I don't know anything about a sexual assault he's experienced before and don't deny that he could have experienced it. This is the first I've heard of it.
He also states that in this particular incident he's not sure if she even remembered, and that he knew he SHOULDN'T do it, but went through with it anyway, because he DID want to have sex with her. By his own words, it sounds like he set this woman up in his bed on the off-chance that things might still happen between them after she was "predictably" passed out on the bathroom floor. I don't think there is anything wrong with questioning his motives or actions because they look DAMN suspicious, here.
If you didn't think you did anything wrong, how come you never talked about it with her and told her what happened, Sportlandia?
Putting a drunk girl who can't even say her own address into a random NYC cab is a non option folks. We couldn't have gone to her place if I'd wanted to.
Newly dating, this was maybe our 4th or 5th date?
I got into bed with her with zero intention of expectation of sex or even cuddling. I've shared many a bed with non partner women in non sexual scenarios, I view that as super normal. So do you, probably. Frankly, she could have walked to the couch and done the same thing, at my place or her place, it's literally totally immaterial. It comes down to a person I was interested in did 100% of the work in initiating sexual contract, while aggressively drunk. I am 0% responsible for that, I have no obligation to push her off or say no. I didn't take her clothes off (or mine), I didn't suggest sex, I wasn't touching her successively, I was half asleep when things started. Yes EmmaLiz: I did that. Congratulations, you've revealed that sex is something only can men do and women merely receive. Just gender flip this one and tell me the woman with a drunk dude at her place who crawls on top of her and demands to fuck is the criminal. Do it, I dare you.
It's funny how many women adopt the stereotypical mra stance when you flip the genders. "you should have fought back", "you took her to your place what did you expect", "your worries about what could happen are hysterical"
Yall are straight clowns
By your own admission, you said you weren't raped, so your "gender bias" BS isn't applicable here. What you DID was supply an example of when you had sex with a girl who was so drunken and incapacitated that she could hardly walk, or talk, and ultimately passed out and you still "gave in" to her. You are not expressing this as a time when you felt you were sexually assaulted, you expressed this as a time when you had sex with someone who was "blackout-drunk". If anyone is responsible for how poorly your words were conveyed, in this particular situation, it would be you.
You couldn't possibly have thought it was a good idea to have sex with this girl when she was that drunk--and according to you, you didn't think it was a good idea at all! But you did it anyway, and if you weren't forced, and didn't feel raped, according to your OWN words, why did you have sex with her anyways? That's a question you only need to be able to answer to yourself, though...and to her, if she remembers it at all.
Nah Sporty. You can't try to make a double standards thing and cast yourself as both the person who took advantage of the drunk person AND the victim of the drunk person's come ons.
Yes you put a passing out woman who wanted to go home into your cab, took her to your house, put her in your bed, then got in bed with her. If a sober woman had done the same to a passing out man, I would not be telling her "what did you expect"- I'd be asking her why she took advantage of a passing out man who cannot consent.
Also you did not answer my question. Were you already in a sexual relationship with this woman and had she already been to your house and stayed the night in your bed?
I'm not suggesting that prior consent is permanent consent, but it would make your side seem more reasonable if you were already in the habit of going home together, sleeping together, fucking, etc.
If not, I don't know how you can even defend this much less pretend some double standard bullshit.
Also yes walking to the couch is preferable to both punching a woman in the face and fucking a passing out woman who did not want to go home with you in the first place. But putting the passed out woman on the couch alone in the first place is obviously the better option. I think it's telling that A) your response is that your only alternative was to punch her in the face, and B) you later tell another woman here that she should die.
You've gone from being a bit of a resentful I'm-a-victim troll to full blown violent maybe-rapist.
@113 I'm not casting myself as the victim. I'm casting myself as someone who did nothing wrong.
It's not about your genders but the relative sobriety of the two people. She was the one passed out. You were the sober one. Stop trying to act like you don't understand this very basic fact. It's disgusting. In fact it's so gross and infuriating, I'm going to walk away from this shit. I hope to god you get some help, Sporty, you are a disturbed person.
