So if a sober person having sex with a drunk person is rape because the sober person has more influence on the drunk person, being seen as the voice of reason, an emotionally mature person having sex with an emotionally immature person is rape.
Advertisement
by Zottistan » Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:15 am
by The Parkus Empire » Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:19 am
by Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro » Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:21 am
Zottistan wrote:Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro wrote:It is "their fault", then.
For getting severely intoxicated, for not having how to accesse reliable people they'd trust, for trusting people that are semi-reliable, for not getting their STD prevention and birth control methods accessible, updated and easy to use.
If I do drugs and go to a gay party and do a banheirão or a darkroom and get AIDS, I am not going to cry like a baby and try to put guys in prison.
You could say the same thing about somebody being murdered wandering down a dark alley. "They shouldn't have been going down there, it's their fault."
Other people will. And some of them would have a valid claim. The problem is deciding which do have a valid claim and which don't.
by Zottistan » Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:21 am
The Parkus Empire wrote:Zottistan wrote:So if a sober person having sex with a drunk person is rape because the sober person has more influence on the drunk person, being seen as the voice of reason, an emotionally mature person having sex with an emotionally immature person is rape.
Emotional maturity isn't easy to define legally, but we use age a guideline and it works pretty well.
The Truth and Light wrote:Zottistan wrote:So if a sober person having sex with a drunk person is rape because the sober person has more influence on the drunk person, being seen as the voice of reason, an emotionally mature person having sex with an emotionally immature person is rape.
Which is why we have the age of consent.
by The Truth and Light » Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:22 am
Zottistan wrote:Exactly. So we should have a cutoff point where somebody has been too intoxicated to consent to sex.
by The Parkus Empire » Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:24 am
Zottistan wrote:Neither is lucidity or degree of control. Should there be a cutoff point where a person is too drunk to consent to sex?
by Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro » Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:27 am
The Parkus Empire wrote:Zottistan wrote:So if a sober person having sex with a drunk person is rape because the sober person has more influence on the drunk person, being seen as the voice of reason, an emotionally mature person having sex with an emotionally immature person is rape.
Emotional maturity isn't easy to define legally, but we use age a guideline and it works pretty well.
by Zottistan » Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:29 am
Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro wrote:Zottistan wrote:You could say the same thing about somebody being murdered wandering down a dark alley. "They shouldn't have been going down there, it's their fault."
Other people will. And some of them would have a valid claim. The problem is deciding which do have a valid claim and which don't.
They wouldn't because they were likely asking for it. That is how we survive in Brazil, if they don't know because they're irresponsive youngsters pretending to be adults, it is no one's business.
Be drugged to be raped is a thing. Get drugged yourself ignoring possible jeopardizing situations is a whole other.
by The Truth and Light » Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:30 am
Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro wrote:The Parkus Empire wrote:Emotional maturity isn't easy to define legally, but we use age a guideline and it works pretty well.
It turns non-rape situations (14 x 21, a pedorape? Fucking c'mon, gringoes) into inexcusable crimes agaisnt the dignity of not really suffering persons. Even if their long-term relationship might end because of this, what is more hurting than the sex (yes, consented) itself.
Just as those often stupid anti-zoophilia and anti-incest laws.
by Forster Keys » Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:30 am
by Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro » Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:35 am
The Truth and Light wrote:Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro wrote:It turns non-rape situations (14 x 21, a pedorape? Fucking c'mon, gringoes) into inexcusable crimes agaisnt the dignity of not really suffering persons. Even if their long-term relationship might end because of this, what is more hurting than the sex (yes, consented) itself.
Just as those often stupid anti-zoophilia and anti-incest laws.
A twenty-one-year-old having relations with a fourteen-year-old is not sex. It is rape.
Sex is a physical relationship between consenting equals.
I find it to be idiotic that you want to excuse the abuse of minor citizens.
by Zottistan » Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:35 am
The Truth and Light wrote:Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro wrote:It turns non-rape situations (14 x 21, a pedorape? Fucking c'mon, gringoes) into inexcusable crimes agaisnt the dignity of not really suffering persons. Even if their long-term relationship might end because of this, what is more hurting than the sex (yes, consented) itself.
Just as those often stupid anti-zoophilia and anti-incest laws.
