Sorry honey, alcohol is not an excuse to ruin some guys life.

Leads to an interesting discussion on consent, consciousness, and the concept of self. When taken philosophically, and open-mindedly, it may take some hard arguing to get out. I am interested in everyone’s thoughts.

For your ease into the discussion, these are the last two interactions between self and OP:

ME: Hmm, amnesia =/= consent either. I hear your point, and it’s granted,

I can see the male’s side, but there is a female side as well, and rape ruins lives. However, if consent was given under the influence, then that it one thing. I see a difficulty in proving that if she did not remember. I, again, agree assuming based on that reality alone, is neither OK.

I can not imagine a person having not desired the act, thereafter. Remembered or not, it’s painful.

I’m still slightly torn on something though. Doesn’t the man have the ability to say no as well? I’m unsure why the man doesn’t carry at least some responsibility in this discussion. Especially if she is overly intoxicated, and him not.

Am I making sense? Or going in circles? Do tell, I-m honestly trying to wrestle with this.

OP: I don’t think so. If the man doesn’t consider himself raped, there isn’t an issue if he consumes too much alcohol. If he consents to it, then he consents to it.

Now the man who had sex with the girl? Same thing. They both /could/ say no, but why should they? It’s a consenting act.

My tip is to just not be shit-faced drunk in the first place.


29 thoughts on “Sorry honey, alcohol is not an excuse to ruin some guys life.

  1. Well, when you’re drunk and wreck your car, killing someone, but didn’t consent to it… who is to blame? If you willingly imbibe you are still responsible for your actions. Now, if you’re passed out drunk and raped then that is different. If you are tipsy and have sex it can’t be rape unless we want to rewrite the laws on what is illegal under the influence.

    Lets leave gender out of it. Alcoholic consumption does not relieve a person of the responsibility for their own actions. Oh, you killed someone… death row. Oh, you got drunk and had sex… it is your problem, not a problem for the law. The law in no way supports, unfairly, those that willingly diminish their reasoning ability. In fact, it punishes most people who do so in some way or other. If you do something foolish while under the influence there is no recourse under the law for compensation … including having sex. Do you think a guy can say that he doesn’t have to pay child support because he was drunk when it happened? Nope.

    • I continue this discussion with some others outside of WordPress.

      In fact, intoxication does release you of legal bindings and contractual agreements. They are not binding if the individual who made them is under the influence of any intoxicants.

      How does that inform this discussion? Is it a double-standard?

      I’m also not sure I like the inflected assumption in this discussion – that being, the woman who calls rape is either lying, malicious, or claiming rape due to the intoxication level alone. Rape is rape is rape, and it’s a horrible thing.

      However, I’m also not sure the discussion of consent is as complicated as it seems…. Maybe it is less so? Maybe more? Hmm. It all seems very complicated… I think. I’m really enjoying the conversation started on this too, as it’s broadening in perspectives.

      • That was my point. A passerby cannot know when the intoxicated is beyond sound reasoning and must act as though the intoxicated person is of sound mind.
        To do otherwise is to assume responsibility for another without their consent… that’s a no no.

      • I believe intoxication would become quite apparent after a few interactions with the individual. Perhaps this assumes a level of discretion and… thought, but regardless, apparent.

        I’m still not sure whether I find it ethically acceptable for a non-intoxicated individual to engage in sexual intercourse with an intoxicated individual. It’s too icky and drips of ill-intent.

      • You appear to infer the worst of people. Do you have any idea how many children in the western world were conceived while one or both participant creators were intoxicated?

        While you search for a clear line between black and white you cannot ever expect the average person to know when and where that line is. Such thinking is unreasonable. It is even more so if nobody ever says no during the act.

        There are clear cases of abusive behavior and rape… I don’t think those are in question here nor in civil society. It is the gray area where the debate lies and I think the burden lies with all parties to the act, not one or the other. While you seem to want to excuse the female while she is intoxicated for bad decisions you do not do the same for the male who is likely also intoxicated.

        There is even a Buffet song called ‘why don’t we get drunk and screw’ … it is that common. Such a common thing yet to insert morality and law into it is to insinuate that there are clear cut lines on what is okay and what is not exactly while people are doing things which diminish their ability to know such things.

