JREF Homepage Swift Blog Events Calendar $1 Million Paranormal Challenge The Amaz!ng Meeting Useful Links Support Us
James Randi Educational Foundation JREF Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   JREF Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
Click Here To Donate

Notices


Welcome to the JREF Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

Reply
Old 6th May 2012, 11:18 PM   #241
truethat
Penultimate Amazing
 
truethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,621
The problem with that mentality is two fold.

In the above cases the men had defend themselves against rape accusations. And the woman was raped. Even if the men were not convicted she felt raped. This goes back to how a woman can be raped without the men being "rapists."

Do we want to win a court battle? Or do we not want to rape women? If we don't want to rape women or be accused of raping women then perhaps don't have sex with an intoxicated woman.
__________________
“People who say they don't have time to read simply don't want to.”

― Julie Rugg, A Book Addict's Treasury
truethat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2012, 02:43 AM   #242
JJM 777
Illuminator
 
JJM 777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,175
Originally Posted by Kevin_Lowe View Post
Can you cite any laws or cases to support this claim?
It was others in some of the many recent rape threads that claimed that a drunken woman may be legally unable to consent to sex without havng passed out. That claim is all what I know, and I have responded that such would be a double standard.
JJM 777 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2012, 04:17 AM   #243
Kevin_Lowe
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kevin_Lowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Queensland
Posts: 11,354
Originally Posted by truethat View Post
The problem with that mentality is two fold.
Could you clarify what you mean by "that mentality"? Ideally could you also identify what arguments you think I have put forward that are erroneous, which you think are errors I have made because of "that mentality"?

Quote:
In the above cases the men had defend themselves against rape accusations. And the woman was raped. Even if the men were not convicted she felt raped. This goes back to how a woman can be raped without the men being "rapists."
I'm not sure in what sense a man is not a rapist, if they have sex with someone who is so incapacitated by drugs that they are physically incapable of consenting or not consenting. We're not talking about someone who is deemed unable to consent under some urban-mythological law, we're talking about someone too plastered to be able to move or talk.

Quote:
Do we want to win a court battle? Or do we not want to rape women?
I don't understand what dichotomy you are trying to put forward here.

Quote:
If we don't want to rape women or be accused of raping women then perhaps don't have sex with an intoxicated woman.
If you don't want to rape women (or men or transgender people for that matter) as the laws are currently constructed then you just don't have sex with people who cannot consent or who do not consent. They can be very drunk indeed, at least under UK case law, but as long as they can say yes and take actions consistent with enthusiastic consent it's fine.

The idea that you can be charged with rape for having sex with someone who's had a few drinks still seems to be an urban myth. Once again I welcome correction if there's a single law or case that fits that description.

As for avoiding being accused of rape, assuming that you have taken the precaution of not raping anyone, I don't know how much you can do except avoid being alone with anyone who seems likely to make false accusations.
__________________
Thinking is skilled work....People with untrained minds should no more expect to think clearly and logically than people who have never learned and never practiced can expect to find themselves good carpenters, golfers, bridge-players, or pianists.
-- Alfred Mander
Kevin_Lowe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2012, 07:40 AM   #244
truethat
Penultimate Amazing
 
truethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,621
Seems like you are presenting the idea that "being accused of rape" is not that big of a deal if you can beat the charges.

I think this misses the point. If a woman feels raped she was raped. It doesn't necessarily mean that the guy intended to rape her. Ex in marriages when a woman consents to having sex with her husband, she may be doing so out of fear if he is abusive. She may reluctantly consent but will still walk away feeling raped and violated.

The words coming out of a woman's mouth do not necessarily represent how she feels in the moment about what is going on. And so it is important to consider if YOU don't want to rape a woman, things YOU can do to be sure that you don't.

It's about not raping her, not about "beating the rape charges."

So if I was a guy I would never have sex with a drunk woman. I suppose if I was in a long term relationship it would be different. But for dates and one night stands, if the woman had been drinking I would not have sex.


A drunk woman who enthusiastically consents may still not be in her right mind. She's drunk. How is she in a position to consent? Maybe explain why you would want to have sex with a drunk woman?

The court may understand that the man did not "rape her" according to his perception. IOW it was reasonable for him to assume that she consented. She enthusiastically did. But the woman was still raped. So if you don't want to rape a woman don't have sex with a drunk woman, because you are raping her. Even if she consents.

If you were out with a woman who had just won the football pool in a bar. She gets drunk and happily and enthusiastically tells you that you can have $1,000 of her money. She hands it to you and pushes you to take it. Would you take it?

If she woke up the next day and said "Oh my god I didn't mean to give you that!" would you keep the money and say "Hey you GAVE it to me, you insisted!" You would realize that she wasn't really in her right mind and give it back to her I hope. If you spent that money that night in a casino and lost it all, you wouldn't be able to give it back.

Then who is at fault? Well she's at fault for getting so drunk and giving the money away. But most decent people would not accept $1000 from a drunk woman they didn't know very well. It would seem like a creepy thing to do.


