If both parties are drunk, who raped who?

[Anonymous]

If both parties are drunk (not passed out unconscious), who is at fault for rape? Guy is at fault for raping the girl Girl is at fault for raping the guy Both are at fault for raping each other Neither one is at fault for rape This is also assuming that both parties got drunk legally and under their own accord.

[kheserthorpe]

You know what the law says? You must be a genius. The laws are ambiguous and vary by jurisdiction.

The most common legal situation is likely that D holds legally, unless one essentially tricked the other into that level of intoxication. Consent that is given that you might not have given sober is still consent if you chose to get drunk. If you're too drunk to indicate consent or no, then its rape.

There have been some jurisdictions that have pushed for any alcohol = no consent. And many lobby groups have pushed a view point that suggests any alcohol influenced consent is rape. Legally its not true. Ethically, its grey area, but I personally think there needs to be more in place then just 'they were drinking and making bad decisions' for it to really be considered an assault.

[Asker]

Yes, I know what the law says... meaning, I don't want people to fucking answer the question saying... Well, according to the law... if this, this, this, or that happen then it's rape, but if that, that, that, or this happen then it's not. I said that because I want to avoid that bullshit and have people just give me their own opinion on the matter.

[kheserthorpe]

My opinion is you're responsible for your actions when drinking, and while its a good and nice thing to do for people to not participate in something they may think you wouldn't like doing while drunk, its not criminal for them not to do so.

[Asker]

Okay, that's more like it. Thanks for the opinion! I appreciate it.

[front2back]

If they both consent and there's no force involved (they weren't forced to drink or have sex), then it isn't rape for either. Even while drunk. Reason being is consent was given. Even if you're impaired by alcohol, that's your own fault for decisions. Don't want to make bad decisions? Don't drink. Just because you regret it after doesn't make it rape, and that's for both sexes.

[snowangle]

I was under the impression that the law's description of "unable to consent" only referred to being so drunk that you're barely conscious - not "under the influence of alcohol and probably isn't making the smartest decisions right now." If not, then that's my opinion, anyway. Rape is forcefully having sex with someone who is passed-out drunk; not just having sex with someone with impaired judgement. So in this situation, I believe no one is guilty of rape.

[pr3ttybr0wn]

I don't think drunken consensual sex is rape.

if they are both on the same level of drunkenness its fine. but if he was of sound mind and she was drunk he should be beat.

[MaskedSanity]

Nobody raped anyone.

Both gave consent while drunk. If neither of the parties asked to stop, it was just drunken sex.
Regret in the morning doesn't turn it into rape.

[Lilly987]

I didn't vote. The one who is guilty of rape is the one who raped. It could be the buy, it could be (less often) the girl. And most often, it's neither one, because most people are normal human beings and don't go around raping. Btw, drunken sex, unless someone is passed out and unaware of what is going on, is not rape.

[Izzy2102]

There are different kinds of drunk. you can be a bit tipsy or so wasted you can't stand by yourself. I'd go with the person who's more drunk.
If both equally are drunk, I don't think anyone is guilty of anything

[Asker]

Just want to clarify. So, the person who is more drunk is at fault for raping the one that isn't as drunk, but if they are equally drunk then no one is guilty?

[Izzy2102]

well obviously it makes a difference if you're sleeping with someone who's like you bit tips or someone so drunk they can't stand or produce proper sentences anymore So yes oversimplified if they're both equally drunk none are at fault, or both are it doesn't really matter.

[Asker]

No, no, no... haha I'm just confused on you saying that the person that is more drunk is at fault for rape. I just want to clarify that. Because if the person that is more drunk is at fault for rape, then when one party is drunk and the other party is sober, then the one that is drunk is at fault for raping the sober person since, as you said, "I'd go with the person who's more drunk" and a drunk person is more drunk than a sober person... but I get the impression that you meant it the other way around. So, I wanted to clarify that you meant exactly that... that the more drunk person is at fault for rape..

[Izzy2102]

Oh ya I meant the person who is less drunk

[misscocobutter]

If there's a rape it's usually the guy at fault, but I'm under the opinion if a girl gets so drunk and puts herself in that position it's not rape it's sex

[SaVes]

You didn't include any information on the situation other than both parties being drunk.

The one at fault is the one continuing even after the other party clearly said they didn't want to.

[ILoveLouis123]

But both parties could be okay with what's going on. Not everyone wants to stop.

[Asker]

Sorry, this is under the assumption that the sex was "consensual", but the consent was made while both parties were drunk. I'll add that to the update.

[SaVes]

@ILoveLouis123: Like I said, the question didn't include any further information, so I had to make some assumption. @Asker: If it's consensual, what does it have to do with rape?

[Sex_Panther]

Doesn't work. Consent only affirms.

[Asker]

The point of it being consensual is that I want to know peoples opinion. Some people are under the opinion that if the consent, even in a drunken state, then it's consent. Some people are under the opinion that a person shouldn't be able to consent if they gave the consent while drunk. I've seen some people, not on here, say that if both parties are drunk, and they both consent, then the guy is at fault, and I've seen some that say the girl is at fault and I've seen some that say they both are raping each other... but that the rape is okay since they are both victims. So, I was just asking for peoples opinion on where you stand individually.

[SaVes]

Let's assume consent while drunk is not real content. If both are drunk and both consent, then how can one be more at fault than the other? Where exactly is the difference between them? There is missing some factor in order to make a difference.

