65 replies to this topic

[svines85]

Spoiler

Exactly my point. Don't get so drunk you lose control of yourself.

As someone underage you're not liable because you're still a punk kid but if you're an adult, you'll have to exercise restraint.

If adults aren't responsible for their own actions, who would be?

 

Maybe I'll get a lot of hate for that but I agree. She shouldn't have taken pills she didn't know what did, from people she didn't know, under more than suspicious circumstances.

I mean, who in their right mind takes random drugs from strangers? Yeah these assholes are fucking scum for doing that kinda shit but c'mon.

Some amount of a healthy distrust of strangers should be exerted.

You know, I'm not real big on "what if..." questions, but just out of curiosity........ Kokai, just to take this out of the morality-strewn land mine field that is any question regarding rape, let me shoot a hypothetical at you...personally. 

 

So, you're drunk as hell......falling down, completely wasted.........and along comes someone who, seeing that you're shitfaced and can't possible take up for yourself, they push your drunken ass down, snatch the keys to your car out of your pocket, and steal your fucking car.

 

So, is it all your fault? I mean, you got too drunk to fend off a thief, right? By the reasoning you seem to have expressed above (it's all the victim's fault for not taking care of themselves), that guy wasn't really a strong-arm thief at all, right?

 

You think about this and tell me if you really don't think they committed a crime against you..........this really isn't any different than the question originally posed in this thread. Yes, this somewhat circumvents the question of "impaired judgement" brought on by the op's requirement that the victim did say yes at some point.......but you really should ask yourself if this is really such a black and white issue that you can just blithely answer "it's their fault cuz they were drunk" like you seem to be wanting to do.

Edited by svines85, 11 December 2016 - 10:31 PM.

[Yaomo]

just to have mentioned it, people are biologically incapable of taking full responsibility for their actions before they're around 25 years old. the part of the brain that calculates risk and understands responsibility isn't fully developed before that, particularly in men. though it takes longer than until 18 for women as well.

at my age, i actually see anyone under 20 as kids, and even until 23-25 they're still not particularly adult.

but the 30+yo gang rapists were fully capable of knowing what they were tricking that girl into, and they did it with malicious intent. that's a known fact even, regarding that, particular case.

so if someone abuses another person's vulnerable state, they're innocent because the other person got into that state of their own free will? that's hardly true. it's rape exactly because the rapist abuses the victim's vulnerability.

[Kokai]

You know, I'm not real big on "what if..." questions, but just out of curiosity........ Kokai, just to take this out of the morality-strewn land mine field that is any question regarding rape, let me shoot a hypothetical at you...personally. 

So, you're drunk as hell......falling down, completely wasted.........and along comes someone who, seeing that you're shitfaced and can't possible take up for yourself, they push your drunken ass down, snatch the keys to your car out of your pocket, and steal your fucking car.

So, is it all your fault? I mean, you got too drunk to fend off a thief, right? By the reasoning you seem to have expressed above (it's all the victim's fault for not taking care of themselves), that guy wasn't really a strong-arm thief at all, right?

You think about this and tell me if you really don't think they committed a crime against you..........this really isn't any different than the question originally posed in this thread. Yes, this somewhat circumvents the question of "impaired judgement" brought on by the op's requirement that the victim did say yes at some point.......but you really should ask yourself if this is really such a black and white issue that you can just blithely answer "it's their fault cuz they were drunk" like you seem to be wanting to do.

Who said no crime was commited? If I did, or insinuated that somehow, I want to make clear that I don't think no crime was commited. Neither in the original, nor your proposed scenario.

I don't think I said somewhere that ALL the blame is with the victim either. The question was "is it rape if you have sex with someone who is drunk". I proposed that I don't think it's rape.

However, that doesn't mean that no crime was commited. At least I didn't mean that and I don't think I said it either.

Also your proposed scenario does not really lend itself to that nuance, at least I don't think it does. If I overlooked something there, please enlighten me to my mistake.

 

I'm not hellbent on my opinions. If you can propose new information, I'm more than willing to change my point of view. Please don't make it sound like I'm happily condemning rape victims.