There's a problem with the way men (especially young men) seem to think that it's ok to want to have sex with someone even if she doesn't and to try to convince her to have sex with you. Very strange mindset. And one that needs to be changed by encouraging men to be more responsible. IMO this is one way that it can be done.
__________________
“People who say they don't have time to read simply don't want to.”

― Julie Rugg, A Book Addict's Treasury

Last edited by truethat; 7th May 2012 at 07:52 AM.
truethat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2012, 08:24 AM   #245
JJM 777
Illuminator
 
JJM 777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,175
Originally Posted by Kevin_Lowe View Post
you just don't have sex with people who cannot consent or who do not consent
... or who change their mind the morning after.

Avoid these, and everything will go well for you.
JJM 777 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2012, 02:39 PM   #246
Kevin_Lowe
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kevin_Lowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Queensland
Posts: 11,354
Originally Posted by truethat View Post
Seems like you are presenting the idea that "being accused of rape" is not that big of a deal if you can beat the charges.
I'm not sure what I've said that could make it seem like that, but whatever. I have in fact said the opposite quite recently.

Quote:
I think this misses the point. If a woman feels raped she was raped.
I wouldn't go that far. I'm sure the majority of women who feel raped were raped, but one hasn't been raped until and unless one is actually raped, just as one has only been robbed when one is actually robbed - feeling robbed alone doesn't quite meet the definition.

Quote:
It doesn't necessarily mean that the guy intended to rape her. Ex in marriages when a woman consents to having sex with her husband, she may be doing so out of fear if he is abusive. She may reluctantly consent but will still walk away feeling raped and violated.

The words coming out of a woman's mouth do not necessarily represent how she feels in the moment about what is going on. And so it is important to consider if YOU don't want to rape a woman, things YOU can do to be sure that you don't.

It's about not raping her, not about "beating the rape charges."

So if I was a guy I would never have sex with a drunk woman. I suppose if I was in a long term relationship it would be different. But for dates and one night stands, if the woman had been drinking I would not have sex.
It seems to me that you're trying to change the definition of "rape" with this "if a woman feels raped she was raped" manoeuvre, and then argue that to be morally safe you must never have sex with someone who was drunk.

On one level I agree with you, in that I think alcohol is a major net negative for the human species and if I could wave a magic wand and make alcohol vanish from the planet I would do so. I'd save millions of lives per year, just to begin with, so morally I'd find it a very simple decision. In my ideal world nobody would make major decisions that (thanks to HIV) can be life-threatening while drunk.

On the other hand I think we ought to strongly resist the idea that rape is anything but having sex with someone without their enthusiastic, informed consent. It's a powerful word we ought to save for the situation it actually describes.

Quote:
A drunk woman who enthusiastically consents may still not be in her right mind. She's drunk. How is she in a position to consent? Maybe explain why you would want to have sex with a drunk woman?
Unless you're trolling it serves no purpose to try to personalise the argument like this.

Legally, in the real world, you're in a position to consent as long as you are physically capable of conveying and acting on enthusiastic consent.

Quote:
The court may understand that the man did not "rape her" according to his perception. IOW it was reasonable for him to assume that she consented. She enthusiastically did. But the woman was still raped. So if you don't want to rape a woman don't have sex with a drunk woman, because you are raping her. Even if she consents.
The problem with this argument, as indicated earlier, is that you have to redefine "rape" to make it work. As I understand it such a case would never even make it to court - it would be one of the 5% or so of rape accusations found to be groundless, because nothing that meets the definition of rape is alleged to have occurred.

Quote:
If you were out with a woman who had just won the football pool in a bar. She gets drunk and happily and enthusiastically tells you that you can have $1,000 of her money. She hands it to you and pushes you to take it. Would you take it?

If she woke up the next day and said "Oh my god I didn't mean to give you that!" would you keep the money and say "Hey you GAVE it to me, you insisted!" You would realize that she wasn't really in her right mind and give it back to her I hope. If you spent that money that night in a casino and lost it all, you wouldn't be able to give it back.

Then who is at fault? Well she's at fault for getting so drunk and giving the money away. But most decent people would not accept $1000 from a drunk woman they didn't know very well. It would seem like a creepy thing to do.
I don't think this is a very good parallel. The women I've known who had sex while drunk did so because they wanted sex, not because they were altruistically overcome with the urge to make someone else happy. This parable only works if sex is something women give away out of generosity, as opposed to something they share because they want to do so for their own pleasure.

A better parallel might be giving a drunken woman a slice of cake, because at the time she really wanted to eat the cake.

Obviously there's a continuum of incapacitation here, and if someone is physically incapable of indicating whether or not they want cake it's not okay to shove cake into their mouth. However if they are capable of standing up and saying "Dammit, I want to eat cake now!" then you're on the right side of the law if you decide to give them the cake they want.

Quote:
There's a problem with the way men (especially young men) seem to think that it's ok to want to have sex with someone even if she doesn't and to try to convince her to have sex with you. Very strange mindset. And one that needs to be changed by encouraging men to be more responsible. IMO this is one way that it can be done.
That looks to me like two different things. Trying to convince someone to have sex with you is okay. Having sex with someone who doesn't want to have sex with you is not.

