Jump to content

Sex while intoxicated?


Recommended Posts

A question for discussion...

 

My daughter is in high school, and one of the topics they have set to discuss in health class is consent to sex, especially if alcohol is involved.

 

while the current law in my country is sort of ambiguous, the policy on many university campuses ( where this seems to be a problem) is that a woman can't consent if she is intoxicated ( I would assume that this also applies to men, but I don't know for sure).

 

What is your opinion on this? When I was that age ( university) , having sex with a woman who was drunk was seen as "taking advantage of her" and quite a sleazy thing to do, but illegal? I don't think it was.

 

Is there sort of a double standard about this when it comes to whether its a man or a woman?

Link to post
Share on other sites
In the US both in law and in university rules: gender doesn't matter. So no double standard.

 

 

Gender does matter actually.

 

The double standard is real. Women can't give consent while intoxicated, but it seems this doesn't apply to men. Both in practice and in teaching young people.

 

 

Think about the intoxicated rule for a second. Party at some ones house. Everyone's drinking. One guy goes into his room and tries to go to sleep. Intoxicated woman wanders in there looking to score. They have sex. According to what they are teaching these days, he raped her.

Edited by Keenly
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author

My daughter and I talked about this, as I gnat to try and get her thinking about situations that could come up when she's older and what to do if it happens. In a way she's lucky, as she can't drink due to some medication she needs to take.

 

I did a bit of looking, and from what I can tell, though I'm no expert, is that an intoxicated person can't form consent ( at least where I live) but the issue becomes defining "intoxicated".

 

http://sieccan.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/SIECCAN-Sexual-Health-Issue-Brief_Consent.pdf

 

It also seems as thought the law may be very black and white with respect to treating men and women the same with regard to this subject, the reality may be very different.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the U.S., this is simply not true:

 

Gender does matter actually.

 

The double standard is real. Women can't give consent while intoxicated, but it seems this doesn't apply to men. Both in practice and in teaching young people.

 

 

Think about the intoxicated rule for a second. Party at some ones house. Everyone's drinking. One guy goes into his room and tries to go to sleep. Intoxicated woman wanders in there looking to score. They have sex. According to what they are teaching these days, he raped her.

 

This is:

 

In the US both in law and in university rules: gender doesn't matter. So no double standard.

 

 

While it is a more prominent issue on campus, in U.S. law, it is presumed that one who is intoxicated is "not in their right mind"; consent cannot be given in one is "not in their right mind", whether the cause be organic or manufactured.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
In the U.S., this is simply not true:

This is:

While it is a more prominent issue on campus, in U.S. law, it is presumed that one who is intoxicated is "not in their right mind"; consent cannot be given in one is "not in their right mind", whether the cause be organic or manufactured.

 

Unfortunately, while the law may say one thing, the prevailing attitude may be quite different. There is a thread going in the infidelity section where this can be clearly seen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

According to the law that IS written in black and white, taking advantage of EITHER gender while they are intoxicated IS illegal and CAN be prosecuted.

 

Does it always happen? No. Are there some contradicting attitudes out there? Yep. But if we are asking what the law says - the LAW is blind to gender. The fact that some people aren't does not change what is written.

 

The way to change this is for more men to come forward and more bulldog prosecutors to go for the jugular.

 

Bashing women who drink or women who are raped or other such playground whining won't fix anything.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Unfortunately, while the law may say one thing, the prevailing attitude may be quite different. There is a thread going in the infidelity section where this can be clearly seen.

 

"Prevailing attitude" and the law often have little to do with one another, other than often The Law can and will, over time, change prevailing attitudes.

 

Anyone who is truly concerned with the prevailing attitude surrounding double-standards of any type should consider becoming a more vocal and politically-active feminist, if they truly would like to wipe out double-standards, no matter where one lives in the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
According to the law that IS written in black and white, taking advantage of EITHER gender while they are intoxicated IS illegal and CAN be prosecuted.

 

Does it always happen? No. Are there some contradicting attitudes out there? Yep. But if we are asking what the law says - the LAW is blind to gender. The fact that some people aren't does not change what is written.

 

The way to change this is for more men to come forward and more bulldog prosecutors to go for the jugular.

 

Bashing women who drink or women who are raped or other such playground whining won't fix anything.

 

 

I agree.

It seems that the problem for some is that whether it be a man or a woman ( or even a child) that if he or she got intoxicated, they somehow asked for it.