[Asker]

Like I said... I'm just asking for your own personal opinion. You say, "then how can one be more at fault then the other" and personally, I agree. But I've seen some people that have found ways to see it that one party, even if equally drunk, is more at fault. So, just asking for personal opinions on the matter. So, it sounds like you're going along with option D. Neither one is really at fault, or C they are at fault, but are so equally.

[SaVes]

And what exactly are their reasons for saying one is more at fault than the other?

[Asker]

Usually sexist things like...I've seen both girls and guys say that if a guy and a girl are both drunk and they both consent, then the guy is at fault for raping the girl because guys know how to hold their liquor better, so a guy that is about to pass out is equivalent to a girl that had just one beer, and because of this if a girl consents, it's because she doesn't know better but the guy, who is about to pass out knows full well what he is doing, therefore, he's raping her. You know just some ridiculous bullshit, but that was their stance and they stood by it... And I've had a person actually say this to me... in person. To me... that's mind blowing, and is one reason I wanted to ask this question to get a more general consensus of what peoples opinions are on this matter. There's already one guy that has voted that the guy is at fault in this poll, but it doesn't look like that guy didn't gave their opinion.

[SaVes]

Well, if there was no sign of the girl not consenting and the guy was as drunk as her, no one is at fault. That's how I see it. But that's a very specific situation we're talking about here. Change just one little detail and things might be very different.

[RBT-RS]

Whoever made the first move. Usually thats the guy, but girls can too.

[Sex_Panther]

Legally both are at fault and the case is discarded.

[Asker]

I know what the law says. I was asking for your own personal opinion.

[Sex_Panther]

Do you have one? Share yours.

[Asker]

I do. If both are drunk and they both consent while drunk, then I don't consider that rape... but what is your opinion?

[Sex_Panther]

No one cares what my opinion is. Toodles.

[yaddayaddayadda02]

In my own opinion, neither is guilty of 'rape'. If I get in a car while drunk, and I drive...I can be charged with DUI. There is no way to simultaneously not be responsible for your actions when having sex while drunk, but also responsible for your actions when you're driving while drunk. You're either responsible or not.

This whole notion of having sex with drunk people being rape is just absurd.

[emzy-89]

Consensual sex is never rape whether they are drunk or not; neither of them are rapists, they're just stupid.

[iampikachu]

I think vote D is more fitting.

[Kshppatel]

I'm still a virgin because I chose not to take advantage of a girl when I knew she was drunk even though I was kind of drunk (not as drunk as her). Did I miss my chance?

[llorando]

Neither are guilty since both are drunk.

[Anonymous]

The manosphere exaggerates the "consensual drunk sex is always being called rape" thing...

If you're fucking someone who is stumbling, slurring and incoherent and you're readily aware of their lack of awareness and use it to your advantage - that is wrong. I've personally witnessed this on several occasions. Even guys trying to physically carry someone to an isolated place. Anecdotally, I've heard it happens to guys (from both guys and gals) too.

[Asker]

I'm sorry. . . are you going to answer my question or just rant? Both parties are legally drunk. Both of them aren't passed out or unconscious. So, both are roughly around the same level of drunkness and they decide to have sex with one another. Sorry, I didn't make this clear, but this is under the assumption that they are also both agreeing to the sex, but because they are drunk and cannot legally consent in your own personal opinion do you follow the legal law and consider it rape regardless... if so by which party? The guy, the girl, or both? And if not then it would be neither.

[Opinion Owner]

I voted neither, but my answer was in response to the prevalent opinion on GAG and other forums that people are constantly being accused of rape when they're having happy, consensual drunk sex.

[kheserthorpe]

I think the issue is a split in how the message is getting out there. You have guys who are getting girls drunk and carrying them off, and don't care what people say. And you have guys who are trying to do the right thing, and never took advantage of drunk girls, and they're the ones who are getting more and more confused is there's higher attention on 'its rape if she's had anything to drink'. Basically the wrong people are hearing the message.

[Opinion Owner]

It's hard to explain... Especially to people without much drinking experience. There's a spectrum of drunkenness and the point it becomes wrong is before people are passed out, but not when they're uninhibited. It happens to guys too. A guy in my area used to offer to give really drunk guys a ride or say he was having an after party and then start fooling with them when they were too drunk to take care of themselves.

[kheserthorpe]

I actually really agree with you ms. anon. My own personal feeling is that we need to have these kind of discussions far more often. The reason the 'manosphere' is confused is that the message young guys are given through formal sources is 'don't have sex if she's had anything to drink... it might be rape!!!'. and then the actual culture we live in, casual sex for those who like to engage in it -primarily- takes place in an environment of alcohol (and often drug) use that has no bearing to what you were told. We need to give decent guys a clearer guideline, because right now the loudest messages are 'just turn down sex' and 'it's fine bro go for it'. We need the voice of reason to be a lot louder.

[Opinion Owner]

Also that the guys soeaking the loudest are often the most radical with agendized perspectives (like anywhere). It's be awesome to have more web resources that has the tone of "the cool older brother" type. Maybe some successful, sound guys should start blogging!

[Opinion Owner]

Believe me, some of the female stuff on the web is ridiculous too... But many females tend to be less isolated and more likely to pick up on context clues and many guys seem to try to understand complex things in black and white or only get the viewpoint of a few people. I can see where it's be confusing.

[Anonymous]

Neither of them did it against their will so it's not rape