I'm open to the possibility that "sex you regret afterwards" is such a bad outcome that nobody should ever have sex with anyone who is drunk. Show me the evidence and I'll take a look.

However I think it's highly problematic to try to redefine "rape" by fiat so that it includes "sex you enthusiastically consented to at the time and regretted afterwards", and then carry on as if all our rules and/or intuitions about what Whoopi Goldberg would call rape-rape still apply to this broadened definition of rape you've just tried to force on us.
__________________
Thinking is skilled work....People with untrained minds should no more expect to think clearly and logically than people who have never learned and never practiced can expect to find themselves good carpenters, golfers, bridge-players, or pianists.
-- Alfred Mander
Kevin_Lowe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2012, 03:30 PM   #247
truethat
Penultimate Amazing
 
truethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,621
So raping someone is giving her a slice of cake, only she didn't really want it? LOL ok come on now that's stupid.

We're not discussing the woman. We're discussing the man, at least I am. I'm talking about being a man who doesn't ever want to rape anyone. I mean if you are ok saying "Look I'm sorry you ultimately were raped but you looked like you wanted sex" that's different.

I would not want to say that to someone. So it depends on your personality. I would no more take $1,000 from a drunk person than I would pour shots down a drunk persons throat. I'm morally responsible that way. (Not saying that's a right way to be, it's just how I am.)

I've always been the type of person who will look out for others even if I'm drinking myself. I've many times in the past taken shots away from friends who really wanted it and believe it or not, refused a $1,000 gift from a drunk rich man who won an $18,000 football pool and wanted to give it to me because he was rich anyway.

I would not do those types of things because I would not want to take advantage of someone who is drunk. I also care about other people and look out for them. I've taken car keys away and paid for cabs for people that were drunk even though they had more money than me. It's just "how I roll."

If you roll with "hey if you got raped due to your own stupidity it's not my problem" I can understand that. But I try to teach my sons to have more self respect than that.


As to the very first point, I think a lot of guys don't realize how often women do give away sex without really wanting to do it out of a sense of obligation. Years ago I would see girlfriends feel obligated to sleep with a guy who spent a lot of money on them for the evening. Or as we have discussed, started making out with a guy without wanting to go all the way to sex but then felt like a "tease." I do hope you realize how common it is for women to "have sex" even if they don't really want to.
__________________
“People who say they don't have time to read simply don't want to.”

― Julie Rugg, A Book Addict's Treasury

Last edited by truethat; 7th May 2012 at 03:34 PM.
truethat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2012, 10:49 PM   #248
Kevin_Lowe
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kevin_Lowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Queensland
Posts: 11,354
Originally Posted by truethat View Post
So raping someone is giving her a slice of cake, only she didn't really want it? LOL ok come on now that's stupid.
Well that's a rather stream-of-consciousness response.

I was addressing your attempt at producing an analogy to consensual-but-regretted sex, I was saying that yours was a poor analogy, and I was saying that a better analogy for consensual-but-regretted sex would be consensual-but-regretted cake.

It had nothing to do with rape, and so your response is irrelevant.

Quote:
We're not discussing the woman. We're discussing the man, at least I am. I'm talking about being a man who doesn't ever want to rape anyone. I mean if you are ok saying "Look I'm sorry you ultimately were raped but you looked like you wanted sex" that's different.
I'd rather say that you are a man who is prepared to go to absolutely any lengths to make absolutely sure they do not rape anyone, who has also already bought in to your redefinition of "rape" to include sex with enthusiastic consent which is later regretted.

If I haven't emphasised it enough already, I do not think we should accept that redefinition. I still have not seen a single law or case that backs that definition up.

Anyway, such a man probably wouldn't have sex with anyone without a series of in-depth psychological assessments (after all, she might be a paranoid schizophrenic having an episode), a breathalyzer (she might be incredibly drunk and hiding it really well) and other precautions as well.

Maybe you think that is the standard of behaviour we should expect, but I think that position can only make sense if you don't count sex as a good thing in and of itself. If sex counts as a good outcome for both parties, and I think most of us think it does most of the time, then unreasonable demands for caution that have a chilling effect on people's sex lives are doing harm in an important way. Yes, to women as well, because women enjoy sex too (a factor which seems highly relevant to your position but which I don't think I've ever seen you address).

Quote:
I would not want to say that to someone. So it depends on your personality. I would no more take $1,000 from a drunk person than I would pour shots down a drunk persons throat. I'm morally responsible that way. (Not saying that's a right way to be, it's just how I am.)
Both are just bad analogies. I wouldn't do either of those things, but I might furnish a drunk person with a slice of cake if they said they wanted one. Or give a mildly-to-moderately drunk person a shot if they said they wanted one. I respect their autonomy up until the point where they are clearly harming themselves, or clearly not competent to act rationally.

Quote:
I've always been the type of person who will look out for others even if I'm drinking myself. I've many times in the past taken shots away from friends who really wanted it and believe it or not, refused a $1,000 gift from a drunk rich man who won an $18,000 football pool and wanted to give it to me because he was rich anyway.

I would not do those types of things because I would not want to take advantage of someone who is drunk. I also care about other people and look out for them. I've taken car keys away and paid for cabs for people that were drunk even though they had more money than me. It's just "how I roll."