        Let’s not even get into what spring break has become for many USA-ians… a drink and fuck fest. Where is the rape in that cultural bubble?

        There is no clear cut take on it unless one party is incapable of acting on their own or forcibly raped. Outside of the obvious it is a case by case call.

      • I do hope I wasn’t coming across that way. 😦 I try to stay as open as possible. Your points are well-received, however.

        Maybe I am writing too much pondering, and not addressing my issue?

        I think my issue is with making a rapist at victim. If she did not want it, and says it was forced, I find discussions like the OP’s harmful to the victim.

        Does that make sense?

        And as always, thank you for your thoughts. They are eye-opening. I get awfully verbose with my types thoughts, I’ve been working on being more concise and non-rambling.

      • The problem with legislating morality is that you can’t. A crime happens only when a clear line has been crossed. When it comes to he said she said, there is no clear line to cross without corroborating evidence. Any argument outside of the clear and corroborated evidence is a personal morality call. When it comes to the law, I can see no other course except to treat it as a case by case basis for the jury to decide… which means justice will sometimes be done.

      • It is interesting to note that evolutionary processes guarantee that those willing to spread their genes by rape or consent will survive genetically. After several hundred thousand years, we are programmed to spread our genes. To declare civility and say that one way is right and others are wrong is to defy evolutionary processes… or more importantly it is to declare new evolutionary process pressures. I’m not saying there is anything wrong with that, I’m saying that it is change… adding morality to the mix that seldom had it before. It’s a slippery slope as the next thing you will be confronted with is who is qualified to spread their genes, how many times, and what does it mean to be qualified.

        Then there is the ‘other’ problem… a woman who wants a baby and child support but does not want the father involved. Can you see where all this is going?

        You cannot legislate morality for if you try there is a precipice waiting for you at every turn. Whether it is rape or not the father will be charged child support… except if he is in goal for rape and so on.

        The answer is education. It always is.

      • we legislate corroborated violence against personages. I said violence. If we were to try legislating slights then Monsanto would be in big trouble. The law can only do so much … we are a violent species, civility is the goal

  2. “I think my issue is with making a rapist at victim. If she did not want it, and says it was forced, I find discussions like the OP’s harmful to the victim.”

    Pardon? How in the world did I make any rapist a victim? If both parties consented, there is no rapist, and there is no victim. no amount of drinking will change that. And how is /not/ assuming rap detrimental to the victim?

    • I’m getting confused between two separate conversations on this same topic base. Pardon the confusion, both of you. My mistake, it got very fast moving there for a bit.

      • It’s ok. I was just just reading, and then suddenly started scratching my head like “what the hell? I never said…”

  3. Yeah it… Needed more background to have been stated here, which was provided in the other conversation, but not here… Ugh!

    Here, there seems to be the assumption of consent being made and then withdrawn afterwards. I agree, that regretted consentual sex =/= rape.

    In my other conversation, it’s morphed. There have been some remarks that intoxication invites the possibility of rape, and that a woman should be aware of that aaaand… Well it’s still ongoing, and consent has not been anywhere in that talk thus far.

  4. The reason i think the OP is wrong is that he acts like there is not context in which the man/woman are acting. He seems to be addressing all drunk women like “Look, all y’all, you’re responsible!” But in my eyes it depends on the context of the situation. I would never say that, of all women who claimed to have been raped that 100 percent of the men were at fault in the full sense of what the woman is claiming. Nor would I say that 0% of the men were at fault and the blame goes completely on the women. I think to think in such black or white terms is entirely idiotic, and well, sexist.
    Also basing responsibility on the level of the individual is problematic to me. I think that if you look at the greater cultural circumstances in which rapes occur, those also play a large factor. That does not absolve the individual of responsibility but it helps to explain why things happen the way they happen, and why rape is a cyclical problem that is difficult to solve. I don’t think it’s helpful to point fingers at specific men and or women, while ignoring the larger cultural fabric within which they are both embedded that led them to both sort of get in a given situation.
    Now of course rape occurs across a variety of cultural contexts and in different ways around the world. I’m not saying it will ever be entirely solved. But I think there are just different levels from which we can approach and analyze the situation, instead of just at the individual level, or instead of just looking it from the specific gender perspectives. Hope this all makes sense.
    as a final note, I think that whenever drunk people want to have drunk sex, they need to be extra careful when it comes to establishing consent. In cases where this does not happen, you’re going to potentially be in some sort of gray area. I really don’t know how to make some sort of universal claim about these gray areas, but if I were to look at it on a case by case basis, as a feminist, i’m guessing my sympathy would tend to lie more with the woman then the man, unlike the OP. The real world is messy, but that doesn’t mean that men should get away from dominating and oppressing women and ruining their lives (as you say) in the status quo, just because consent is a tricky subject.
    To that guys “sorry honey alcohol is not an excuse to ruin some guys life” my response is: “Sorry bro alcohol is not an excuse to ruin some girls life” .
    He is blinded to one-side, and comes off as an idiot and a pig. (to me at least….)