 

there was a case near where I live where a teenage girl got drunk and passed out at a party, she was assaulted, and the video of it was distributed. She was bullied and treated very cruelly for it, and got little help. Finally, after some very vocal efforts by her family, the boys involved were charged.

Sadly, some even came out in support of the guys, and the bullying got even worse.

She ended up committing suicide.

 

This is an example of the incongruity between the law and the day to day reality, and I'm sure there are others.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
"Prevailing attitude" and the law often have little to do with one another, other than often The Law can and will, over time, change prevailing attitudes.

 

Anyone who is truly concerned with the prevailing attitude surrounding double-standards of any type should consider becoming a more vocal and politically-active feminist, if they truly would like to wipe out double-standards, no matter where one lives in the world.

 

I do speak out. In my opinion, it's not acceptable whether it happens to a woman or a man, and work with some local agencies to help make sure this is included in the educational materials they distribute.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are social norms that still affect reporting, both for men and women. Women don't like to be seen as victims of rape bc they then get the 'damaged goods' label, and men don't like it bc being seen as taken advantage of sexually is 'unmanly' in many circles. But like was said above, the law itself doesn't care or distinguish. (I'm assuming the laws where OP lives and the US are fundamentally similar in this regard.)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
There are social norms that still affect reporting, both for men and women. Women don't like to be seen as victims of rape bc they then get the 'damaged goods' label, and men don't like it bc being seen as taken advantage of sexually is 'unmanly' in many circles. But like was said above, the law itself doesn't care or distinguish. (I'm assuming the laws where OP lives and the US are fundamentally similar in this regard.)

 

The law may state "intoxicated', but how do you define intoxicated?

 

The problem is that a gray area exists in defining "intoxication".

 

Here ( canada) one can not legally form consent if intoxicated. This carries to other ares as well, such as contract law.

 

How does one define intoxicated? Under our law, for example, it is illegal to drive while intoxicated or with a blood alcohol level of 0.08 ( depending upon the province it may be higher or lower) . That is a clear line.

 

What should the line be for sex? Can a person who has had a few drinks form consent?

Link to post
Share on other sites
The law may state "intoxicated', but how do you define intoxicated?

 

The problem is that a gray area exists in defining "intoxication".

 

Here ( canada) one can not legally form consent if intoxicated. This carries to other ares as well, such as contract law.

 

How does one define intoxicated? Under our law, for example, it is illegal to drive while intoxicated or with a blood alcohol level of 0.08 ( depending upon the province it may be higher or lower) . That is a clear line.

 

What should the line be for sex? Can a person who has had a few drinks form consent?

 

I suppose it'd have to be determined on a case-by-case basis, depending on findings of an investigation - witness testimony, etc.

 

The BAC standard applies to driving specifically, and there are different standards that apply to other types of intoxication-related crimes (public intoxication, etc.).

Link to post
Share on other sites
A question for discussion...

 

My daughter is in high school, and one of the topics they have set to discuss in health class is consent to sex, especially if alcohol is involved.

 

while the current law in my country is sort of ambiguous, the policy on many university campuses ( where this seems to be a problem) is that a woman can't consent if she is intoxicated ( I would assume that this also applies to men, but I don't know for sure).

 

What is your opinion on this? When I was that age ( university) , having sex with a woman who was drunk was seen as "taking advantage of her" and quite a sleazy thing to do, but illegal? I don't think it was.

 

Is there sort of a double standard about this when it comes to whether its a man or a woman?

 

Man or woman, the person cannot consent if intoxicated. If one party is sober, or significantly less intoxicated than the other, and has sex with the under the influence party, it is rape.

Period.

Men can rape women, women can rape men, men can rape men, women can rape men. Gender is irrelevant in that. Ability to consent is.

 

 

 

(Though, if they are in a relationship and have previously clarified that they are okay with sex even while intoxicated, of course that's different.)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

my ex/gf said she was drunk (sometimes blacked out even) every time she had sex. Even in relationships, she said she always got drunk before sex. She was a heavy drinker back then. Does that mean every time she had sex it was rape?

 

I've done tons of drugs and used them in combination with heavy drinking... but I still take responsibility for my actions. Using alcohol as an excuse for bad behavior is such pathetic excuse. Maybe if you're 16 years old and don't have any tolerance it might be different, but when you're an adult who meets people in bars, it's pretty ridiculous to say having sex while drunk is rape.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If she is tipsy and wants to have I wouldnt mind, but if she is seriously than NO, I want to have sex with sober person without the bad smell of alcohol.

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...