If you roll with "hey if you got raped due to your own stupidity it's not my problem" I can understand that. But I try to teach my sons to have more self respect than that.
We were not talking about rape, due to stupidity or otherwise. We were talking about whether it's okay to have sex with a person who is somewhat drunk, but still perfectly capable of expressing or withholding enthusiastic consent.

In fact your attempt to put the words "hey if you got raped due to your own stupidity it's not my problem" into my mouth is highly offensive. Yes, you carefully discounted the claim with a strategic "if", but the intent is very clear.

Quote:
As to the very first point, I think a lot of guys don't realize how often women do give away sex without really wanting to do it out of a sense of obligation. Years ago I would see girlfriends feel obligated to sleep with a guy who spent a lot of money on them for the evening. Or as we have discussed, started making out with a guy without wanting to go all the way to sex but then felt like a "tease." I do hope you realize how common it is for women to "have sex" even if they don't really want to.
If there's a problem with women faking enthusiastic consent, I think it should be addressed by educating women not to do that or by fixing the social pressures that make women do that. Not by trying to lower the bar for rape so low that even sex with enthusiastic consent can still be construed as rape under the special truthat definition.

I don't know what you think the goal of all this is, but I think the goal of these sorts of social rules and structures is to see to it that people can have lots of enthusiastically consensual sex while minimising the chance that anyone will get raped insofar as that's reasonably possible. Your position seems incompatible with any kind of pro-sex position, because it seems to me to treat enthusiastically consensual sex as being of zero to negative value, and hence things that get in the way of people having enthusiastically consensual sex have no downside to you.

My view is that both men and women like sex, want sex, will go a long way out of their way to have sex with people they find sexy, and that it's a good thing if they get such sex (all else being equal). Precautions against rape, false rape accusations or other adverse outcomes are important but not so important that they automatically trump people's legitimate desire to have enthusiastically consensual sex.
__________________
Thinking is skilled work....People with untrained minds should no more expect to think clearly and logically than people who have never learned and never practiced can expect to find themselves good carpenters, golfers, bridge-players, or pianists.
-- Alfred Mander
Kevin_Lowe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th May 2012, 08:23 AM   #249
JJM 777
Illuminator
 
JJM 777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,175
A new definition of date rape: she faked it all.
JJM 777 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th May 2012, 12:30 PM   #250
mijopaalmc
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,249
Originally Posted by JJM 777 View Post
A new definition of date rape: she faked it all.
Are you trying to be offensive?

Have you moved on from defending an untenable position to out-right trolling?
mijopaalmc is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th May 2012, 05:03 PM   #251
Kevin_Lowe
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kevin_Lowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Queensland
Posts: 11,354
Originally Posted by mijopaalmc View Post
Are you trying to be offensive?

Have you moved on from defending an untenable position to out-right trolling?
It's trolls trolling trolls around here.
__________________
Thinking is skilled work....People with untrained minds should no more expect to think clearly and logically than people who have never learned and never practiced can expect to find themselves good carpenters, golfers, bridge-players, or pianists.
-- Alfred Mander
Kevin_Lowe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th May 2012, 09:37 PM   #252
truethat
Penultimate Amazing
 
truethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,621
I think it has to do with knowing how to be a decent man. A decent human being.


A sixteen year old can consent cheerfully and willingly to sex with a 50 year old man.

But what kind of man wants to have sex with a 16 year old? There are some. But not any I respect.

A drunk women can consent willingly and provocatively.

But what kind of man wants to have sex with a drunk woman?


Edited by LashL:  Edited for civility.
__________________
“People who say they don't have time to read simply don't want to.”

― Julie Rugg, A Book Addict's Treasury

Last edited by LashL; 12th May 2012 at 12:12 PM.
truethat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th May 2012, 10:53 PM   #253
Kevin_Lowe
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kevin_Lowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Queensland
Posts: 11,354
Originally Posted by truethat View Post
I think it has to do with knowing how to be a decent man. A decent human being.

A sixteen year old can consent cheerfully and willingly to sex with a 50 year old man.

But what kind of man wants to have sex with a 16 year old? There are some. But not any I respect.

A drunk women can consent willingly and provocatively.

But what kind of man wants to have sex with a drunk woman?
This isn't really an argument, it's just name-calling.

You've arbitrarily defined "decent" to mean "follows certain codes I just specified", and defined anyone who breaks those codes as "indecent". But as soon as someone asks the question "Okay, so why do you think X is decent and Y is indecent?" you are right back to where you started.

If there's some sensible reason to think X is decent and Y is indecent, you need to state that reason. If there's no such reason, you still don't have an argument. You're just calling the other side bad names.

You also get bonus troll points for dragging in the inflammatory topic of spring/autumn romances when it has no particular relevance.

Quote:
Edited by LashL:  Removed quote of moderated content.
Once again, all I said was that equating sex with cake was a better analogy than your attempt to equate sex with giving away money, because at least cake is something people do for their own sensual pleasure. It's far from a perfect analogy - cake can't give you AIDS and it does make you put on weight - but it's a lot better than yours.

