Is it rape? (poll included)

[Homosexy]

Same, but, these are people we are talking about. As much as we would like them to, it's bound to still happen, but whether it's right or wrong I can't say, since that's on moral grounds.... and morality is something I hate. :/ Though, in legal terms, I can see how A and C are rape, though A is arguable. B is at most assualt, but, it seems that it can also turn out to be good as in the guy ended up liking it, we may never know I suppose. d:

It's not a good idea to speculate that victims of sexual assult might end up liking it.

Whether they "liked it" or not doesn't make it any less of a rape. So it doesn't really matter if they liked it or not. Still rape. If they ended up liking it, it was only their body's reaction to sex of any kind, in my opinion. It's also dangerous to bring up whether or not a victim "liked it" because it's more reason for the victim to blame themselves and hate themselves if they feel that they liked it.

[Kingdom of Bennington]

Perhaps it depends on who defines it, more so than on the situations themselves? The only consent that matters to me is God's consent, since if he doesn't give it, it's not up to lower beings to ignore do it against his will.

Fortunately, the legal system does not believe that sex outside of marriage is a crime, or that its existence nullifies the concept of rape.

Thats not entirely true. In Islamic county's The Koran (or Qura'n. There are many different spellings for it.) has far reaching effects on the the rape and adulty laws of their nations. A man can not rape his wife. A woman can not have sex outside the marriage, but the man can.

[Aquophia]

But if a person consents to drinking alcohol, then he or she would know that when you are drunk, you are far less inhibited than you would be when sober. This is pretty common knowlege and that person made that choice to allow him or herself to become that way, so how can you say that being drunk means you cant consent to anything when you clearly put yourself in such such a vulnerable position by your own free will?

Self-responsibility has to come into play somewhere. If you don't want to wake up next to a stranger, then maybe you should not drink so much in the first place.

Because the responsibility for preventing rape, as we all know, lies on the prospective victims. We can't expect people to refrain from having sex with an unconscious or drunk person, so that person must stay conscious and sober. Obviously.

Just so you know, your meme gifs don't augment your post in any way.

Second off, I clearly noted that unconscious sex is wrong. Maybe read my earlier post a little more carefully.

[Homosexy]

Scenario A: If the woman intended to have sex, and are otherwise okay with people having sex with her while she is unconscious, then no. Otherwise yes.

Scenario B: If the man is capable of bringing the act to an end and doesn't then it is not rape.

Scenario C: No, the woman did have the choice to stop her husband so not rape. But the husband is clearly a douchebag.

---

Basically as long as a prospective rape victim has the power to stop a "rape" but chooses not too, than it aint rape in my book.

It's most definitely rape, even if the victim is capable of overpowering her rapist. It's not black and white like that. I had the capability of beating my rapist, but out of fear decided that it was less dangerous for me to let him rape me, than hit him, try to make it through all of his friends, and then run out into some strange town.

Coercion is rape, physical force is rape, when a person is forced (by any means) to have intercourse or do sexual actions against their will, it is rape, regardless of whether or not they're CAPABLE of fighting them off.

[Ertae]

The three are clearly wrong, but if they are "rape" is bit more complicated.

A. Not rape, she gave a condom, that's giving consent. Not a nice thing to do, and I would never do it, but the "she gave a condom" part makes it clear to me she gave her consent. And one more reason to not drink alcohol - it disables our ability to think about consequences and give consent, and not only for sex, so it makes all ethical issues blurry...

Wrong. So if someone pulled a girl into a car and tried to rape her, it became apparent that she was going to get raped, and the man didn't have a condom, so she gave him one, that makes it consensual sex?
That's basically what you just said, and that is not true at all.

I believe that post implies that the act of giving a condom is consent when not being coerced, and alcohol doesn't coerce. Giving a condom to a rapist during a rape wouldn't be permission.

[Ifreann]

Because the responsibility for preventing rape, as we all know, lies on the prospective victims. We can't expect people to refrain from having sex with an unconscious or drunk person, so that person must stay conscious and sober. Obviously.

Just so you know, your meme gifs don't augment your post in any way.

I'm expressing my distaste for the things you're saying visually. I wouldn't consider my posts complete without them.

Second off, I clearly noted that unconscious sex is wrong. Maybe read my post a little more carefully.

So you agree that it's the responsibility of the victim and not the perpetrator. with regards to drunk sex? Or did you not read my post carefully enough and missed how I said "unconscious or drunk" and "conscious and sober"?

[Ethel mermania]

The number of people who think having sex with an unconscious person is OK is a little scary.

i would not say A is oK, it is seriously icky, but is it rape? As someone else pointed out, consent was given and never withdrawn.

I knew a girl who got off on having sex while unconcious and masturbated while looking at the pictures later.

B and C are both rape.

[Faeggot]

The number of people who think having sex with an unconscious person is OK is a little scary.

i would not say A is oK, it is seriously icky, but is it rape? As someone else pointed out, consent was given and never withdrawn.

I knew a girl who got off on having sex while unconcious and masturbated while looking at the pictures later.

B and C are both rape.

How is passing out not a withdrawal?

There is a fetish for that, but it is not related to most cases like this.

