'If a woman is drunk a man should not be prosecuted for rape'

Breezy the problem with this Osbourne chap is that he isn't thick, he is deeply misogynistic though.

But Davsmum, the scenario you are talking about is not what this debate is concerned with.

If a woman is coherent enough to enthusiastically consent to sex then she is unlikely to have a memory block the following day.

If a woman wakes up with no memory of the night before then she was likely to have been too drunk to consent the night before.

Most women who wake up with a hangover and a man in their bed do not assume the man raped them. If they have difficulty remembering they are more likely to assume they consented than that they were raped. But it's really unlikely to have total memory block and at the same time have been sober enough to be engaged and present with a sexual partner the night before.

If a man does not want to rape then ensuring that he has freely given enthusiastic consent will be important to him, and he will behave accordingly (so not plying a woman with drink, checking she is enjoying herself every step of the way). Anything else suggests that he does not prioritise consent above his own sexual gratification and is risking being a rapist

It really is not difficult to understand. I cannot, as hard as I try, see what is so difficult about understanding you do not penetrate someone just because you feel like it whenever and in whatever circumstance, without proper consent. Consent from someone who understands.

Anyone still having a problem with this concept must, surely, be being deliberately provocative or just thick. This ridiculous buffoon Osborne must be thick. I think it is not worth anyone trying to debate with someone like him as he is clearly incapable of understanding normal, reasonable concepts.

It does not mTter what people wear or have drunk. In any case, it is likely some arseholes will blame the victim anyway, whatever the circumstances. Someone sexually assaulted me and I had had one glass of wine and was wearing an ankle length navy skirt and a cardigan. It is the behaviour of the person raping and assaulting that needs criticising and examining. People still arguing against this basic concept should just be cut out of the conversation by society, they are boring. Too angry to articulate this any better.

BreakingDad I apologise, that wasn't clear from that one post, but I stand corrected.

Perhaps we should introduce this "barrister" to this man

tribune.com.pk/story/836550/us-lets-women-drive-because-they-dont-care-if-they-are-raped-saudi-historian/

(Says women in Saudi shouldn't drive as they might get raped. OK for western women to drive because they don't care if they get raped). Yes, that's really what it says…..

Sounds like Osborn and the Sheikh make a good pair.

Men who rape women don't care about consent. Again this is not about how much a woman has had to drink. It isn't about women waking up in the morning and not remembering having mind-blowing sex. It is about men's attitudes towards women. It is a deliberate act.

As Puffins is teaching her sons, if a man cares about consent he won't penetrate a woman who is not enthusiastically consenting. All these scenarios about women enthusiastically consenting and then waking up in the morning, not remembering and declaring rape DON'T EXIST. Except in the minds of those wanting to excuse men's attitudes and behaviours.

I am NOT trying to excuse men's behaviour, scallopsgreat and certainly not leaping through hoops to do so.
I was trying to establish if it would still be considered rape if BOTH were drunk and the man believed the woman WAS giving consent due to her responses and his clouded judgment of the situation due to him being drunk.

I am not claiming it IS ok - I was trying to find out if there was any consideration of that or whether there should be.

Even the courts go through it in more detail than claiming a man is guilty because a woman was drunk, so don't call my trying to understand this better as 'sickening'
At least I am trying to learn more and am prepared to consider what people are saying and not just assuming I know everything!

Just awful that attitudes like this still exist. Supposedly educated people as well...

is it that drink spiking is more likely to be reported than other scenarios? because if as breakingdad suggested "society wants them to come up with some reason as to why they were raped (victim blaming)" then if you had been raped and you thought your drink had been spiked you might perhaps be more likely to report it. which would mean it would appear to happen more frequently if you were measuring reporting / convictions than actual occurrences

no idea if this makes sense - it's rather badly worded

i said this on the other thread, but can you imagine being a woman who is a victim of rape who has to stand up as a witness knowing that this barrister is for the defence? you wouldn't just know that he is going to challenge you in order to present his client's defence, he actively thinks that as a woman you are worthless and unentitled to rights

It is not hard to determine whether someone is too drunk to consent. I don't know why you think it is Davsmum. You leaping through hoops trying to excuse men's behaviour is a bit sickening.

It is not unreasonable to expect a man not to penetrate a woman.

And yes lots of women are raped without even realising it. Ched Evan's victim was one of them. Do you think he misread signals? Because that is the type of scenario we are talking about.

As a rule of thumb, and the thing I have taught my sons now.

If you are not 100% sure that the woman you are about to penetrate with your penis is 100% able to consent and is consenting. Wait until morning. A man who respects your boundaries and respects you enough to not take a slurred response as a yes is a man who isn't a rapist. Drunk or not, it is the man's responsibility to ensure he has consent before he inserts any part of himself into any part of another human being.

YouBetterWerk - I was wondering in terms of spiking of women how often does it occur, as one article I read said it happens a lot less than people believe it to.

I wondered if this was tied to them feeling that society wants them to come up with some reason as to why they were raped (victim blaming). Rather than just I went out in the evening and a guy raped me through no choice of mine.

They don't need educating about when a woman is too drunk to consent. They need educating that they aren't entitled to stick their dicks into women because they want to.
you are creating scenarios that don't exist Davsmum. I wonder why you would want to do that?

I think those scenarios DO exist.
I did not say they need educating about when a woman is too drunk to consent. I meant they need educating that if they are both drunk and the woman is keen - they need to think and not assume she is giving consent.
In that situation the man may truly believe it is mutually consensual. I am sure there are men in that situation who are not monsters who would want to rape someone.

I am trying to make sure I understand this and am interested in the responses to what I have asked.
After reading your posts, I am sad to say, I know a few women who have been raped when drunk. They don't realise it was rape. None of them have reported it as far as I am aware.

HootyMcTooty I have posted several times agreeing its victim blaming with regards to drink, women can drink and do whatever they wan't.

The poster was saying drunk women will be avoided by sober men.

Interesting you're in the Police and actually believe women don't "cry rape" all the time. That's a ratio of 1:3 against women now, I think.

It's actually really refreshing and hopeful to have a police officer who does actually believe women are raped posting on here. Hopefully, a woman who has been raped will read this and be reassured that not all Police won't believe them.

I'm really not being snarky, btw, we've had more than one Police Officer or friends of Police Officers posting about how they believe most women are lying. It's been really disheartening.

BreakingDad are you implying that a woman should not drink so that she is not the victim? The problem with this is that someone will still be the victim, unless we expect all women not to drink. In this scenario, a rapist who formerly hunted down drunk girls will find another criterion for selecting his victim.

Some women stopping drinking doesn't protect womankind from rapists. Stopping rapists being rapists would though, and that starts with stopping victim-blaming and making excuses for rapists.