In your example sex isn't something women want, it's something they are giving away in a drunken excess of generosity. That seems like a weird way to view sex to me, but each to their own.

Quote:
Edited by LashL:  Removed quote of moderated content.
If that's not a direct personal attack, could you please explain what you meant?

If it's a direct personal attack, then please cease the personal attacks.

Quote:
Edited by LashL:  Removed quote of moderated content.
Don't blame me. You were the one trying to model sex as something women give away that hurts them and gives them no benefit except perhaps the warm, fuzzy feeling of having made someone else happy. That seems pretty weird.
__________________
Thinking is skilled work....People with untrained minds should no more expect to think clearly and logically than people who have never learned and never practiced can expect to find themselves good carpenters, golfers, bridge-players, or pianists.
-- Alfred Mander

Last edited by LashL; 12th May 2012 at 12:13 PM.
Kevin_Lowe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th May 2012, 07:45 AM   #254
truethat
Penultimate Amazing
 
truethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,621
Why do I need to do any of those things?


I was not trying to model sex as something like that all, reread it. You are making sweeping generalizations to avoid discussing "consent." We're not discussing situations in which consent is very clear, IOW a sober woman having sex and enjoying it.

We're discussing rape. Enjoyable sex is nothing to do with rape. Why is that distinction not clear to you.
__________________
“People who say they don't have time to read simply don't want to.”

― Julie Rugg, A Book Addict's Treasury
truethat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th May 2012, 08:08 AM   #255
AvalonXQ
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 11,853
I've used cake as an analogy for sex before. It's useful for this idea of "things people do voluntarily but regret later".

It's particularly useful when people are having trouble understanding the existence of seduction, which is distinct from coercion.
AvalonXQ is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th May 2012, 09:29 AM   #256
truethat
Penultimate Amazing
 
truethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,621
The topic of this thread is consent, so we're discussing what clearly means consent. This is in regard to rape. Getting raped is not like eating cake and regretting it later. There is no pleasure that goes away the next day when you are raped. It's a bit disconcerting that this doesn't seem obvious to some posters.
__________________
“People who say they don't have time to read simply don't want to.”

― Julie Rugg, A Book Addict's Treasury
truethat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th May 2012, 09:36 AM   #257
AvalonXQ
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 11,853
Quote:
There is no pleasure that goes away the next day when you are raped.
A rape victim can still experience physical pleasure. Arousal or even orgasm do not imply that the victim consented.
AvalonXQ is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th May 2012, 09:51 AM   #258
truethat
Penultimate Amazing
 
truethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,621
Originally Posted by AvalonXQ View Post
A rape victim can still experience physical pleasure. Arousal or even orgasm do not imply that the victim consented.
That's like saying that jamming a slice of chocolate cake down a person's throat still gives them some pleasure because chocolate tastes good. It's completely irrelevant. Pleasure means that it was enjoyable or pleasing to the person not that their physical body set off endorphin.

Pleasure as you are defining it is not pleasure. It's a physical reaction.
__________________
“People who say they don't have time to read simply don't want to.”

― Julie Rugg, A Book Addict's Treasury
truethat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th May 2012, 09:57 AM   #259
AvalonXQ
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 11,853
Originally Posted by truethat View Post
That's like saying that jamming a slice of chocolate cake down a person's throat still gives them some pleasure because chocolate tastes good.
See, I think that's a perfectly good use of a cake analogy. Thanks for coming on board with it.


Quote:
It's completely irrelevant. Pleasure means that it was enjoyable or pleasing to the person not that their physical body set off endorphin.

Pleasure as you are defining it is not pleasure. It's a physical reaction.
Okay, I don't mind those definitions -- we just need to make sure we're clear on that point. Because physical pleasure is absolutely possible with rape, and it doesn't imply consent.
AvalonXQ is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th May 2012, 10:07 AM   #260
truethat
Penultimate Amazing
 
truethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,621
Jamming cake down someone's throat doesn't cause them pleasure because chocolate tastes good. What happens is that chocolate now tastes sickening and the person probably won't want to eat chocolate for a long time afterwards.

Likewise raping someone may cause physical things that would normally be considered pleasure. But under the circumstances the sensation is not pleasure, it's sickening.

Eating cake can cause pleasure, but being forced to eat cake while someone murders a baby in front of you is not going to be a pleasing experience.

You're not going to be thinking "Wow this cake is awesome, too bad about the baby" the entire situation is connected. If for you, your sexual gratification is separate from your state of mind then that's you, but it's certainly not the norm.

People who participate in S&M are doing things that normally cause pain, but because they are psychologically into this, it causes pleasure.
__________________
“People who say they don't have time to read simply don't want to.”

― Julie Rugg, A Book Addict's Treasury
truethat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th May 2012, 03:17 PM   #261
Kevin_Lowe
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kevin_Lowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Queensland
Posts: 11,354
Originally Posted by truethat View Post
Why do I need to do any of those things?
I was politely assuming that you were arguing for a point, and wanted to persuade people. If you were just typing things at random, then whatever.