@115 it's clearly about gender. If a drunk man pushed himself on a sober woman, the sober woman would not be considered responsible. Had she been sober and I been fucked up, cabbed me back to her place, where I then proceeded to push myself on her, you would have still considered me a rapist. Literally, in that situation, regardless of which gender is in what role, you would clearly argue that the man is the rapist.
Emma, You're "walking away from all this" because you're a coward, and you can't face the obvious fact that gender is really the only thing at play here whatsoever and you don't have a coherent response. Coward, coward, coward - you can't even say what you believe when the consequences are zero.
Here's the challenge: Tell me that if I were drunk and climbed on top of a sober woman and demanded sex, that she's a rapist. Say it, you coward. (You can't, because that's not what you believe - at least admit that much).
Seriously, your hand is in the cookie jar and you've got chocolate chips coming out your ass. Don't bother lying.
If you were passed out drunk and a sober woman took you to her house even though you were trying to take cab home, put you in her bed, then got in bed with you, then you came on to her and she fucked you, she would have raped you.
In fact a story you have told in the past is very similar to that and I have said all along that I believe you were raped.
Also I don't even believe that you believe the bullshit you are saying right now.
As for cowardice, Sporty this is a goddamn internet message board. Someone arguing here or learning here or not is not a real fight nor does it require bravery or cowardice, what in god's name are you talking about?
The truth is that some of the stories here are very disturbing and upsetting. Then to find you going on about your typical "men are the real victims" bullshit in this case and acting like you don't undrestand the difference between being sober or passing out- it literally makes me feel queasy and I'm having a moment of questioning why in god's name I'm participating in this shit at all, and honestly the thoughts going through my head were that you seem petulant in a way that probably would become violent in real life- I can in fact see you punching a woman in the face, and it makes me feel that I need to get away from people like you, and it makes me wonder, when I walk down the street, when I see dudes running around the lake, how many of them are men who want women to die, want to punch them in the face, want to crawl in teens' windows or fuck teens until they bleed and then go on about double standards and do we use the word rape too much, and the whole thing makes me feel sick and like I need to crawl in bed and bury myself under the covers and lock my doors, and then I remember- I don't know you in real life. The men in my real life are lovely people. I don't have to talk to you. I could just log off and not come talk to you ever again.
@EmmaLiz: Please keep coming back. We need your reasoned analysis. You can avoid getting into fights with particular posters and still drop your wisdom on the rest of us.
There is a difference between DEMANDING sex and ENFORCING sex, just like there is a difference between WELCOMING it and ENDURING it, and that difference is what is called RAPE. Gender does not even factor into the equation, here. If she absolutely FORCED your bodies together and you were NOT a willing participant, then yes, anyone with a moral compass would say she raped you, sober or not, whatever the gender. But if you took advantage of a drunk woman and took sex from her when you KNEW she couldn't fully consent to it, then YOU are an asshole.
Since you're so keen on challenges and calling people cowards, I have a dare for YOU! Call this woman up, show her this thread, and tell her about the night you're not sure she remembers. See what she thinks of it, since her opinion here is the one that really matters. Do it! I DARE YOU...but we both know you won't.
@119 I not only do I accept your dare, I beat you to it and e-mailed her yesterday (we've continued to be friendly although we only dated a few months). I don't know if she is keen to discuss old fucks (she's married with kids now) but I'll be happy to report back what she says.
Thanks, EmmaLiz @107. You're right that I was conflating this with another story. In this story, it seems there was no rape. I missed that they were dating, I read only that she was coming onto him at the club and he wasn't interested. Why would he have been uninterested if this was his girlfriend? Basically I think the lessons from this story are 1. don't be a drunk and 2. don't date drunks. So, not an example of "men get raped too, double standards!!1 one!" but an example of, as NoCute first said, everyone should really drink less if they want all the sex they have to be coherent and consensual.
"it literally makes me feel queasy"
Ditto. This thread took a very disturbing turn.
While tempted to say more, sometimes someone says things that turn out to be self-making points to the audience, sometimes people show who they are all by themselves with no need for comment from the peanut gallery. Here we have EL to thank for it, and I do!
