Should "No means No" be "yes means yes"?

[Tastycles]

This anti-rape campaign has been going for a few years now, and you can buy those Lance Armstrong style bracelet things if you want to support it. Essentially the idea is that if a girl says no, it's not ok to have sex with her. The fact that not everybody in the world is inherently aware of that is incredibly depressing, but sadly, some people need to be reminded of such things.

However, the more I think about it, the less suitable it is. Sure, if a girl says no, it doesn't mean she should be forced into having sex. That's an absolute given. But what if she doesn't say yes? Rape cases these days are much less man jumping out of bushes, and much more two drunk people getting really drunk and having drunken sex with each other. When they did that reddit thread on rape recently, most fell into this category, of coercion rather than brute force.

In this case, the girl may not have said the word "no", possibly because she's too drunk to even do so. Does that mean the guy has a carte blanche to do what he wants, just because she left the club with him under her own volition? I don't think so, which is why I think consent should be exactly that consent, not the absence of a rejection. We don't assume most people are ok with being mugged until they say otherwise, so why do we tolerate the same for rape?

 

[Gelgarin]

Whilst its a solid theory, my unfortunate suspicion is that a change in the law of this nature would end up making it harder to prosecute rape cases rather than achieving the intended result. What constitutes 'consent' is such a fucking legal minefield to begin with, that if you make the basis for prosecution "was consent given" rather than "was consent denied" then you risk making a field where prosecution is borders on impossible even more difficult and dependent on "he said" "she said" testimony.

The mugging analogy doesn't really work on account of the absence of millions of consensual muggings taking place on a daily basis.

To be clear, under the letter of the law what you say is already technically in effect. If a person is in a state whereby they are legally incapable of giving informed consent then it is considered rape, even if the sex is completely consensual. This is why you can be prosecuted for bedding an underage person even if they are the initiating partner.

As I understand it the same law holds true for a partner who is too drunk to be in command of their faculties, but prosecutions don't happen because the burden of proof is almost impossible to reach in such a scenario no matter what criteria you look for.

The reason courts typically look for a denial of consent is because that at least is fairly unambiguous. In most scenarios "no" has pretty much one interpretation; physical resistance is better because it produces actual evidence that can be used to support a conviction.

Typing this is leaving a bad taste in my mouth as I realize that I'm getting dangerously close to "misogynistic cunt blaming the rape victim for getting raped" territory, but the all too common scenario of someone getting taken advantage of when drunk is something that I've come to suspect is a problem that the law simply isn't equipped to handle. What goes on in a private bedroom between two inebriated adults is something that no court on earth is, nor ever will be, equipped to handle.

The only way this problem gets solved is for people's behavior to change and for people to stop ending up in the situation where this sort of thing can happen.

 

[Mustang Sally]

Sure, if a girl says no, it doesn't mean she should be forced into having sex. That's an absolute given. But what if she doesn't say yes?

Whilst its a solid theory, my unfortunate suspicion is that a change in the law of this nature would end up making it harder to prosecute rape cases rather than achieving the intended result.

I've wondered when the first case of a woman accusing a man of rape went to court. 100 years ago? 200? Whenever it was, it probably was a woman who was legitimately sexually assaulted and wanted the guy to pay for the crime. Hopefully, she was successful.

But, you know what? Shortly after that first case, I would wager there was a woman whose boyfriend cheated on her with another woman. The girlfriend was mad at him so, having read about the first case in the newspapers, decided: "Hey, I'll just say he raped me like that girl I read about!" Whether she got him convicted or not is almost beside the point because it started this whole legal merry-go-round of "Did he or didn't he?"

I wish every woman would tell the truth about whether she gave consent or not. If we all did that, it wouldn't come down to these he-said, she-said court battles that permanently ruin lives and reputations.....sometimes with merit, sometimes not.

Honestly, when it comes to these "too drunk to be accountable" situations, I fear the courts may sometimes have to err on the side of caution. Maybe courts have to assign some measure of responsibility to women to stay out of these situations, as Gelgarin says in his last sentence. If she's allowed herself to get so stinking drunk that she leaves the bar with the guy and goes to a place where it's damn obvious was their crowning activity of the night is to be, she has to understand what she's letting herself in for; i.e., not only account for how drunk she is, but how drunk he is.