Quote:
I was not trying to model sex as something like that all, reread it. You are making sweeping generalizations to avoid discussing "consent." We're not discussing situations in which consent is very clear, IOW a sober woman having sex and enjoying it.

We're discussing rape. Enjoyable sex is nothing to do with rape. Why is that distinction not clear to you.
The reason the distinction isn't completely agreed-upon is that you are asserting that we should treat enthusiastically consensual, enjoyable sex as if it was rape when it comes to the question of whether it's okay to have enthusiastically consensual, enjoyable sex with someone who is mildly to moderately drunk. (But definitely not so drunk as to be incapacitated, which is where the law draws the line).

Now how you can argue this out of one side of your mouth, and then also say that "enjoyable sex is nothing to do with rape" confuses me, but maybe you can clear that up for us.

Now I've been musing on this in my own time and wondering if maybe you don't have a point in the sense that if we were highly risk-averse we could just have a social norm of absolutely no sex (for the first time with a given partner, anyway) while under the influence of anything. I don't think it's inconceivable that in a generation's time people might see getting drunk and going home with a stranger to be as daft as duelling. I think the real question is what effect such a revised social norm would have on the date rape rate - if it could cut it substantially, it might be a net good move for society to accept such a revised norm.

If so I'm pretty sure that criminalising first-time sex under the influence, or trying to equate it with rape (as you do) is a stupid way to try to revise the social norm, but the goal might be sensible even if the methods are offensive, counterproductive and/or irrational.
__________________
Thinking is skilled work....People with untrained minds should no more expect to think clearly and logically than people who have never learned and never practiced can expect to find themselves good carpenters, golfers, bridge-players, or pianists.
-- Alfred Mander
Kevin_Lowe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th May 2012, 03:40 PM   #262
truethat
Penultimate Amazing
 
truethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,621
Who is "We"? I'm speaking from a male perspective not a societal one. I do not necessarily think that society does treat it this way.

However as a man, (if I were a man) I would not want to have drunken sex with someone unless I knew them very well. No matter how "enthusiastic" and "fun" it might be, having nothing to do with rape, when someone is drunk they will sometimes do things they really wouldn't do when sober.

Let's look at it from an entirely different point of view. If a drunk person challenged you to a fight would you take them up on it or would you walk away because they were drunk? If a drunk person decided to whoop it up and jump on a bar and strip in the middle of a restaurant, would you consider it OK because the person thought it was fun and interesting?

I'm not understanding why you don't seem to understand that being drunk impairs your judgment. Often a person who seems completely alert and aware is operating in a black out and has no recollection of it the next day.

I would think any responsible adult would recognize the problem with doing something with another person that requires their consent, if they are not legally able to consent, and are impaired.

Edited by LashL:  Edited for civility.
__________________
“People who say they don't have time to read simply don't want to.”

― Julie Rugg, A Book Addict's Treasury

Last edited by LashL; 12th May 2012 at 12:15 PM.
truethat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th May 2012, 07:35 PM   #263
Kevin_Lowe
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kevin_Lowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Queensland
Posts: 11,354
Originally Posted by truethat View Post
Who is "We"? I'm speaking from a male perspective not a societal one. I do not necessarily think that society does treat it this way.

However as a man, (if I were a man) I would not want to have drunken sex with someone unless I knew them very well. No matter how "enthusiastic" and "fun" it might be, having nothing to do with rape, when someone is drunk they will sometimes do things they really wouldn't do when sober.

Let's look at it from an entirely different point of view. If a drunk person challenged you to a fight would you take them up on it or would you walk away because they were drunk? If a drunk person decided to whoop it up and jump on a bar and strip in the middle of a restaurant, would you consider it OK because the person thought it was fun and interesting?
I guess I'll just repeat myself. I respect their autonomy up until the point where they are clearly harming themselves, or clearly not competent to act rationally.

Quote:
I'm not understanding why you don't seem to understand that being drunk impairs your judgment. Often a person who seems completely alert and aware is operating in a black out and has no recollection of it the next day.
I've never seen that actually. The people I've interacted with who didn't remember what they'd done the day after (or claimed not to anyway) were pretty obviously impaired at the time.

Being drunk impairs your judgment, but there's a continuum. We're still considered perfectly capable of making sensible decisions after, say, three drinks and I don't see any problem with that.

Quote:
I would think any responsible adult would recognize the problem with doing something with another person that requires their consent, if they are not legally able to consent, and are impaired.
You're equating two totally different things. "Not legally able to consent", in the context of adult alcohol use means "too hammered to walk or talk". There's a very large continuum between that level of inebriation and having had a few drinks.

Quote:
Edited by LashL:  Removed quote of moderated content.
You really are determined to personalise this discussion, aren't you? I decline to play your game. If you can't discuss this issue without Just Asking Offensive Questions, I'm not interested in engaging with you.
__________________
Thinking is skilled work....People with untrained minds should no more expect to think clearly and logically than people who have never learned and never practiced can expect to find themselves good carpenters, golfers, bridge-players, or pianists.
-- Alfred Mander

Last edited by LashL; 12th May 2012 at 12:15 PM.
Kevin_Lowe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th May 2012, 07:47 PM   #264
truethat
Penultimate Amazing
 
truethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,621
Edited by LashL:  Edited for civility.