A twenty-one-year-old having relations with a fourteen-year-old is not sex. It is rape.
Sex is a physical relationship between consenting equals.
I find it to be idiotic that you want to excuse the abuse of minor citizens.
by The Truth and Light » Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:38 am
Zottistan wrote:The Truth and Light wrote:A twenty-one-year-old having relations with a fourteen-year-old is not sex. It is rape.
Sex is a physical relationship between consenting equals.
I find it to be idiotic that you want to excuse the abuse of minor citizens.
There are exceptions to every rule. There are people above the age of consent who are too emotionally immature to consent to sex, and people below the age of consent who, realistically, are mature and physically developed enough to consent to sex.
by Zottistan » Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:41 am
The Truth and Light wrote:Zottistan wrote:There are exceptions to every rule. There are people above the age of consent who are too emotionally immature to consent to sex, and people below the age of consent who, realistically, are mature and physically developed enough to consent to sex.
They are not legally equals. Their socio-economic status creates a power imbalance. Which is why it makes it a Bad Idea.
by The Rich Port » Wed Aug 28, 2013 9:21 am
The Parkus Empire wrote:The Rich Port wrote:It does, but that doesn't stop people from raping each other.
Because that's what they're doing.
No it isn't, that's so fucking stupid it hurts. The woman who got me into alcohol always got drunk before looking for sex because she much preferred drunk sex (on the part of both parties), she was not being fucking raped every time.
by Starkiller101 » Wed Aug 28, 2013 9:41 am
by The Rich Port » Wed Aug 28, 2013 9:45 am
Starkiller101 wrote:Alchoal has a lot to do with people getting rapped
by Starkiller101 » Wed Aug 28, 2013 9:46 am
But alcohol makes you do stupid things such as running naked on the streets and saying things you would't usually say.
by The Rich Port » Wed Aug 28, 2013 9:48 am
Starkiller101 wrote:But alcohol makes you do stupid things such as running naked on the streets and saying things you would't usually say.The Rich Port wrote:
Not in my current life.
Actually, come to think of it, I don't think I've heard of anything major happen around campus.
Methinks there was plenty of partying in the spring.
by The Parkus Empire » Wed Aug 28, 2013 9:54 am
The Rich Port wrote:The Parkus Empire wrote:No it isn't, that's so fucking stupid it hurts. The woman who got me into alcohol always got drunk before looking for sex because she much preferred drunk sex (on the part of both parties), she was not being fucking raped every time.
Wait... She got drunk... Every time before you had sex?
by Tahar Joblis » Wed Aug 28, 2013 9:56 am
The Truth and Light wrote:Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro wrote:It turns non-rape situations (14 x 21, a pedorape? Fucking c'mon, gringoes) into inexcusable crimes agaisnt the dignity of not really suffering persons. Even if their long-term relationship might end because of this, what is more hurting than the sex (yes, consented) itself.
Just as those often stupid anti-zoophilia and anti-incest laws.
A twenty-one-year-old having relations with a fourteen-year-old is not sex. It is rape.
Sex is a physical relationship between consenting equals.
I find it to be idiotic that you want to excuse the abuse of minor citizens.
The Truth and Light wrote:Zottistan wrote:There are exceptions to every rule. There are people above the age of consent who are too emotionally immature to consent to sex, and people below the age of consent who, realistically, are mature and physically developed enough to consent to sex.
They are not legally equals. Their socio-economic status creates a power imbalance. Which is why it makes it a Bad Idea.
by The Rich Port » Wed Aug 28, 2013 9:57 am
The Parkus Empire wrote:
Yup. And not just with me, with everyone I'd ever seen her have sex with (she'd fuck in the middle of a party). When we booked a room, she'd always get at least one bottle of Jack and we'd kill it first.
by The Parkus Empire » Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:08 am
The Rich Port wrote:That... Sounds... Unhealthy.
But, anyway, how is it stupid?
What the hell are they doing, then?
They're incapable of consent if they're both drunk.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Eahland, Maximum Imperium Rex, New Temecula, Nuevo Meshiko, Ravemath, Shrillland, Soviet Haaregrad, Statesburg, The Two Jerseys, The Vooperian Union, Tiami, Verkhoyanska, Xind, Yasuragi
Advertisement