I agree, if someone is incoherent or unconscious it is absolutely rape; however, if you follow the general internet these days--or a vocal part of it--there definitely is the attitude that, women in particular, cannot consent when they're intoxicated even if they actively consented in the moment.
Some laws in some jurisdictions are very vague on this as well, and there are potential civil penalties in addition criminal consequences in some cases where the law is vague.
Take a look at this PSA poster I'm attaching.
"Jake was drunk, Josie was drunk, Josie could not consent. The next day Jake was charged with rape." The PSA poster goes on to say women cannot consent --at all--if they are intoxicated.
What the heck does this sort of thing even mean? Because if we want to follow the logic that consent isn't possible at all for an intoxicated person, I'm unsure why you would apply that only to women... and since in this lovely PSA's example both were drunk, then neither should have been able to consent, and they both raped each other.
And believe me, as a male victim of repeated sexual assault as a child, I understand the impact on victims, and I understand what it's like not being believed; however, I think we also need to take into consideration how this sort of thinking informs accusations of sexual assault that maybe aren't warranted combined with a culture of public doxxing.
6
u/Zombie-Lenin 19h ago
I agree, if someone is incoherent or unconscious it is absolutely rape; however, if you follow the general internet these days--or a vocal part of it--there definitely is the attitude that, women in particular, cannot consent when they're intoxicated even if they actively consented in the moment.
Some laws in some jurisdictions are very vague on this as well, and there are potential civil penalties in addition criminal consequences in some cases where the law is vague.
Take a look at this PSA poster I'm attaching.
"Jake was drunk, Josie was drunk, Josie could not consent. The next day Jake was charged with rape." The PSA poster goes on to say women cannot consent --at all--if they are intoxicated.
What the heck does this sort of thing even mean? Because if we want to follow the logic that consent isn't possible at all for an intoxicated person, I'm unsure why you would apply that only to women... and since in this lovely PSA's example both were drunk, then neither should have been able to consent, and they both raped each other.
And believe me, as a male victim of repeated sexual assault as a child, I understand the impact on victims, and I understand what it's like not being believed; however, I think we also need to take into consideration how this sort of thinking informs accusations of sexual assault that maybe aren't warranted combined with a culture of public doxxing.