Berberis Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 Asking someone to change their behaviour through fear of being a victim of crime has the situation on its head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loraward Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 I haven't claimed to have an answer for this entirely new question you've raised. Why don't you explain how a chocolate cake does something to anyone... If you want to draw a distinction between raping girls who are comatose through alcohol and using force then that's between you and your conscience (or lack of it), to everyone else they're equally vile. I have never tried to make a distinction between raping girls who are comatose through alcohol and using force, so as usual when you can't counter an argument you invent something to counter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sgtkate Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 (edited) The cake does not give consent in any way. When absolutely blotto drunk a sexual partner cannot give consent in any way. 5 drinks...............grey area............ 4 drinks...............grey area............ 3 drinks...............grey area............ 2 drinks...............grey area............ 1 drink.................grey area............ A sexual partner when sober can give consent. Are you saying that the ....grey area.... does not exsist? I am saying that circumstances alter cases. Of course they exist. The law states quite clearly that there is implied consent, loosely "would the majority of people in that situation believe they had consent". As I've used it before take the Ched Evans case. His co-defendant met the girl as she was leaving a bar and got a taxi with her back to a hotel. He was found not guilty as it could easily be believed that she was giving consent by going back with him to a hotel room (we have no idea what was said between the 2 so the court makes a decision on likelihood). Ched turned up at the hotel with no previous contact with the victim. In this case he was found guilty as most people would NOT believe they had consent (again we can't know what was said in that hotel room). Edited April 30, 2015 by sgtkate Typo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 I have never tried to make a distinction between raping girls who are comatose through alcohol and using force, so as usual when you can't counter an argument you invent something to counter. On the contrary, you either don't understand what an inability to consent it, or it's as I said. one has a drunken night of sex whilst the other drags and 11 year old girl into a park and rapes her at knife point, to me there is a distinct difference You've kept repeating that being drunk makes you unable to consent, and this is simply not true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loraward Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 (edited) This is the kind of poster they should use instead of victim advice ones: http://vancouver.ca/police/assets/pdf/posters/dont-be-that-guy1.pdf JUST BECAUSE SHE’S DRINKING doesn't mean she doesn't want sex, and there lies the problem, lots of drunk people want sex, so how do you tell the difference between the one that says yes and wants sex, and the one that says yes but doesn't want sex. ---------- Post added 30-04-2015 at 10:25 ---------- On the contrary, you either don't understand what an inability to consent it, or it's as I said. You've kept repeating that being drunk makes you unable to consent, and this is simply not true. I haven't said that being drunk makes you unable to consent, you are inventing stuff to argue about again. Edited April 30, 2015 by loraward Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 JUST BECAUSE SHE’S DRINKING doesn't mean she doesn't want sex, and there lies the problem, lots of drunk people want sex, so how do you tell the difference between the one that says yes and wants sex, and the one that says yes but doesn't want sex. ---------- Post added 30-04-2015 at 10:25 ---------- I haven't said that being drunk makes you unable to consent, you are inventing stuff to argue about. Someone that slurs yes and can't reliably stand up on their own is probably incapable of consent. Someone that appears to be compus mentus, albeit drunk, is capable of consent. It's really not that difficult to judge, but if you're not sure, then don't. So, having derailed the thread for multiple pages, are you any closer to understanding what consent is? And why blaming the victim or telling them how to behave to avoid being raped is inappropriate? ---------- Post added 30-04-2015 at 10:29 ---------- I haven't said that being drunk makes you unable to consent, you are inventing stuff to argue about again. one has a drunken night of sex whilst the other drags and 11 year old girl into a park and rapes her at knife point You quite clearly are equating drunken sex with rape here. ---------- Post added 30-04-2015 at 10:30 ---------- Its only rape because the law has decided that in a drunken state people can't make sensible decision in relation to sex, they can't consent. And here you said it even more clearly. ---------- Post added 30-04-2015 at 10:31 ---------- You can't even remember what ridiculous linguistic twists you've gone through to continue the argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sgtkate Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 Someone that slurs yes and can't reliably stand up on their own is probably incapable of consent. Someone that appears to be compus mentus, albeit drunk, is capable of consent. It's really not that difficult to judge, but if you're not sure, then don't. So, having derailed the thread for multiple pages, are you any closer to understanding what consent is? And why blaming the victim or telling them how to behave to avoid being raped is inappropriate? It's pretty basic isn't it? Sex is a fairly intimate thing even if it's a one night stand. Surely there is something inherently wrong with you as a person if you would even consider having sex with someone who you weren't 100% had given consent? As I said on a earlier post, being drunk does not ALWAYS mean you cannot give consent, but as the perpetrator (couldn't think of another word here) there would need to be other reasons why you think you have consent if they were drunk. Things like they are your partner and you are in a happy relationship would be good grounds (not always but often), you've spent the whole evening together and it was implied that you'd go to bed together etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loraward Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 So, having derailed the thread for multiple pages You derailed the thread by bringing cake into the discussion. ---------- Post added 30-04-2015 at 10:40 ---------- It's pretty basic isn't it? Sex is a fairly intimate thing even if it's a one night stand. Surely there is something inherently wrong with you as a person if you would even consider having sex with someone who you weren't 100% had given consent? As I said on a earlier post, being drunk does not ALWAYS mean you cannot give consent, but as the perpetrator (couldn't think of another word here) there would need to be other reasons why you think you have consent if they were drunk. Things like they are your partner and you are in a happy relationship would be good grounds (not always but often), you've spent the whole evening together and it was implied that you'd go to bed together etc. That works both ways, two people meet in a night club, both have been drinking, neither can be 100% that each as consented, thousands have sex on a nightly basis with no problems, but occasionally someone claims they was too drunk to consent to sex and the other is accused of rape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 Firstly, I didn't bring 'other public health campaigns' into the discussion, I used cake though to illustrate why obesity messages are targeted at the obese and not at the food. More importantly it illustrated that you don't understand what consent is. ---------- Post added 30-04-2015 at 10:42 ---------- It's pretty basic isn't it? Sex is a fairly intimate thing even if it's a one night stand. Surely there is something inherently wrong with you as a person if you would even consider having sex with someone who you weren't 100% had given consent? As I said on a earlier post, being drunk does not ALWAYS mean you cannot give consent, but as the perpetrator (couldn't think of another word here) there would need to be other reasons why you think you have consent if they were drunk. Things like they are your partner and you are in a happy relationship would be good grounds (not always but often), you've spent the whole evening together and it was implied that you'd go to bed together etc. There's a long gap between being drunk and being unable to think straight. So long as someone hasn't reached that condition then they're capable of consent. They might make decisions that they wouldn't make sober, but that doesn't mean they can't make them. It doesn't seem that difficult to me to be honest. Smithy seems to be finding it all a bit difficult though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loraward Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 Firstly, I didn't bring 'other public health campaigns' into the discussion, I used cake though to illustrate why obesity messages are targeted at the obese and not at the food. More importantly it illustrated that you don't understand what consent is. I do but you appear to lack the capacity to understand that when people are drunk the boundary is blurred and people don't think rationally. ---------- Post added 30-04-2015 at 10:44 ---------- Firstly, I didn't bring 'other public health campaigns' into the discussion, I used cake though to illustrate why obesity messages are targeted at the obese and not at the food. More importantly it illustrated that you don't understand what consent is. ---------- Post added 30-04-2015 at 10:42 ---------- There's a long gap between being drunk and being unable to think straight. So long as someone hasn't reached that condition then they're capable of consent. They might make decisions that they wouldn't make sober, but that doesn't mean they can't make them. It doesn't seem that difficult to me to be honest. Smithy seems to be finding it all a bit difficult though. Its not difficult in your black and white world in which everyone is sober apart from the one making the accusation of rape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now