@Weetabixandshreddies I agree with you 100% regards the equal sharing of responsibility.
If both parties are drunk then they are still both responsible for their actions and I actually follow your drink driving analogy. Many years ago I was arrested and charged for drink driving (not my proudest moment). Had I have just had 'a few too many' then I would never have done it, unfortunately I had consumed enough to tranquillise an elephant and, as such, made the stupid decision to get in my car*
*(This was 15 years ago, I've since been to court, paid fines, been on courses, done community service etc. so anyone planning on preaching at me, save your breath)
So, in my excessive drunken state, I had decided that I WANTED to drive my car home, nobody forced me to, it was my decision. Yes, this decision was heavily impacted by alcohol and, if I had been less drunk, there's no way I would have done it but it was still MY decision and the blame can lay nowhere else than with myself.
The same has to apply for drunken, one-night sex (which, let's face it, it what we're talking about here). If a woman drunkenly consents to sex then she has made that decision and it's not upto the man to put her through some sort of sobriety test (obviously, if it's apparent to the man that she's on the verge of consciousness and is unaware of what's going on then taking advantage makes you scum and deserving of everything you get).
Even if, had she been sober, she may have decided against the liaison, it's still consent even if the decision is influenced by alcohol (again, not if it's clear to the other party that they are in a vulnerable state)
To get a bit 'blokey' here, in my younger days, I had 'one night stands' with girls with whom I never would have done so had I been sober (and I'm sure they would say the same about me in many instances). It was still my decision though and, however awkward it was the next day or how much of a ribbing you'd get from your friends, you put it down to 'beer goggles' or whatever and moved on (I feel the word 'misogynist being featured in many replies..bare in mind that this was in my younger days and I wasn't dragging these girls to bed against their will!)
Surely it has to stand, however, that drunken consent is still consent, otherwise we're setting a dangerous legal precedent. I would never have forced myself on a woman without their willing involvement (if I had misread any signs in the early stages then a slap or a drink to the face would normally set the record straight) . This was when mutual 'implied' consent was sufficient and we didn't have to bring out a solicitor and contracts to determine that a woman who'd voluntarily come back to your house, got undressed and got into your bed and not rebuffed your advances was happy with what was to ensue.
@ExplodedPeach - I don't see that the 'balance of physical power' has anything to do with consent. If a man is having to use his additional physical strength then I would suggest it should be clear that it ISN'T consensual. As for the pregnancy issue, if you're having drunken sex then either (a) It is a 'casual' encounter in which case it is both parties responsibility to ensure that protection is used, or (b) It's in an established relationship when contraception and the possibility/desire for pregnancy will/should have already been discussed.
Sorry for the long post...went off on a bit of a tangent!