such a document later at some point (whether intoxicated or not) decides they want out of said document???

User avatar
Llamalandia
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10637
Founded: Dec 07, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Llamalandia » Wed Aug 28, 2013 6:21 pm

The Parkus Empire wrote:
The Rich Port wrote:That... Sounds... Unhealthy.


It was definitely fun though, since both she and I get super horny when drunk.

But, anyway, how is it stupid?

What the hell are they doing, then?

They're incapable of consent if they're both drunk.


I consented, she consented. Who are you to tell us we didn't?


Hye if I take you out to a bar and we both get drunk and you um consent to give me all your bank info I doubt you'd be too happy in the morining even if I also consented to give you mine. (the idea being i would totally empty your accounts before you sobered up and change all my account info password pins and what not before you had a chance to respond).
Also I'm sure you wouldn't be happy to find a kidney missing if you lets consented to organ donation (not that organ donations are bad but i generally like to know and be able to remember them later.)

User avatar
Des-Bal
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 27502
Founded: Jan 24, 2010
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby Des-Bal » Wed Aug 28, 2013 6:22 pm

The Parkus Empire wrote:You don't have the social position or the emotional prowess to manipulate a drunk into sex when you yourself are drunk. It's that simple. A drunkard masturbating is not being sexually assualted


I'm a generally manipulative person and that is if anything augmented by a couple of drinks.
Welcome to the internet, our men are men, our women are men, our children are FBI agents.

Founding Member The Sovereign League

Red Eclipse Executive Slave Traders: Anonymity Guarantee

User avatar
Llamalandia
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10637
Founded: Dec 07, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Llamalandia » Wed Aug 28, 2013 6:25 pm

I guess a real question could be though if youre unable to remember an event later can it really be al that traumatic to you?? i mean largely that is my understanding of rape as a crime is not so much a result of it being directly physically injurious (not that it can't be but Im not sure how often it is) but more the emotional and sociological aspect of it. The whole power adn domination thing if I understand correctly. That said if youre too drunk to consent aren't you also likely to be so drunk as to not remember or remember only partly the event itself?? if no memories are formed is it not therefor i don't know somehow less of an issue?? :eyebrow:

User avatar
The Steel Magnolia
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8134
Founded: Dec 29, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby The Steel Magnolia » Wed Aug 28, 2013 6:26 pm

The Rich Port wrote:Being a college student as I am, booze and sex are constants in your life. At parties, at home, at bars, designated sober drivers shuttle me and many others like me to our beds, where we may sleep it off.

Often, the two combine, sometimes for better, but sometimes for worse. Acquaintance rape is on the rise, and has been for a while. I've been worrying about falling into it, and often just go to bars to drink, not to pick up chicks or even socialize. I would much rather avoid hurting someone and subsequently hurting myself with jail.

One question that has plagued me is this: if I'm drunk, and the girl I have sex with is drunk, is it rape?

The stereotypical acquaintance rape is when a man intoxicates a woman with a narcotic, directly or indirectly, to take advantage of her.

So, I ask: if both parties are drunk, is it double rape? Is rape nullified? Should either party report the other to the police? Should both parties be put in jail?


How about if there's any doubt you just don't have sex.

User avatar
Des-Bal
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 27502
Founded: Jan 24, 2010
Compulsory Consumerist State

Postby Des-Bal » Wed Aug 28, 2013 6:27 pm

Llamalandia wrote:Wait is that actually possible, I mean Dave Chappell made jokes about a kobe bryant "sex contract" but i can't believe that such consent could actually be given in a durable way by contract. I mean what if one party to such a document later at some point (whether intoxicated or not) decides they want out of said document???

Depends on the circumstances of the case.
Welcome to the internet, our men are men, our women are men, our children are FBI agents.

Founding Member The Sovereign League

Red Eclipse Executive Slave Traders: Anonymity Guarantee

User avatar
The Parkus Empire
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43030
Founded: Sep 12, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby The Parkus Empire » Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:46 pm

Llamalandia wrote:
The Parkus Empire wrote:
It was definitely fun though, since both she and I get super horny when drunk.



I consented, she consented. Who are you to tell us we didn't?


Hye if I take you out to a bar and we both get drunk and you um consent to give me all your bank info I doubt you'd be too happy in the morining even if I also consented to give you mine. (the idea being i would totally empty your accounts before you sobered up and change all my account info password pins and what not before you had a chance to respond).
Also I'm sure you wouldn't be happy to find a kidney missing if you lets consented to organ donation (not that organ donations are bad but i generally like to know and be able to remember them later.)

Giving someone one's bank info does't equate to consent to rifle one's bank.

Donating an organ can't been done that easily, even sober.
American Orthodox: one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.
Jesus is Allah ن
Burkean conservative
Homophobic
Anti-feminist sexist
♂Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know men and women aren't the same.♀

User avatar
The Parkus Empire
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43030
Founded: Sep 12, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby The Parkus Empire » Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:47 pm

Des-Bal wrote:
The Parkus Empire wrote:You don't have the social position or the emotional prowess to manipulate a drunk into sex when you yourself are drunk. It's that simple. A drunkard masturbating is not being sexually assualted


I'm a generally manipulative person and that is if anything augmented by a couple of drinks.

If you manipulate women into sex generally, that's really more of a problem with you being an asshole than with liquor.
American Orthodox: one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.
Jesus is Allah ن
Burkean conservative
Homophobic
Anti-feminist sexist
♂Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know men and women aren't the same.♀

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Cannot think of a name, Darussalam, Grinning Dragon, Kowani, Majestic-12 [Bot], Soviet Technocracy6, The Greater Ohio Valley, The New United States, Torisakia, Uiiop, Yahoo [Bot]

Advertisement

Remove ads