Lugh
Sophomore
@dcu
Posts: 848
Likes: 77
 
|
Post by Lugh on Mar 29, 2018 18:58:44 GMT
can the man who fucked the drunk person be held responsible if they are drunk? If the woman cannot consent then how can the man? Something to think about you are one of those weird feminists who think like the above.
|
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Mar 29, 2018 19:12:56 GMT
can the man who fucked the drunk person be held responsible if they are drunk? If the woman cannot consent then how can the man? Something to think about you are one of those weird feminists who think like the above. If a guy has enough mastery over his physical actions that he can fuck a woman, then he can't plausibly claim he was too drunk to NOT do it. |
|
Lugh
Sophomore
@dcu
Posts: 848
Likes: 77
|
Post by Lugh on Mar 29, 2018 19:15:44 GMT
can the man who fucked the drunk person be held responsible if they are drunk? If the woman cannot consent then how can the man? Something to think about you are one of those weird feminists who think like the above. If a guy has enough mastery over his physical actions that he can fuck a woman, then he can't plausibly claim he was too drunk to control himself. It's really not that hard to fuck someone, it doesnt take any complex body-eye coordination skills to fuck somebody. Anyway who said the woman in this situation was any drunker than he was? Also who said anything about controlling themselves? Obviously you are in control, no matter how drunk you are. |
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Mar 29, 2018 19:24:05 GMT
No one says it's complex. It still takes deliberate and some careful physical action on the part of the man, while a woman can be passed out. So, how drunk is the woman? Just too drunk to drive? Or too drunk to walk?
|
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Mar 29, 2018 19:26:35 GMT
The question is confusing.
Are you saying the women is consenting though drunk?
If so, the notion of it being rape is probably more philosophical than legal considering the amount of reasonable doubt.
If you are saying that drunk due is raping too drunk or passed out woman, then of course it's still rape since being drunk is rarely a good alibi for anything in the first place.
|
|
Lugh
Sophomore
@dcu
Posts: 848
Likes: 77
|
Post by Lugh on Mar 29, 2018 19:31:09 GMT
No one says it's complex. It still takes deliberate and some careful physical action on the part of the man, while a woman can be passed out. So, how drunk is the woman? Just too drunk to drive? Or too drunk to walk?
Who said anything about being passed out? Does it matter? Either way the "too drunk to be able to consent" line is arbitrary. |
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Mar 29, 2018 19:37:13 GMT
Either way the "too drunk to be able to consent" line is arbitrary. So, what do you want to do? Eliminate the line, tell a woman, "Even if he had to carry you over his shoulder to his room, that still counts as consent"? |
|
Lugh
Sophomore
@dcu
Posts: 848
Likes: 77
|
Post by Lugh on Mar 29, 2018 19:44:01 GMT
Either way the "too drunk to be able to consent" line is arbitrary. So, what do you want to do? Eliminate the line, tell a woman, "Even if he had to carry you over his shoulder to his room, that still counts as consent"? If she enjoyed it or had the ability to deny him but didn't then it was consent. Just to clarify consent does not necessarily imply morality. For example if a woman was extremely drunk and prior to being drunk she was repulsed by me for some reason and we had consensual sex then that would be immoral despite the fact that it was consensual. |
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Mar 29, 2018 19:57:13 GMT
So, what do you want to do? Eliminate the line, tell a woman, "Even if he had to carry you over his shoulder to his room, that still counts as consent"? And how is a judge or jury supposed to decide if she "had the ability to deny him"? By drawing a line, which generally speaking is: "Just too drunk to drive, able to consent. Too drunk to walk, unable to consent". |
|
Lugh
Sophomore
@dcu
Posts: 848
Likes: 77
|
Post by Lugh on Mar 29, 2018 20:22:41 GMT
And how is a judge or jury supposed to decide if she "had the ability to deny him"? By drawing a line, which generally speaking is: "Just too drunk to drive, able to consent. Too drunk to walk, unable to consent". so consent has nothing to enjoying with enjoying something or saying yes to something? Well that's a bizarre definition of consent. "And how is a judge or jury supposed to decide if she "had the ability to deny him"" You can test the levels of blood in alcohol. |
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Mar 29, 2018 20:27:29 GMT
And how is a judge or jury supposed to decide if she "had the ability to deny him"? By drawing a line, which generally speaking is: "Just too drunk to drive, able to consent. Too drunk to walk, unable to consent". "And how is a judge or jury supposed to decide if she "had the ability to deny him"" You can test the levels of blood in alcohol. Yes, that will work, because blood alcohol tests are always given at the time that two people are having sex.