Interesting how: 1. Dadddy can tell a story that is remarkably similar to Sporty's, and he comes across as a human being, while Sporty comes across, well, as a rapist who hates women, and 2. Sporty seems to have FINALLY been kicked off the boards for his verbal abuse, and is immediately back under a new, very thinly disguised moniker. Unless someone is impersonating him?
@117 Cowards don't openly say what they truly believe. Based on your own comment history, it's obvious you don't believe what you're saying because you've said the exact opposite numerous times. So just say what you believe. There's no downside. Nothing bad will happen to you.
In this situation, own the dislike yourself (and it IS your dislike being around him that's at issue), and don't offer a reason beyond, "I really don't like him," or, "Hanging out with him really bothers me," or, "I hate being around him." Take your friend's cue regarding other social situations.
@11: I have a friend who blacks out but functions normally otherwise, to the point that other people don't reize he's drunk. He's had sex under those conditions, and doesn't consider it assault or rape on the part of his partners, though in many legal jurisdisctions he's technically been assaulted or raped dozens of times. I suspect that there's still a heavily gendered lens to this - people are going to be far, far less likely to call his female partners rapists than a man who has blackout-drunk-but-outwardly-consensual-in-the-moment sex with women.
I find it odd that we think drunk people are responsible for their decision-making if they opt to drive a car, but not if they opt to have sex. Personally, I think people are responsible for their behavior while intoxicated, and if they know they make unwise decisions in that state, they are responsible for not intoxicating themselves to the degree that they make bad and potentially harmful decisions; drunk sex that is consensual in the moment is consensual, and drunk drivers are assholes.
I'm NOT blaming people who are assaulted while incapacitated for someone assaulting them, nor for incapacitating themselves - if you're passed out, you're not a risk to anybody, and you CAN'T give consent for sex - nor people who are assaulted if they are intoxicated and DON'T consent to sex - there's no consent in the moment. The drunk = assault formulation is a legal convenience, for which the problems created may be lesser than the problems solved, and I think whether we have or how we implement such laws is an empirical matter of harm reduction. Philosophically, I don't think intoxication alone negates consent.
For my own context: as I've noted before, I was raped by a girlfriend. She flatly refused to have PIV sex with condoms over our 4-month relationship (she wanted PIV sex without), and I refused to have PIV sex without condoms (no six-month STI followup test yet, and I knew she was haphazard about taking hormonal BC because she told me so), and she eventually pinned me down and fucked me one.time.until I managed to throw her off of me. We were both perfectly sober; so, I'm speaking drom a place of knowing how I experienced someone raping me, but not involving alcohol.
I've personally had no issues with blacking out/alcohol and sex, as the first time I ever blacked out was two weekends ago, where the beer of which I had 2 was triple the ABV I thought, and I'd forgotten to eat that day until the party I was at. Previously, however drunk I've been (I've passed out a few times), I was rational and recording memories the entire way through; impacts of alcohol on me were limited to reduction/loss of muscle control (slurring and stumbling, in cases where I've been very drunk) and inhibition reduction. Blacking out is scary, because you have NO idea what happened, so it could have been anything (I apparently behaved normally, and nobody had any idea I was blacked out versus a little drunk as the'd seen me otherwise), - I fely pretty badly shaken for days after - and it's also not something other people can know from observation or one can even know oneself in the moment. And while it's scary, as per my statement above, I don't think it can be philosophically taken to negate agency or consent - it's not altered decision-making (though it can accompany that), it's a failure to record long-term memory (sometimes accompanied by not recording short-term memory).
@ciods #77: You rarely get the chance because every space where sexual assault is discussed, we get people like "no" who don't realize (or don't care) that they're engaging in the same kinds of disbelief, dismissal, and blame-shifting women have to endure with respect to men (or gender-indifferent penis-havers, in my case), to the extent that we get the message that we're not supposed to participate (e.g. look at all of the commentaries on #metoo that were complaining about men sharing their stories of sexual harassment and assault as part of it).
no, your categorical gendering of this is making you behave like a rape-denying asshole; knock it off.
@83: And why was his skirt so short? He's obviously a lying slut who wanted to fuck!