Is that an unfair burden to put on the woman? Perhaps, but it's also realistic. Personally, I weigh 105 pounds; just about any guy would easily overpower me. Especially if he's drunk as a skunk (and I willingly accompanied him to his lair)....what am I supposed to do if he comes after me? He's capable of doing whatever he wants and the only thing I can console myself with is to know I'll nail him in court later? Screw that!

When the two intoxicated people are groping each other, drunk out of their minds, do we really expect the guy to stop for a moment and say: "Listen, hon, are you sure you really want to do this?" And even if he does, is she competent enough that her assent is binding?

And if she gave her consent but later tells the police she didn't, what happens then? Conversely, if she didn't give consent but admits she left the bar with him to go somewhere and have sex.....then changed her mind.....how is the legal system supposed to know what to do with this case? It now becomes the jurisdiction of the legal system, in which her lawyer will paint the accused guy as a willful rapist while the guy's attorney tries to depict her as a ****. Wonderful, huh?

Someday, I'm convinced, there will be a foolproof way to scientifically tell who's telling the truth in these matters. There won't be any more of this O.J. Simpson bullshit. We probably won't see it in our lifetimes, but it'll come.

Still, it won't help in the situation brought up in this topic. What good is a test like that when the woman involved truly doesn't know whether she gave consent or not.....but has decided after the fact she regrets going with the guy so she says she told him no?

An ounce of prevention is worth 100 tons of cure. A woman can have a fun life without putting herself at undue risk. But if she chooses to take the risks, she should understand that her fate...... physically, mentally and legally......is going to wind up in the hands of someone other than herself.

 

[ABMorales787]

Rape cases these days are much less man jumping out of bushes, and much more two drunk people getting really drunk and having drunken sex with each other. When they did that reddit thread on rape recently, most fell into this category, of coercion rather than brute force.

When you put it that way, it's as if we're glorifying negligent behaviour on the part of the women. Being forced into sex is obviously wrong, but it's not as if you're being forced into going on a drunken party craze. That kind of stuff should fall on irresponsibility on the part of the female for letting herself being led on. She got herself drunk to such a point and there was no drugs she consumed without her knowledge. That's reckless behavior on her part.

 

[Loveless]

I swear to God it's a matter of time before the law makes its way into the bedroom. I can honestly foresee within the next 10 years us reaching a stage where people retain legal contracts on their mobile phones and we end up with a situation where people are signing "Sex permission" contracts before getting it on.
I really feel there is a genuine fear growing amongst men of being falsely accused and it's a matter of time before someone addresses it. In the society we have, "Innocent until proven guilty" doesn't work because the mere accusation alone can be incredibly damaging.

As for consent, presumed or confirmed, it's an utter minefield or unverified fact, opinion, legal definitions of being in clear mind and absolutes. The reality is what goes on behind closed doors is usually going to come down to "He said, she said", no law can change that.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

I mean....How drunk was HE ?? is always how I would feel about it. Why when two people are near alchohol poisoning, it becomes the males responsibility to be able to withstand / undo the natural effects of alchohol, and be able to exercise sound judgement and perception?

Anyways, what everyone has said is spot on. If you dont want to be raped(in the scenario of which we speak, obviously), dont get so shitfaced you cant take care of yourself. If you dont want to be accused of rape, dont fuck a girl who is so shitfaced she cant take care of herself/dont get so shitfaced you dont realize she is so shitfaced she cant take care of herself.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Unfortunately, it's become something of a double edged sword to be born with a penis.

When I was in college, I went to my share of parties and did see people hooking up while they were stoned out of their heads or so drunk that they couldn't see straight. At one party, one of my friends hooked up with this girl he'd had a thing for and they wound up doing the deed. She comes out a few days later and accuses him of raping her. She says that he didn't "force" her to do it, but that she didn't really "want to" do it. She didn't say "no", but she didn't turn him down either. Both of them were pretty damn stoned. She said she felt like she "had to" or was "supposed to". He was suspended for a couple of semesters while she went on about her life. The university did this because I think the words "law suit" were tossed around by the girl or the girl's father and my buddy was the sacrificial lamb.

I fully agree that no means no. However, men aren't fucking mind readers. If a girl doesn't want it, then say it. Shout it from the rooftops if that's what you have to do or feel like doing. If the guy doesn't take no, then get the cops on his sorry ass. But this buyer's remorse bullshit pisses me off to no end. An allegation of rape is all it takes to really screw up someone's life. Even if it turns out that you're completely innocent, the fact that you were even accused of it and that the authorities pursued it is what stays with you, whether you're exonerated or not.