[Ifreann]

The number of people who think having sex with an unconscious person is OK is a little scary.

i would not say A is oK, it is seriously icky, but is it rape? As someone else pointed out, consent was given and never withdrawn.

I propose a comparable situation. I sign up for a sky dive. I pay up front, go through the safety lecture, and board the plane. When we're climbing, I have an attack of nerves and pass out. I never actually withdrew consent, being too occupied with being unconscious, and did previously consent to jump out of the plane. What happens next? Am I thrown out of the plane, or does it land with me still on board?

[Homosexy]

Wrong. So if someone pulled a girl into a car and tried to rape her, it became apparent that she was going to get raped, and the man didn't have a condom, so she gave him one, that makes it consensual sex?
That's basically what you just said, and that is not true at all.

I believe that post implies that the act of giving a condom is consent when not being coerced, and alcohol doesn't coerce. Giving a condom to a rapist during a rape wouldn't be permission.

But it's the same principle. Why does it have to apply to that situation and not others? TECHNICALLY, having sex with someone who is drunk could be construed as rape, although it wouldn't hold up in court. Just because she gave the condom doesn't mean she wanted it. And when she passed out, all consent was withdrawn. Sorry, dude, she passed out, you can't have sex with her. When someone is asleep, they have no capability of verbally withdrawing consent, but that doesn't make it consensual.

[Ovisterra]

The number of people who think having sex with an unconscious person is OK is a little scary.

i would not say A is oK, it is seriously icky, but is it rape? As someone else pointed out, consent was given and never withdrawn.

If someone is unable to give or withdraw informed consent, it's rape.

[Juristonia]

Even apart of the whole "is it rape" debate, why would you even want to hump someone who's completely unconscious?
But yeah, in my eyes it's rape. If you're not physically able to withdraw consent, you're not physically able to give consent.

[Aquophia]

Just so you know, your meme gifs don't augment your post in any way.

I'm expressing my distaste for the things you're saying visually. I wouldn't consider my posts complete without them.

Second off, I clearly noted that unconscious sex is wrong. Maybe read my post a little more carefully.

So you agree that it's the responsibility of the victim and not the perpetrator. with regards to drunk sex? Or did you not read my post carefully enough and missed how I said "unconscious or drunk" and "conscious and sober"?

I think it's the responsibility of a person to know the possible outcomes of drinking too much. Alcohol is notorious for lowering inhibitions and increasing sexual desire. If you know that and you drink in excess anyway, then it's your own fault if you wake up next to some person the next day. We have been given the right to drink alcohol and with that right comes responsibility for our own actions. If you don't think people can handle that responsibility, then maybe we should just ban alcohol again since obviously people can't handle it.

[Ertae]

It currently qualifies as rape. I don't think it should.

Because...?

There's a difference between consenting to sex

In no sane world is drunkenly handing over a condom and then passing out consenting to sex.

and then not being all there for it and being murdered.

What the crime is isn't important. What is important is that, if you somehow contrive to prevent being convicted of a crime, you can't be legally punished for it. According to you, the scenario described isn't rape because it isn't legally punishable. I am asking if that holds true of any other crime. Murder came to my mind first, but feel free to substitute any other crime you prefer if it'll get you to actually address my point.

In this instance, I consider initiating sex with someone and giving them a condom as consent to engage in 'normal' sex, even if intoxicated. Here's what I came up with for your alternate crime question. Look at this not with regards to the nature of the act itself, but of the atmosphere around it; hitting someone isn't pleasant, but consent technically can be given, both when being coerced (which would nullify true consent) and when voluntarily initiating the 'assault': Two kids on the playground. Kid A says kid B can hit him. Kid B hits him, and everyone is fine. If kid B takes that 'consent' and doesn't stop attacking, it crosses over to assault. Kid A gave consent for a little punch, and everyone expects that. A sane, socially-minded person would not misconstrue "hit me" as "crack my skull".

[Juristonia]

I think it's the responsibility of a person to know the possible outcomes of drinking too much. Alcohol is notorious for lowering inhibitions and increasing sexual desire. If you know that and you drink in excess anyway, then it's your own fault if you wake up next to some person the next day. We have been given the right to drink alcohol and with that right comes responsibility for our own actions. If you don't think people can handle that responsibility, then maybe we should just ban alcohol again since obviously people can't handle it.

..Wow.
That's some nicely dressed up victim shaming you got going on there.

[Ertae]

I believe that post implies that the act of giving a condom is consent when not being coerced, and alcohol doesn't coerce. Giving a condom to a rapist during a rape wouldn't be permission.

But it's the same principle. Why does it have to apply to that situation and not others? TECHNICALLY, having sex with someone who is drunk could be construed as rape, although it wouldn't hold up in court. Just because she gave the condom doesn't mean she wanted it. And when she passed out, all consent was withdrawn. Sorry, dude, she passed out, you can't have sex with her. When someone is asleep, they have no capability of verbally withdrawing consent, but that doesn't make it consensual.

I still feel that the condom implies "normal" sex is allowed in cases where the person was not being coerced before initiating the act, even if they were intoxicated. Going beyond that would very easily fall under rape.