@92: Wait, are we now going to pretend that all of the data on how men who are drunk are more likely to perpetrate assaults are false, because some who's extremely intoxicated can't assault someone? Seriously, folks, get some fucking internal consistency in your worldviews. Maybe work it out with Lava and no, as they seem to be on the "women donht rape men" train with you.
Sporty just described a situation in which a woman passed out drunk in a toilet, then when he fetched her out and she tried to take a cab home, he intervened and took her to his place instead, then put her - not on a couch- but in his bed and then he got in bed with her and had sex that he admits he wanted to have with her when she came on to him.
Now this woman had been coming on to him earlier, aggressively despite him trying not to and she came on to him again in bed though while so drunk she couldn't talk/walk nor make her body cooperate. So if you want to contribute to the conversation about nuance around responsibility when intoxicated and how people should behave responsibily in those situations, then do so.
But that's not what you did. You flippantly compared these two responses as if they are the same thing:
A) You shouldn't have been flirting and wearing a short skirt if you didn't want sex.
B) You shouldn't take a passed out woman who wants to go to her own house to your house instead and put her in your bed with you instead of on your couch when you admit you want to have sex with her but she's too drunk for her body to cooperate with her mind and then later claim your only other option is to punch her in the face?
Then you bitched about how tricky these gendered conversations are b/c women always blame men when in reality, this entire thread was full of women (and several men) discussing in an honest way the nuances around consent when intoxicated, so I'm not sure what you are going on about - like did we even read the same thread?
@ No Cute Thank you that's what I meant.
@ BDF - Daddy's and Sporty's posts have nothing in common other than one person was intoxicated and the other wasnt. Daddy was in an established sexual relationship, he did not know how intoxicated she was, she was not passed out, she had not previously tried to go home on her own, they talked about it later, he didn't make comments about punching her in the face, he did not tell another woman to repeatedly kill herself, etc.
I don't think Sporty should be banned for being a misogynist nor an asshole but I don't think posters should be able to repeatedly make violent threats at others- he literally told Jibe Ho twice to shoot herself in the head.
As usual, why don't men and women talk more freely about consent and sexual assault? Have a look at how this thread unfolded.
Also JOhn, I mean you could've chosen to respond to Anky, to NoCute, to myself, to any of the many posters here who were talking about the nuance in these categories, or even to the level of discourse before Sporty started up with his "shoot yourself in the head"
"I wish I could speak to the experience of men who believe they are having a consensual sexual encounter when they are not - as some commenters have postulated. I don’t know, or pretend to know, if the man (men?) who raped me while I was unconscious thought they were having a consensual encounter. It’s hard for me to imagine they did, but I must admit the possibility. What I don’t know and can’t imagine is, if they did, what should be their punishment? On the one hand, I was indisputably harmed in a lasting way. On the other hand, if they believed they were acting in accordance with my wishes, should they be punished for that, even if I were harmed and they ought reasonably to have known I would be harmed? Those are complicated philosophical questions that go beyond definitions of rape. Legally?? I was raped. What should happen next? I dunno."
Are some women here dismissive of any nuance?- absolutely and most of them discussed it without choosing to threaten anyone with violence and explained their biases. You could've chosen to respond to that. But others are saying things like what I quoted above from GueraLinda.
But no. You piled on with your flippant "it's just like wearing a skirt"- a comment in support of Sporty against Jibe Ho who called him out on his "I shouldn't feel bad for this" bullshit, right before he also told her to kill herself. And then you followed up with some high minded bullshit about how hard it is for the men to discuss this- which is absolutely true but would get a better response if you actually discussed it with the women trying to discuss it instead of agreeing with the man who a) just described taking a passed out woman home who had tried to go home alone and b) told another woman to kill herself for pointing out that was bullshit.
Uggh seriously just gross.
There's some serious (and deliberate?) distortion of Sportlandia's story going on in this comment thread. Let's recap:
He went out to a bar with someone he'd been dating for 4-5 dates. We're not in 1960, and this almost certainly means they had an established, consensual sexual relationship, and everything that follows comes under that umbrella.