If a girl is too out of it to know where she is or what she's doing, then it's best to leave her be. It might not technically be "raping" her, but I've seen girls so hammered that they don't even know their own names. It's best to avoid a sticky situation there even if she does say yes. For all anybody knows, she might be under the impression she's being asked if she needs to use the bathroom.

 

[Kodo Sawaki]

Well, i have one nice thought about that: If the girl intoxicate herself enough that she cant say "No" and under that state goes with the guy who takes advantage its partially her own fault. Every person answers for themselves and granted, its still a rape, but everybody should be responsable enough to take good care of themself so bad things shouldnt happened to them. Not saying that the bastard who rapes isnt responsable(on contrary, he is the one who does bad thing), just saying that every person needs to be more percocious about what it does in order to protect themselves...

 

[HBK-aholic]

Well, i have one nice thought about that: If the girl intoxicate herself enough that she cant say "No" and under that state goes with the guy who takes advantage its partially her own fault..

What exactly you're talking about depends on how much I agree with you. If you're talking about 2 people who get so drunk they don't know what they're doing, and consensually have sex, then the next day one party doesn't remember, or regrets the act and calls 'rape' then that person should be jailed for as long as a 'rapist' would be jailed - and I agree they should take full responsibility for their actions.

If you're talking about someone going on a night out and getting drunk, then being raped (And by being raped, I mean forced, without consent, to have sex) - then I disagree the person is at fault. How many of us have gone on a night out and ended up drunk? And not passed out drunk, just inhibitions lowered drunk? You can't drive a car when you're over a certain limit because your reactions are slow; all it takes is one blow to you, for you to be knocked over because your reactions aren't as fast as usual, and suddenly there's someone on top of you.

Telling a person their drinking is partly at fault for their rape is doing nothing but taking part of the fault from the person raping them. In court, if someone is mugged the defence doesn't say something such as 'So, you were wearing your rolex watch, talking on you phone, in an area where there are poor people? And you don't think you were asking to be mugged?' so why in a rape case is it okay to say 'So, you were wearing revealing clothing, had had a few alcoholic drinks, were walking home alone; you don't think you were asking to be raped?'

Please note - I haven't assigned a gender to anyone in these scenarios. Anyone can be the person raped, and anyone can be the person falsely accused. I know it's typically 'male rapes female' or 'female regrets sex, says male raped her' but it really could happen any way around. Everyone needs to be responsible for themselves and if you're not 100% sure you want it - say no, and if you're not 100% sure the other party is awake enough to consent - don't do it. It's shocking that there are so many incidents where this was not known.

 

[Loveless]

Please note - I haven't assigned a gender to anyone in these scenarios. Anyone can be the person raped, and anyone can be the person falsely accused. I know it's typically 'male rapes female' or 'female regrets sex, says male raped her' but it really could happen any way around. Everyone needs to be responsible for themselves and if you're not 100% sure you want it - say no, and if you're not 100% sure the other party is awake enough to consent - don't do it. It's shocking that there are so many incidents where this was not known.

I'm glad you said that. It disturbs me when I see male members of this forum insinuating that "She deserved it for getting drunk" and I wonder whether they've ever been drunk before. I wonder whether they'd take the same view if they got taken advantage of by a guy. It certainly happens, probably more than anyone realises.

 

[Kodo Sawaki]

If you're talking about someone going on a night out and getting drunk, then being raped (And by being raped, I mean forced, without consent, to have sex) - then I disagree the person is at fault. How many of us have gone on a night out and ended up drunk? And not passed out drunk, just inhibitions lowered drunk? You can't drive a car when you're over a certain limit because your reactions are slow; all it takes is one blow to you, for you to be knocked over because your reactions aren't as fast as usual, and suddenly there's someone on top of you.

That I was talking about...

If you have a few drinks and then being raped its other thing and offcourse its not(in any way) your fault, being intoxicated enough that you cant almost move, thats just irresponsible by itself. Yes, we are humans, we do that kind of things, but its irresponsible...

Please note other thing, didnt said it was their fault(for godsake, that person is raped by some other who should be found guilty and go in jail for that act), just said that the person should be more responsible for his/her actions and not get drunk and jump into bed with person potentially dangerous to him/her. In "You should be more carefull" way...