Btw you are moving the goal posts. We've been saying "drunk" and now you are switching it to "had a few drinks." Well obviously it's not the same thing to have sex with a woman after she had a glass of wine at dinner. That's not drunk.
__________________
“People who say they don't have time to read simply don't want to.”

― Julie Rugg, A Book Addict's Treasury

Last edited by LashL; 12th May 2012 at 12:16 PM.
truethat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th May 2012, 08:00 PM   #265
Kevin_Lowe
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kevin_Lowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Queensland
Posts: 11,354
Originally Posted by truethat View Post
Edited by LashL:  Removed quote of moderated content.
If you think it makes any difference to my actual arguments, feel free to assume that I've never had sex in my life with any person or thing that wasn't at least three sheets to the wind, more likely six. I can't see what difference that could possibly make, though. Arguments stand or fall regardless of who puts them forward, which is why ad hominem arguments are fallacious and why attempts to personalise arguments are bad form.

Or to put it another way, if I said I was a teetotaller in a long-term relationship would you say "Oh well then, I guess I agree with everything you said!"? I very much doubt it. You're fishing for an excuse to discount my position, nothing more. I strongly suspect there is no honest intent on your part to update your beliefs based on what I say.

Also I want to make it clear that I never said "it's so important to be able to have sex with a drunk woman". That's just another thing you made up and tried to put in my mouth. That is also bad form.

Quote:
Btw you are moving the goal posts. We've been saying "drunk" and now you are switching it to "had a few drinks." Well obviously it's not the same thing to have sex with a woman after she had a glass of wine at dinner. That's not drunk.
"Drunk" covers a lot of ground. If you're going to say that "drunk" means "totally paralytic" and does not include people who have had a few drinks, then I'm not the one trying to move the goal posts.
__________________
Thinking is skilled work....People with untrained minds should no more expect to think clearly and logically than people who have never learned and never practiced can expect to find themselves good carpenters, golfers, bridge-players, or pianists.
-- Alfred Mander

Last edited by LashL; 12th May 2012 at 12:16 PM.
Kevin_Lowe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th May 2012, 08:02 PM   #266
truethat
Penultimate Amazing
 
truethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,621
Edited by LashL:  Edited for civility.


Also drunk doesn't mean totally paralytic. Obviously you would know that is rape. (I hope) but you seem to act as if there's this great divide between "tipsy" and passed out drunk. People who are drunk operate motor vehicles every single day, unfortunately. When they get busted they all express regret and wish they hadn't done it. (Most of them anyway) And yet many people wind up being repeat offenders. Most drunk drivers aren't out there trying to ruin their lives or risk killing people. Alcohol messes with your ability to make decisions, and even when the decision is dangerous to yourself, you might do it.

So the person doesn't have to be falling down drunk. Not all drunk drivers are weaving all over the road. Most are not caught. If they were caught they'd regret it. So a drunk woman most certainly can be capable of doing something and being drunk.

And btw just because you haven't recognized a black out doesn't mean that people don't have them.
__________________
“People who say they don't have time to read simply don't want to.”

― Julie Rugg, A Book Addict's Treasury

Last edited by LashL; 12th May 2012 at 12:17 PM.
truethat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th May 2012, 08:28 PM   #267
Kevin_Lowe
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kevin_Lowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Queensland
Posts: 11,354
Originally Posted by truethat View Post
Edited by LashL:  Removed quote of moderated content.
When you stop trying to put words into my mouth maybe we can have a conversation like adults.

Quote:
Also drunk doesn't mean totally paralytic. Obviously you would know that is rape. (I hope)
Since I have explicitly said so several times recently I can only interpret this as an attempt to get around the forum rules prohibiting personal attacks. If you had a sensible argument you wouldn't need trolling or sly personal attacks.

Quote:
but you seem to act as if there's this great divide between "tipsy" and passed out drunk.
Since I used the word "continuum" at least twice in my last post, as opposed to "great divide", it's clear you're not responding to what I actually post. You're responding to some straw man in your own head that is saying and thinking all sorts of bizarre things.

If you want to have that argument out loud on these forums feel free, just don't try to drag me in and use me as a stand-in for your straw man.

Quote:
People who are drunk operate motor vehicles every single day, unfortunately. When they get busted they all express regret and wish they hadn't done it.
Just so we can start to have a sensible conversation, do you think that a non-zero percentage of people who have enthusiastically consensual, enjoyable sex while one or both parties are under the influence of one or more drinks do not regret it in the morning?

(I'm not now and never have denied that a non-zero percentage of such people do regret it in the morning, by the way. Because I can feel that straw man coming on).

How high would that percentage of non-regretful people have to be, for you to decide that allowing such sex under some circumstances might be okay?
__________________
Thinking is skilled work....People with untrained minds should no more expect to think clearly and logically than people who have never learned and never practiced can expect to find themselves good carpenters, golfers, bridge-players, or pianists.
-- Alfred Mander

Last edited by LashL; 12th May 2012 at 12:17 PM.
Kevin_Lowe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th May 2012, 08:36 PM   #268
truethat
Penultimate Amazing
 
truethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,621
You still haven't answered my question or perhaps I'm misunderstanding.