She got sloppy drunk, passed out in the john, and was inebriated enough that she couldn't walk or talk properly. This is NOT someone you send home in a cab on their own -- especially not someone you're dating, for God's sake! Abandoning them to their own devices is an asshole move, because (a) rape (b) mugging/theft (c) aspirating vomit while unconscious are all very real possibilities, in and after the cab ride. You don't send someone in that condition home in a cab. Taking them back to your place is the RIGHT thing to do.
He took her home, they got into bed, he started to fall asleep, she apparently sobered up to some degree and insistently initiated sex, to which he eventually assents.
This is something that happens between millions of consenting adults on a nightly basis, and if it's pathological, the pathology is alcohol abuse, not sexual assault. I'm aware of no jurisdiction that would convict, or even press charges, when someone otherwise able to consent (i.e. adult, not mentally retarded, etc.) becomes voluntarily intoxicated and initiates sex with an existing sex partner, and a mutually agreed-upon sex act follows.
To characterize this as "rape" is to pathologize one hell of a lot of consensual sex between people who drink, and is frankly insulting as fuck to anyone who has actually been raped or sexually assaulted -- including people who have been INCAPACITATED through alcohol or other drugs, which is a totally different issue and means being unconscious, catatonic, or physically helpless, not just sloppy drunk.
The woman in Sporty's bed wasn't incapacitated any longer (though she had been in the women's bathroom), and that's pretty typical of someone doing shots -- they hit you quickly, and can leave you quickly too. 60-90 minutes from the last drink, without further alcohol consumption, is EASILY enough to take someone from "passed out" to "functional".
If you have enough agency to express desire and initiate sexual contact, you bear responsibility for your own actions until such time as you become incapacitated or withdraw consent. Alcohol isn't some magic drug that makes people do things they don't want to do -- few drugs do any such thing, except deliriants and dissociatives.
Do people make lapses in judgment when they drink? Uh, yeah, and that's one of the main reasons WHY they drink -- to provide an excuse for doing shit they sort of want to do, or even REALLY want to do, but don't want to own.
Does this put people who black out (stop forming memories because of alcohol) in a potentially shitty place, unable to know with certainty whether they consented and to what? Yes, it does. And sadly, there's no realistic remedy for that, because it's not reasonable to expect others to know whether you've reached that state of intoxication: it's not externally observable, but can only be identified in hindsight.
no @84 Thank you. I exited this thread and am just now seeing your kind comment. Looks like my timing was good, because I apparently missed some pretty violent, hateful stuff.
You said it Sportlandia @110. She was drunk. You weren’t. Open and shut case of you being a lousy man who didn’t take care of a vulnerable woman. Why am I not surprised.
Ytterby @130 According to NIH:
"On average, it takes about 1 hour for your body to break down 1 unit of alcohol. However, this can vary, depending on:
whether you're male or female
how quickly or slowly your body turns food into energy (your metabolism)
how much food you have eaten
the type and strength of the alcohol
whether you're taking medication and, if so, what type"
So your statement that someone who passed out in a public bathroom and apparently couldn't even give her address to a cab driver was "functional" within 60-90 minutes after leaving the bar and imbibing her last drink shows a serious lack of understanding of intoxication.
Or maybe we just have different definitions of "functional".
We have no idea how many units of alcohol she consumed at the bar. Clearly she consumed enough alcohol that she was sloppy drunk, passed out in public, and at the time she demanded sex, couldn't get her body to cooperate with her words.
The right thing to do is quite simple. Don't have sex with anyone who's clearly inebriated. Follow that rule and there will be zero argument about consent.
I understand why comments 89 - 91 were removed by the moderator, but I missed comments 104 and 105 which are also gone. Now I'm really curious what I missed in those comments...
No distortion going on YBM @130. This woman was drop down drunk, and within how long, Sportlandia was fucking her. Her decision making abilities were out, she couldn’t consent to anything. This is in my view, rape.
She wasn’t in a fit state to consent, her inhibitions were lowered by the alcohol and Sportlandia could have taken a cab to her place, made sure she got inside and stayed a bit to see she was ok, made no moves on her because every man knows what alcohol does to decision making abilities.
No way any of you defending him, can justify this.
Brilliant trolling by Sportlandia. Well, not really his goal I'd imagine since he's just telling the story of his life, but it sure functioned that way like a champ.
My god is this place populated with the worst of humanity. And no, I'm not talking about Sportlandia. I keep trying to give this comments space up. It used to be a pretty great place to get different perspectives. Just awful now. Filled with the worst narcissts who've never been wrong or even let anything go in their entire lives. Hopefully this time I can stay away. Again, a shame. I used to really look forward to the discussion around the letter of the day.
What’s your problem dropout. You think fucking a drunk girl is ok too? Don’t bang the door on your way out.
Sportlandia, a sober girl shouldn’t fuck a drunk man. Stop avoiding what you did that night.
Doesn’t matter how many times you’d dated, she was gone and you knew it.
JibeHo, those were probably Sportlandia’s sweet words to me. I’d just given him a serve and he does get so cross, doesn’t he.
I’m in a very similar situation. Two years ago, a former friend, “A”, raped a very close friend of mine, “B”; B’s not totally comfortable calling it rape, but she told me the whole story and to me it was clearly rape, and not the kind of thing that could result from being “dense.” She didn’t want to tell all our friends about it, which is very understandable, especially since one mutual friend after being told continued to hang out with A and invite him to parties. However, B is uncomfortable being in the same place as A, and I am too. What I eventually decided to do, with B’s blessing, was to tell mutual friends that A had once assaulted a friend of mine and to please not invite him to things, and that if he was invited I wouldn’t come. If they asked further questions I simply said that it wasn’t my story to tell. This ~mostly~ worked. Some friends still invite A to things, so I only see them one-on-one. However, no one has ever pressed to know who was assaulted or get more details.
John H. @126, You said " in many legal jurisdisctions he's technically been assaulted or raped dozens of times." Name one and I'd be happy to read the relevant rape statute and case law if necessary and give you my thoughts (you're not my client, I'm not giving you a fully considered legal opinion, etc.) on what the law really is in that state. My guess is that it will be similar to the law here in California. Your friend has never been raped by a woman, nobody was raped in Sporty's story, nor would they have been if the genders were reversed. However, the geder reversal does create a much more dangerous situation because of the fear a sexually aggressive man can induce in a woman he is demanding sex from has no parallel when the genders are reversed for the 99.9% of couples in which the man has a greater physical capacity for violence and a greater proclivity for it.
Having sex with someone who wants to have sex with you while drunk but aware that they are having sex and who they're having it with is sometimes a shitty thing to do. It's not rape.
@127, John Horstman, I never once said that I believe that only men rape, drunk or otherwise-- because I DON'T believe that. Sportlandia said that he was not raped, or assaulted. He admits that he had sex with a drunk girl because he wanted to.
Further, I said that Sportlandia is an asshole IF he DID, in fact, take advantage of her drunkenness to have sex with her. At NO point in ANY thread did I call him a rapist, I called him an asshole, and if you KNOWINGLY take advantage of someone's inebriated state, then that does indeed qualify as asshole behavior. You're putting words in my mouth that were never there. I don't know if it's fair to call him a rapist, because I wasn't there, and I did not, but I don't think ANYONE is out of line to challenge Sporty's version of events for all of the reasons above, since he never one time felt victimized by THIS particular situation. That, and the creepy things he said to JibeHo, and his snide comparisons of gender bias and rapists/rape victims, only make his comments seem questionable.
I DID fuck up, though, I got heated and meant to @Raindrop with the "fuck you, and how dare you" comment. That part wasn't actually addressed to Sportlandia, I don't know why he didn't call me out on that.
dcp123; @140, this girl was slurring her words drunk, there’s no way she could give consent in that condition. Sex without clear and conscious consent is rape. There would be no conviction sure, like that’s anything new.
How can so many of you think this is ok, doesn’t matter how the woman behaved. Either you men are looking out for women or you’re not.
JohnH, I’ve never said women don’t rape men.
