379
Anon pregames (sh.itjust.works)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] southsamurai@sh.itjust.works 47 points 1 week ago

I'm going to give a longer explanation than was already given.

So, imagine yourself at a hospital. You're about to have a minor surgery, and get knocked out. While you're under, some nurse comes in and fucks you in the ass.

Is that rape?

Switch things up. You're at a bar, having a good time, someone slips something in your drink. While you're under the influence of that hit of whatever, they take you into the bathroom and fuck you in the ass, and you agreed to that, you may even like it.

Is that rape?

On a fundamental level, if someone is visibly drunk, or even olfactorily drunk (meaning your can smell the booze on them), they are in a state of mind that is the same as being drugged. It doesn't matter if they are initiating contact, they are unable to give meaningful consent.

Now, if you want to argue we need another term instead of rape, I'm okay with that. We can call it whatever. But we have statutory rape already, which exists because we recognize that even when someone is the initiator, there are states of mind and being that simply can't make a choice to have sex in a meaningful way. So using the term rape for violating meaningful consent is fine, even when it's an adult, and even when they initiate.

I am also aware that there are edge cases where consenting before consuming a substance could/should count as meaningful consent. And I'm aware that there is a range of inebriation where meaningful consent is still possible. However it is nearly impossible to tell without testing what a person's blood alcohol level is, so we're limited. That in turn means that the standard for (at least colloquial usage) what is and isn't inebriated rape has to be broader than it would be if we had reliable testing on the fly.

I also agree with your point that she was ignoring consent, and being an absolutely horrible person, and if she had persisted by force or coercion and he had given in, I wouldn't accept her being drunk as a defense against any charges brought.

But there's a fundamental inability to consent when drunk. How drunk? That's something that would need to be addressed by medical science and then legislated. What's the maximum BAC someone can give meaningful consent for other things? But that fact is there, that alcohol serves to break down the ability to consent, and sex without consent is considered rape, on at least a colloquial level, if not always on a legal level everywhere.

[-] Jax@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 week ago

I want to point out two things

1: She threw up, assuming she doesn't have a pocket dimension in her throat she likely threw up most of the alcohol.

2: OP was almost certainly drinking. OP makes no mention of throwing up. We can pretty safely assume OP is also drunk, and likely has more alcohol still in his system than her.

Seems like a lot of people ITT think that consent is a one way street. He said no and was drunk, she pushed. We can at the very least admit that she sexually assaulted him, and if you think otherwise you need to rethink some things.

[-] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 week ago

We can pretty safely assume OP is also drunk

How? Pre-gaming doesn't typically result in being drunk, it's something you do to cut the costs of getting drunk at a bar. It's usually something like 1-2 drinks, so you'd be a little buzzed, but not drunk. If he was drunk, I highly doubt he'd have the fortitude to refuse, because alcohol dramatically lowers your inhibitions. It could also be that OP doesn't drink, he just went because he likes the girl.

So no, I don't think we can safely assume OP is drunk. Also, you don't throw up alcohol until after you're already drunk, so throwing up most of the alcohol isn't going to sober her up.

[-] Fizz@lemmy.nz 4 points 1 week ago

Pre gaming at 22 definitely involves heavy drinking.

[-] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 week ago

It can, but I've "pre-gamed" with people who are drinking without drinking myself. Designated drivers are certainly present if the bars aren't within walking distance. Generally speaking, people don't get drunk before going to the bar, because the bar won't let you order if you're visibly drunk, and why would they allow you to stay if you're not a paying customer?

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (22 replies)
this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2024
379 points (95.9% liked)

Greentext

3966 readers
1294 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS