Which of these following cases is rape?

Post Reply New Topic

I don't understand how someone's not capible of consenting to sex when their drunk but is able to be charged for drunk driving. When someone choses to drive drunk their jungment is also impared when they make that decision & they are held accountable for any wrecks & deaths that may result despite the fact that their jugement was impared when they made the decision in the 1st place. Yet when they are drunk they are suddently deemed incapable of making the decision to have sex or not. People need to be held accountable for their own desisions. If someone choses to get wasted around people he/she doesn't know; he/she was a moron not to consider that they might try to take advatage or that he/she might come on to them while drunk & he/she should own up to that decision instrad of crying rape, just as when a person choses to get wasted at a place he/she drove too, he/she was a mornon to to consider that he/ahe might drive back & should be picked up & charged for drunk driving if he/she decideds to drive back.

Embrace true Islam and none of these cases would occur.

I am well acquainted with rape laws in my state; the intoxication of the aggressor is legally irrelevant, but if the victim was drunk they have grounds for pressing charges.

I also want to point out that E does NOT say the man consented to it. It says he enjoyed it the whole time. That's not the same thing. Someone may enjoy the sex but still not give consent or be unable to give consent. This kind of confusion results in arguments that if a woman gets aroused or has an orgasm during forcible rape, that is the same as consent. It's an ugly and wrong-headed idea.

Tbh I think it all depends on how one looks at it. You could make a case out of A, B, and E because one party did not have full control over mental facilities--ergo, they may not have been coherent enough to give actual "consent". C and D, with both parties intoxicated would probably be considered "poor judgement" as long as both parties agreed and were adults.

The thing is though, due to society's double standards, I feel that it would be possible for the male in most cases to be convicted of "rape" since women tend to be seen as the "weaker sex", anyway.

In my opinion, none of these cases are rape, just poor judgement.

all of them rape

None of them are rape.

None of the above. All involved consent. Regret doesn't make it rape.

If the person you're trying to shag has had that much that they are unable to walk unaided, I would consider it rape to have sex with them because their mental awareness is extremely depleted.

This discussion reminds me of an episode of 'What would you do" -

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QcLs98NeJY[/youtube]

Perhaps this matter could be resolved (at least to a great extent) by the introduction of a law against people using drugs in public to the extent that they become incapable of sentient thought.
The situation could still be problematic at private parties and suchlike of course, but the frequency of it happening would most likely be greatly reduced.