    • Olivia, thank you so much for your reply! I haven’t gotten nearly as much female response to this as I would have hoped for. Since posting this here, and on my Facebook page, I’ve been discussing this almost exclusively with upset men. It is very refreshing to get your input on this.

      My hope is that bringing the discussion into the light leads to some open eyes. Many anti-feminists don’t seem to realize that the issue of “rape culture,” as well call it, is a thing. Even my husband didn’t until I talked it through with him.

      I really do hope discussion can lead to an understanding. There simply hasn’t been enough of it across the gender barrier…

      • Thanks for your comment back! I’m glad it was refreshing to get my perspective.
        Yes, Rape culture is definitely a thing! With all the people who do not realize it, I guess it is a good goal to help others realize that that rape culture really exists.
        Good job getting the discussion going!

      • I knew this, though may have forgotten. But just as a point, you don’t make your gender apparent. Doesn’t make it right to assume one way or another, but just saying. 😉

      • This post links to my blog, a single glance at my blog would give it away that it is run by Lucy. But hey, it’s easy to assume someone is a guy. Albeit it doesn’t make it any less sexist of the commenter to do so.

  5. “So no, if you are drunk, and you decide to flirt with a guy, and later have sex with him, it is NOT RAPE!”
    Flirting is one thing. If suddenly the guy flips around and goes from gentle flirting to aggressive sexual innuendo and the girl is clearly put off or trying to slow the situation down, it is absolutely and irrefutably rape.

    • Thank you for contributing! I was growing a little weary engaging on this topic. It’s grown me quite a few comments on Facebook as well and opened the discussion quite wide.

      It’s good to have another perspective. 🙂

  6. Pingback: Perspective on Rape | For Your Thoughts

  7. Pingback: Biased Hypocrite | For Your Thoughts

  8. Hi everybody.
    When I read the title ‘Sorry honey, alcohol is not an excuse to ruin some guys life’, I thought straight away about ‘excuse’ being the reason connected with ruining some guy’s life. I mean, “Honey, alcohol cannot be a valid reason to incarcerate someone if he does something criminal while affected by alcohol”.
    Another sense might be: “Honey, you cannot ruin the life of a guy who was drunk, while you were drunk too”.
    I believe that both situations occur. We have a judicial position, a forma mentis in society, consisting in minimising what one undertakes while driven by alcohol. For some kind of astonishing magic, alcohol eliminates responsibility.
    In the second case, with the girl using the fact that the guy was drunk to take no responsibility, we have a similar state of affairs: responsibility elimination. The girl seems to be not responsible. In reality, she did something: she drank, thus reducing her discernment capacity. But she was capable of discerning when she opted for taking alcohol.
    A choice retains its value even when the initial manifestation of that choice appears to be the only choice component in which the chooser is conscious about his/her actions. Which means that even when the effect of the choice goes on, the choice has to remain such. The subsequent choice part follows from the conscious part of the choice. Responsibility is a great long train that challenges the person to look to distant possibilities.
    Stefano Libey
    STEFANOLIBEY | a philosophical pad
    RE-THINK NOW | towards a together knowledge

  9. Pingback: NotParticularlyPauciloquent

Penny for your thoughts....? Do share them here!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s