 

 

just to have mentioned it, people are biologically incapable of taking full responsibility for their actions before they're around 25 years old. the part of the brain that calculates risk and understands responsibility isn't fully developed before that, particularly in men. though it takes longer than until 18 for women as well.

at my age, i actually see anyone under 20 as kids, and even until 23-25 they're still not particularly adult.

but the 30+yo gang rapists were fully capable of knowing what they were tricking that girl into, and they did it with malicious intent. that's a known fact even, regarding that, particular case.

so if someone abuses another person's vulnerable state, they're innocent because the other person got into that state of their own free will? that's hardly true. it's rape exactly because the rapist abuses the victim's vulnerability.

I don't remember saying they were innocent. That they were allowed to get away with it is disgusting...I just said she shouldn't have accepted pills with unknown effect from strangers.

Or did I say somewhere the sc*mf*ck faces are innocent? I looked over my post a couple of time but didn't find the part where I insinuated that. (because I never directly said so) Please help?

Also when did the topic shift from being drunk to taking pills from strangers? Did I miss something?

[svines85]

Who said no crime was commited? If I did [...]

Spoiler

or insinuated that somehow, I want to make clear that I don't think no crime was commited. Neither in the original, nor your proposed scenario.

I don't think I said somewhere that ALL the blame is with the victim either. The question was "is it rape if you have sex with someone who is drunk". I proposed that I don't think it's rape.

However, that doesn't mean that no crime was commited. At least I didn't mean that and I don't think I said it either.

Also your proposed scenario does not really lend itself to that nuance, at least I don't think it does. If I overlooked something there, please enlighten me to my mistake.

 

I'm not hellbent on my opinions. If you can propose new information, I'm more than willing to change my point of view. Please don't make it sound like I'm happily condemning rape victims.

 

 

I don't remember saying they were innocent. That they were allowed to get away with it is disgusting...I just said she shouldn't have accepted pills with unknown effect from strangers.

Or did I say somewhere the sc*mf*ck faces are innocent? I looked over my post a couple of time but didn't find the part where I insinuated that. (because I never directly said so) Please help?

Also when did the topic shift from being drunk to taking pills from strangers? Did I miss something?

 

Is it rape, if you have sex with someone drunk?

 

Short version: Not unless that someone is underage and you're not.

Spoiler

Long version:

As an adult, you're expected to take care of yourself. That includes not drinking so much you do stuff you normally wouldn't do (as drunks tend to do).

Putting the blame on the "sober" party (if there is one) is like saying: "Hey, you may be an adult and responsible for yourself but you got drunk so all your responsibility falls to that other person."

That's not right. It may suck for the person but that's what you get for being irresponsible and drinking until your judgement is impaired. Nobody should do that.

 

If the other party is underage, then I'd argue you could call it rape because someone underage is NOT expected to be responsible for themselves. So taking advantage of someone like that is not okay.

 

If both parties are underage, then it gets tricky. That's something that can only be judged case by case.

 

If you don't see the difference between the two threads, then I'm afraid you're beyond our help. R.I.P.

Don't try to play with words on us at this point, you don't get to have it both ways now that people are calling you on what you've said.

 

"It may suck for the person but that's what you get for being irresponsible and drinking until your judgement is impaired. Nobody should do that."

 

Here you go, this passage, along with pretty much all the rest of your posts, make it pretty clear you're now trying to back up and talk out of both sides of your mouth, and it's not gonna fly.

 

Let me ask you something else.....that passage up there, that's what you'd have told your mother or younger brother when they came home with a horror story about how somebody had gotten them drunk and then browbeat them into "agreeing" to put out some of that ass? Really? That wouldn't seem like rape to you? Whatever their age?

 

Again, it sure does seem like you're trying to backtrack on what you've said..........you can take it back, you know, I at least will let you off if you just want to say that you might've mispoke a little in your previous posts and all. But it's your call.

[TeaCat]

it could be rape?!

[Yaomo]

yeah, it could be rape.
doesn't mean it is every time it happens.
but abusing someone sexually while they're in a vulnerable state is usually regarded as rape.

this means that kokai's way of thinking doesn't really work all that well. you could argue that it wasn't rape if a drunk person comes on to someone else and they gladly accept.

but it is impossible to get a lawful consent from someone who is drunk, just like a contract may be judges invalid if one of the people who signed it was too drunk to be held responsible for their stupidity.

you may argue that even a drunk person should be held responsible for their own action, but it's not their own action if someone else abuses their vulnerability. and if someone takes drugs that are offered them after they got drunk, i wouldn't hold them responsible for lacking the judgement, as someone else tricked them and most likely abused their trust.