Policeman Raped in UK

[Egbert]

You guys seem to say "if there aren't two men who are upstanding who here a loud and repeated cry for help/etc, then it was consensual'.

Please move to Saudi Arabia.

JM

OK. Let us take a hypothetical scenario. A woman takes all her clothes off, leaps at you and proceeds to tear your clothes off in a way that would lead you to believe that she wishes to have sex. Let us also assume that she is saying "ravish me". She happens to be highly intoxicated. If you did what she wanted would you be raping her?

Would your answer change if you were also highly intoxicated?

[OneFootInTheGrave]

and than you wake up next to the bushpig, do you file charges?

[Jon Miller]

OK. Let us take a hypothetical scenario. A woman takes all her clothes off, leaps at you and proceeds to tear your clothes off in a way that would lead you to believe that she wishes to have sex. Let us also assume that she is saying "ravish me". She happens to be highly intoxicated. If you did what she wanted would you be raping her?

Would your answer change if you were also highly intoxicated?

Let me ask you this.

If a retarded person, IQ 40, takes off their clothes and asks you to stick your peepee in their hole... is it rape (or nonconsensual)?

If there existed a drug that made some one extremely horny and want to just '****', and you slipped it to someone, and then they wanted you to have sex with them, would it be non-consensual?

Do you understand what 'not capable of giving consent' means?

JM

[Egbert]

Do you understand what 'not capable of giving consent' means?
JM

That question seems to be an attempt at condescension. I see no point in continuing this discussion. Make what you will of that.

[Jon Miller]

To give consent, you must be able to give consent.

This is logical, isn't it?

JM

[Cort Haus]

Jon, you earlier stated that you thought that the consent limit should be the same as the driving limit. This is not very drunk, it is determined by reaction-times, as is required to save lives on the road, rather than a level at which people don't know what they are doing. When pressed on this, I didn't see you change your position so I assume it is the same.

Now you are responding to a question, not with an answer, but with a question of your own which describes an extreme scenario which apparently equates someone who has had a couple of drinks with someone who has an IQ of 40 and acts like a child.

It is almost as if you are viewing adults as children in this regard. Personally I find the notion that someone 'cannot give consent' after two drinks to be highly offensive and insulting.

[Egbert]

To give consent, you must be able to give consent.
This is logical, isn't it?
JM

I am beginning wonder: what are you arguing about?

If you are saying that sex without consent is rape, then if both are too drunk to give consent it follows each has raped the other. The idea of two people mutually raping one another is a concept I can't quite get my head around.

Do you at least accept that drunken sex is not necessarily rape?

[Jon Miller]

The driving limit was a place to start discussion.

If it is based on reaction times and not some other measure, then it could be at a different place.

I consider 'buzzed' to be able to provide consent, at the moment.

JM

[Jon Miller]

I am beginning wonder: what are you arguing about?

If you are saying that sex without consent is rape, then if both are too drunk to give consent it follows each has raped the other. The idea of two people mutually raping one another is a concept I can't quite get my around.

Do you at least accept that drunken sex is not necessarily rape?

I already said that in the case of prior consent, it is not rape. Did you read what I wrote earlier? I made sure to mention that several times.

So take for example that 'love drug' that I hypothesized earlier.

If both parties were given it, would the resulting sex be consensual?

JM

[Egbert]

JM. You keep answering a question with a question which makes me wonder why I bother I bother to write a response. I have read everything you have written in this thread. I presume you regard sex with a drunk as rape. Please give a direct answer to the following question:

Do you at accept that drunken sex is not necessarily rape?
(Without consent prior to inebriation)

Edit. Forget it. We appear to be on different wavelengths and just going round in pointless circles.

[Jon Miller]

Not with the definition of nonconsensual sex is rape.

No.

JM

[Dauphin]

He is unwilling to press charges? Not sure if you have a typo or I am just missing your point.

Not a typo, I was referring to the generic. Maybe should have used "a willingness" rather "the willingness" for clarity though.

[Egbert]

Then if both are too drunk to give consent it follows each has raped the other. Do you agree or disagree?

Edit Xpost, responding to JM, post #101

[Dauphin]

What is the upside of manufacturing this story? I can't see what the motivation would be.

There could easily be a hidden motive (at least hidden from us).

[Jon Miller]

It was nonconsensual sex and wrong.

Yes.

Can two 10-yearolds consent to have sex together?

Can two 10-yearolds consent to get married?

JM
(I will assume that you also think that 10-yearolds are incapable of giving consent. If you do not think so, replace with retards.)