@133: Yes, I'm well aware of the NIH figures, but I've also seen plenty of people go from unconscious to functional in 90 minutes. Many of us know from bitter experience that one drink can make all the difference between radically different states of consciousness (or wellness!); not so hard to understand why, over the course of 60-90 minutes, metabolizing that alcohol can effect a change in the opposite direction.
And "don't have sex with anyone inebriated" -- incapacitated, yes, but inebriated? And "anyone", really? Splitting a bottle of wine with someone and going to bed together is one of life's better-known pleasures, and as I write this millions of couples are getting sloshed together and having sloppy, happy drunk sex. If you've gone on four or five dates with someone and have already established a sexual relationship, I think two reasonable people can agree that if you spend the night getting shit-faced together and end up in bed, you can take each other's sexual advances at face value, especially if you're not doing anything together drunk that you haven't done sober.
@140: " However, the geder reversal does create a much more dangerous situation because of the fear a sexually aggressive man can induce in a woman he is demanding sex from has no parallel when the genders are reversed for the 99.9% of couples in which the man has a greater physical capacity for violence and a greater proclivity for it."
I agree that the dynamics are always different if the person demanding sex is physically larger and more powerful, and I agree that men are typically larger and more powerful than women.
But hyperbole and statistics aren't a good match: 99.9% is a TOTALLY bogus number. That would imply a 1000:1 ratio between male-on-female domestic violence and female-on-male DV, and even the most pro-female, Duluth Model sources don't bear that out (and let's not even get into female-on-child DV). And saying that 99.9% of men have a "greater proclivity for violence" than their female partners? That's downright irresponsible and erases all the men victimized by female intimate partners.
@141: I don't see how engaging in a consensual, mutually-agreed-upon sex act constitutes "taking advantage of someone", particularly if there's a pre-existing sexual relationship. I've had sex a bunch of times when I was drunk and the other person was stone-cold sober, and I certainly wasn't taken advantage of. If they'd tried to push me into a sex act, that might be different, but if I'm saying "yes, I want this" when I'm drunk, I mean "yes, I want this".
Instead, imagine sleeping with someone who's bipolar and in a manic, hypersexual state. To me, that's infinitely sketchier, because they didn't choose to be in an altered state. A drunk person chooses to put themselves in a position where they know their inhibitions will be lower: that's often the point of drinking.
@144: My experience of being drunk, even very drunk, isn't one that leads me to question my own ability to consent. I don't really drink anymore, but even on the few occasions when I've been very drunk (i.e. to the point of vomiting or even passing out), I'm still having coherent thoughts, still aware of the consequences of my actions. I've never had this magical experience of alcohol making me into a different person; alcohol doesn't create desires or impulses out of nothing.
I don't think the people who have had sex with me when I've been drunk have committed rape, or even done anything wrong; I wanted the sex, after all, and would have resented any busybodies intervening. Had they forced me, or done things to me when I was unconscious or in a complete stupor, or even pushed me to do things, that'd be different. But, like many people, I drank in part because I WANTED to participate in a social scene in which inhibitions were lower and sex was more likely; to say that intoxication invalidates consent -- to say that my enthusiastic "yes" has to be ignored -- is to say that I'm incapable of consenting to sex that I want, under circumstances I fully intended to bring about.
Ytterby, if you are being honest, you'll acknowledge 1) that Sporty did not say that they had been on 4-5 dates until nearly 100 comments later and after he'd already declined to answer the question a few times and after he'd told women who told him that it would be wiser to put a passed out woman who'd tried to take a cab home by herself on the couch rather than to climb in bed with her to go kill herself twice. 2) he never answered the question of whether or not they already had an established sexual relationship.
And the rest of this, you are arguing with no one. This is literally a thread of multiple posts in which people (mostly women) have talked abotu the nuance involved in consent while intoxicated and nearly everyone here has talked about sex they enjoyed or regretted while drunk without any of them saying it was rape unless there was some blatant and obvious reason why.
finally the power differential came out of- again- sporty's claim that the only alternative to fucking the just-recently-passed-out woman who was so drunk that her words and her actions could not be coordinated (who he says he wanted to fuck) and who he brought, passed out, to his bed and then chose to get in bed with her was to punch her in the face.