[Risottia]

Because the responsibility for preventing rape, as we all know, lies on the prospective victims. We can't expect people to refrain from having sex with an unconscious or drunk person, so that person must stay conscious and sober. Obviously.

Conscious, sober and AWAKE. 24/7, 365/year (366 on leap years).


And let's not even start about total anesthesia, you pervs.

[Homosexy]

I think it's the responsibility of a person to know the possible outcomes of drinking too much. Alcohol is notorious for lowering inhibitions and increasing sexual desire. If you know that and you drink in excess anyway, then it's your own fault if you wake up next to some person the next day. We have been given the right to drink alcohol and with that right comes responsibility for our own actions. If you don't think people can handle that responsibility, then maybe we should just ban alcohol again since obviously people can't handle it.

..Wow.
That's some nicely dressed up victim shaming you got going on there.

....... This. ^^^

[Mavorpen]

None of them.

[Hathradic States]

B is rather obvious as rape. Both A and C are in the grey area inbetween.

[Demirysis]

I would say that none of them are rape. That doesn't make any of them okay though.

[Ovisterra]

I'm expressing my distaste for the things you're saying visually. I wouldn't consider my posts complete without them.


So you agree that it's the responsibility of the victim and not the perpetrator. with regards to drunk sex? Or did you not read my post carefully enough and missed how I said "unconscious or drunk" and "conscious and sober"?

I think it's the responsibility of a person to know the possible outcomes of drinking too much. Alcohol is notorious for lowering inhibitions and increasing sexual desire. If you know that and you drink in excess anyway, then it's your own fault if you wake up next to some person the next day. We have been given the right to drink alcohol and with that right comes responsibility for our own actions. If you don't think people can handle that responsibility, then maybe we should just ban alcohol again since obviously people can't handle it.

Yeah, but someone knew that you had poor (or non-existent) decision making capabilities and still had sex with you. They're still a rapist.

Sure, drinking in excess is irresponsible, but that doesn't mean you instantly become responsible for the actions of every twat who interacts with you. If you're walking home drunk (because you can't drive) and someone stabs you, by your logic it's your fault for drinking too much and ending up walking home.

[Kilobugya]

The three are clearly wrong, but if they are "rape" is bit more complicated.

A. Not rape, she gave a condom, that's giving consent. Not a nice thing to do, and I would never do it, but the "she gave a condom" part makes it clear to me she gave her consent. And one more reason to not drink alcohol - it disables our ability to think about consequences and give consent, and not only for sex, so it makes all ethical issues blurry...

Wrong. So if someone pulled a girl into a car and tried to rape her, it became apparent that she was going to get raped, and the man didn't have a condom, so she gave him one, that makes it consensual sex?
That's basically what you just said, and that is not true at all.

No, not all, she wasn't forced to give the condom in the scenario. A forced consent is no longer consent, regardless of the shape of consent.

[Ifreann]

Even apart of the whole "is it rape" debate, why would you even want to hump someone who's completely unconscious?

Some people are into that kind of thing. Hell, some people are into just about anything you care to imagine.

---

I'm expressing my distaste for the things you're saying visually. I wouldn't consider my posts complete without them.


So you agree that it's the responsibility of the victim and not the perpetrator. with regards to drunk sex? Or did you not read my post carefully enough and missed how I said "unconscious or drunk" and "conscious and sober"?

I think it's the responsibility of a person to know the possible outcomes of drinking too much. Alcohol is notorious for lowering inhibitions and increasing sexual desire. If you know that and you drink in excess anyway, then it's your own fault if you wake up next to some person the next day. We have been given the right to drink alcohol and with that right comes responsibility for our own actions. If you don't think people can handle that responsibility, then maybe we should just ban alcohol again since obviously people can't handle it.

And what of the responsibility to secure informed consent before having sex with someone? Does that not matter? Can the same knowledge about the effects alcohol not be used to conclude that a drunk's consent is invalid?

[Aquophia]

I think it's the responsibility of a person to know the possible outcomes of drinking too much. Alcohol is notorious for lowering inhibitions and increasing sexual desire. If you know that and you drink in excess anyway, then it's your own fault if you wake up next to some person the next day. We have been given the right to drink alcohol and with that right comes responsibility for our own actions. If you don't think people can handle that responsibility, then maybe we should just ban alcohol again since obviously people can't handle it.

..Wow.
That's some nicely dressed up victim shaming you got going on there.

Where do you get the idea that there is a victim? The only scenario im describing here is this:

Woman goes to bar>Woman drinks too much>Woman eyes some hot guy, starts making moves on him and takes him home.>Woman wake up the next day, calls the police for "rape." and man gets put in jail.

Save for the last part, there was no victim at all.

And what of the responsibility to secure informed consent before having sex with someone? Does that not matter? Can the same knowledge about the effects alcohol not be used to conclude that a drunk's consent is invalid?

The consent is not invalid because no one forced someone to drink alcohol. That person consented to it on his or her own. That means that also consented to the possible consequences, wheather that be waking up next to somebody, or crashing a car. I really hope you don't try to say next that somebody who gets drunk and crashes a car is a victim too.