Would you have sex with an intoxicated woman? Yes or no?


I'm just trying to understand your boundaries. You want to have a conversation like adults but don't answer a direct question.


Perhaps the "would" is tricky, "Have you ever had sex with an intoxicated woman? Not tipsy, or one or two drinks, but drunk. Not passed out drunk or falling down drunk or unable to function drunk. But definitely intoxicated. Yes or no?"

If you can't answer this then I will forgo the conversation because I don't want to be accused of making personal attacks when I'm asking you questions to understand your POV.

Also how is a direct question "sly" LOL


ETA

The drunk driving situation is a good example of what I'm trying to convey. You've also stated (it seems) that when you've had sex with drunk women they seemed to really enjoy it and didn't regret it the next day. That's fantastic for you.

There are many people who have driven drunk many times in their lives, we're talking years of drunk driving. And they've made it home safe, never had a problem. No accidents no worries. No problems.

However it's still illegal to drink and drive. And not only is it illegal, you could accidentally kill someone. So I would say to people "never drink and drive, no matter what" My uncle was killed by a drunk driver. He's dead. Gone and you can't take it back. I'm not angry at the woman who did it because I'm sure she just made a mistake in judgment. She didn't mean to kill anyone.

Likewise, having sex with a drunk woman is risking the chance that she might not have wanted to consent if she was drunk. Sure the idea that having great fun sex is out there and it could be true. In fact in 70% of the cases I would bet it was enjoyable and fun. In some other cases the sex might have sucked or the woman regretted it the next day but owned her own responsibility.

But then there are those few cases of rape. Where the woman feels raped and violated and taken advantage of. Now my advice to you would be the same as the advice to the fun loving drunk driver. Don't drive drunk. Don't do it because the risk of killing someone, however small, is a fatal risk, and so is the risk of raping someone. If you do rape someone it is life altering.

So don't drive drunk
Don't have sex with drunk women.
Be responsible
__________________
“People who say they don't have time to read simply don't want to.”

― Julie Rugg, A Book Addict's Treasury

Last edited by truethat; 9th May 2012 at 08:59 PM.
truethat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th May 2012, 09:03 PM   #269
JJM 777
Illuminator
 
JJM 777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,175
Originally Posted by truethat View Post
Would you have sex with an intoxicated woman? Yes or no?
I have no premeditated policy to refuse sex with my wife if she were drunk when asking for it. A very theoretical scenario, because she never drinks enough to qualify as drunkenness.
JJM 777 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th May 2012, 09:18 PM   #270
truethat
Penultimate Amazing
 
truethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,621
Originally Posted by JJM 777 View Post
I have no premeditated policy to refuse sex with my wife if she were drunk when asking for it. A very theoretical scenario, because she never drinks enough to qualify as drunkenness.
You also know your wife and probably have arrived at the parameters of her consent. You don't rape your wife, you don't force her to have sex and if she's not that into it I would wager it would not be something that would thrill you either.

In this case it is reasonable to assume that you will not "rape anyone." In the beginning of this thread I pointed out that young men should be taught not to have sex with women who have been drinking on dates or that they may have picked up in a club or on a night out. Married young men are not likely to be accused of rape by their wives and prosecuted. At the worst she may have it out with you and tell you how it upset her etc.

So it's not that hard to see why you should not have sex with an intoxicated woman on a date or as a pick up.

The desire to do so, is strange to me. I don't usually hear people wishing they could get away with drinking and driving because it's not that big of a deal.
__________________
“People who say they don't have time to read simply don't want to.”

― Julie Rugg, A Book Addict's Treasury
truethat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th May 2012, 10:49 PM   #271
Kevin_Lowe
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kevin_Lowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Queensland
Posts: 11,354
Originally Posted by truethat View Post
You still haven't answered my question...
No. I don't see any particular reason why I should enable your attempts to derail or personalise the discussion. Unless you have something to say other than repeating the same argument over and over with your fingers in your ears, I can't imagine getting any benefit out of further engagement with you.
__________________
Thinking is skilled work....People with untrained minds should no more expect to think clearly and logically than people who have never learned and never practiced can expect to find themselves good carpenters, golfers, bridge-players, or pianists.
-- Alfred Mander
Kevin_Lowe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th May 2012, 11:06 PM   #272
truethat
Penultimate Amazing
 
truethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,621
Edited by LashL:  Breach of Rule 0 and Rule 12 removed.
__________________
“People who say they don't have time to read simply don't want to.”

― Julie Rugg, A Book Addict's Treasury

Last edited by LashL; 12th May 2012 at 12:20 PM.
truethat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th May 2012, 11:19 AM   #273
mijopaalmc
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,249
Why do you hate women?
mijopaalmc is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th May 2012, 11:43 PM   #274
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°58'S 115°57'E
Posts: 6,917
Originally Posted by Kevin_Lowe View Post
Unless you have something to say other than repeating the same argument over and over with your fingers in your ears ...
Considering your avatar, that is an unfortunate choice of words.
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

JREF Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:39 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2001-2013, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.