That's it. Either I fuck this drunken woman who I brought, passed out, to my bed (despite her plan to go home) or I punch her in the face.
Stop acting like you are arguing with people making unreasonable claims. No one blew up at Daddy who told a story about fucking a blacked out woman because the situation was obviously mutual. If Sproty's case were less creepy than it came across, then he had plenty of time to say so, you know instead of telling the women questioning him to shoot themselves in the head.
PSD @ 136–I know, right? The double standards, the straw men. The misrepresentation of people’s statements and disingenuousness. I don’t condone Sporty’s aggressive posts, but by god do I understand his frustration. Like, if a man is drunk and aggressively wants sex from a woman, won’t take no for an answer and finally succeeds, he’s a rapist. Sure. Now if a woman is drunk, aggressively wants sex from a man, won’t take no for an answer and finally succeeds, the man is still a rapist. Fuuuuck off.
So, as men, are we supposed to be constantly looking out for women’s best interests, and intervening on their behalf? I thought that was white knighting. Or paternalism. Or infantilization of women. Or whatever the term of outrage-du-jour we’re using happens to be. For every action a man takes, however well-meaning, there’s a contemptuous term to dismiss it.
As far as the cab thing? Check out the cab driver in Calgary who raped his drunken fare. https://calgaryherald.com/news/crime/cab-driver-convicted-of-raping-intoxicated-passenger
Stuffing a drunk woman into a cab and assuming everything is going to be okay is irresponsible, and shame on the people who are blaming Sporty for taking her back to his place instead, assuming he had some nefarious plan all along. It was the right thing to do. In fact, fuck all of you who assume men always have a nefarious hidden agenda. It’s so tiresome to have that thrown out and built on, in every single thread it seems. The worst possible motivations are assumed, and then accepted as fact.
There are good men out there, lots of them, who even if they make mistakes sometimes, are really trying to do the best they can. But you wouldn’t know it from reading this fucking column. Here’s a LW who wants a rapist to get his come-uppance. Egotistical fuck! White knighter! Who does he think he is!? Or the guy worried about his girlfriend’s inability to recognize red flags. Loser. Probably not getting laid. User.
I’m really not trying to get away from the violence women experience, and how they bear the brunt of the gender wars. But for fuuuuuuck’s sake, can we please not start from the assumption that men are just trying to be offensive? And rapists? And rapist apologists? There are no clear lines about the right thing to do and when, but we’re expected to take the lead and everybody is getting mad. Thank you.
JohnH@126; it’s against the law to drive after drinking, because the person isn’t capable. Yes, if they are stopped by police, cause an accident, they are held responsible for being irresponsible and driving while drunk. Usually in these situations, the drunk man’s friends would stop him/ her from driving, if they at the pub or party, keeping them safe. Sportlandia is like the friend who let his buddy drive off drunk, didn’t look after him like he didn’t look after this woman.
There are degrees of being drunk. Yes? The woman was totally off her face, unconscious one minute and in Sportlandia’s bed the next.
If a sober woman put a drunk man in her bed, and the whole scenario was the same as Sportlandia’s.. it’s the same deal.
Fine, you creeps fuck super drunk women, and justify to yourselves and each other forever more.
Ytterby @ 146: damn, a lot of what you said made total sense. I honestly don't know what to think at this point, I just have to admit that it's extremely possible that I'm letting my personal experiences influence and accent what I think I'm reading. I do struggle with a lot of trauma that I haven't shared and it's probable that it is affecting my judgment and I automatically assumed the worst of someone when I know nothing about this subject or this couple involved.
Sportlandia, if I did truly misjudge you, then I'm sorry. You don't have to accept it or acknowledge it, but it's there. I certainly would never want to demonize someone for a crime they haven't even committed.
I won't comment again.
@152 this thread makes it pretty obvious that most people here believe only men can be responsible for sex, regardless of anything else. Initiate? You're a rapist. Someone else initiates? Still a rapist. Drunk? You're a dangerous rapist. They're drunk? You took advantage.
Folks - your views are obviously on display here. Just be honest about them.
@153 - Line 3.
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.