I think I need a drink now.
|
|
Lugh
Sophomore
@dcu
Posts: 848
Likes: 77
|
Post by Lugh on Mar 29, 2018 20:32:02 GMT
"And how is a judge or jury supposed to decide if she "had the ability to deny him"" You can test the levels of blood in alcohol. Yes, that will work, because blood alcohol tests are always given at the time that two people are having sex.
I think I need a drink now.
First off I am guessing alcohol deceases proportionally with time. Second of all. How would your solution (Too drunk to walk, unable to consent) solve the problem of you stated? What makes you think the jury wouldnt tbe able to tell if someone was able to deny him but able to tell if she was too drunk to walk? |
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Mar 29, 2018 20:38:49 GMT
Yes, that will work, because blood alcohol tests are always given at the time that two people are having sex.
I think I need a drink now.
They would decide by listening to the testimony of the couple involved, as well as from any witnesses to the woman's state before the alleged rape. Y'know, weigh the evidence, like all courtrooms must.
|
|
Lugh
Sophomore
@dcu
Posts: 848
Likes: 77
|
Post by Lugh on Mar 29, 2018 20:48:02 GMT
What makes you think the jury wouldnt tbe able to tell if someone was able to deny him but able to tell if she was too drunk to walk? They would decide by listening to the testimony of the couple involved, as well as from any witnesses to the woman's state before the alleged rape. Y'know, weigh the evidence, like all courtrooms must.
Ok so why would that method be more effective at determining if someone was unable to walk then being unable to deny a man sex? |
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Mar 29, 2018 20:54:21 GMT
They would decide by listening to the testimony of the couple involved, as well as from any witnesses to the woman's state before the alleged rape. Y'know, weigh the evidence, like all courtrooms must.
Ok so why would that method be more effective at determining if someone was unable to walk then being unable to deny a man sex? If a jury hears that a woman had to be carried out of the bar, they will reasonably conclude that she was unable to give informed consent to sex.
I don't know what makes any of this so tough for you to accept. But I won't dwell on it.
|
|
Lugh
Sophomore
@dcu
Posts: 848
Likes: 77
|
Post by Lugh on Mar 29, 2018 20:59:22 GMT
Ok so why would that method be more effective at determining if someone was unable to walk then being unable to deny a man sex? If a jury hears that a woman had to be carried out of the bar, they will reasonably conclude that she was unable to give informed consent to sex.
I don't know what makes any of this so tough for you to accept. But I won't dwell on it.
Ok fair enough but why draw the line there? It is completely arbitrary. Why not draw the line somewhere along the spectrum of drunkness where one is less drunk? This is just a really poor ad hoc argument. Anyway I noticed you have conveniently glossed over the fact that alcohol bllood level is a thing that can be measured and presumably there is a pattern that can be observed with regards to the speed at which a certain level of alcohol leaves one's blood. |
|
|
|
Post by them1ghtyhumph on Mar 29, 2018 21:21:01 GMT
If a jury hears that a woman had to be carried out of the bar, they will reasonably conclude that she was unable to give informed consent to sex.
I don't know what makes any of this so tough for you to accept. But I won't dwell on it.
Ok fair enough but why draw the line there? It is completely arbitrary. Why not draw the line somewhere along the spectrum of drunkness where one is less drunk? This is just a really poor ad hoc argument. Anyway I noticed you have conveniently glossed over the fact that alcohol bllood level is a thing that can be measured and presumably there is a pattern that can be observed with regards to the speed at which a certain level of alcohol leaves one's blood. Are you planning something? |
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Mar 29, 2018 21:46:07 GMT
If a jury hears that a woman had to be carried out of the bar, they will reasonably conclude that she was unable to give informed consent to sex.
I don't know what makes any of this so tough for you to accept. But I won't dwell on it.
That's a pretty big presumption. Is this something you have looked into? I haven't. Do you know anything about the reliability of determining what someone's blood alcohol level WAS 48 hours (for instance) before the test is given? If not, then do some research before you press such a dubious point. Lines like these are drawn where a consensus of state legislators, in consultation with medical and legal professionals, conclude that it's reasonable to draw them. It's not arbitrary. They don't throw darts at a board to decide. If you think the line should be changed, then build a convincing case based on some real data and reasoned argument. So far, you don't appear to have given five cents worth of thought to this before you settled on a firm opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Mar 29, 2018 21:55:31 GMT
I'm trying to figure you out politically, you're a rather odd mix of communism, MRA talking points, and anti-atheism.
|
|
Lugh
Sophomore
@dcu
Posts: 848
Likes: 77
|
Post by Lugh on Mar 29, 2018 22:00:43 GMT
I'm trying to figure you out politically, you're a rather odd mix of communism, MRA talking points, and anti-atheism. Well to make you even more confused I suppose I should add that I support the Soviet Union's oppression of the Churches. I dont have a major dislike for fascism in comparison to other forms of capitalism either, like most communists. I am very weird politically. |
|
