Jack’s Drunken Consent Argument

Change of pace from the usual. The following is the formal version of an argument I’ve been making for a while, which I originally posted here. It’s about whether adults can consent to sex while under the “influence” of alcohol. The topic seems to come up often enough when dealing with serial infantilizers of women like Feminists and SJW‘s, so I thought I would keep it handy at an easily retrievable location, for future use. If you have any questions, suggestions, or comments about my argument, please post them below. You can help me make it better.

Anyhow, without further ado, the argument:

  • Premise 1: When you knowingly & voluntary consume alcohol, you are agreeing to expose yourself to its effects. Loss of inhibition, reaction speed, and short-term memory, among other things.
  • Premise 2A blackout isn’t a loss of consciousness, nor an indicator of extreme intoxication.
  • Premise 3: The inability to recollect your own actions does not mean you are unaccountable for those actions.
  • Inference 1: Per P1, you are responsible for any behavior you may engage in while under the influence of voluntarily consumed alcohol, to include operating a motor vehicle, or consenting to and having sex.
  • Inference 2: Per P2, and P3, blacking out doesn’t mean the consent that you gave was void.
  • Conclusion: The sex that you consented to and had while drunk, even if you can’t remember any of it, isn’t rape.

 

– Jack The “Rape Apologist”

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “Jack’s Drunken Consent Argument

  1. Consenting to consuming Alcohol and consenting to Sex are different. You can assume someone wants to have/consented to sex with you just because they’ve consented to consume Alcohol. This is common sense.

    • “Consenting to consuming Alcohol and consenting to Sex are different.”

      Show me where I said they were the same thing.

      “You can assume—”

      Did you mean “can’t”? If so: No shit. Please address my actual argument, or go waste someone else’s time with nonsense.

    • You can’t drive a car so fast that you loose control and sue the house you ran into because you didn’t mean for it to total your car and put you into the hospital. – The only case were rape is actually rape is if the person says “no”. A lot of us have common sense to read the others body language and know not to engage in sexual activity, however again if you find yourself in this predicament with a stranger, you placed yourself there, you are the one who hasn’t set boundaries with people you trust before you decided to dig your own grave. – “Fuck it I’ll go to Irak, they’ll never shoot me because I didn’t consent”.

  2. Having enjoyed the privilege of overconsumption of alcohol with a male companion of limited familiarity and enjoyed the sense of honor of not being sexually assaulted on more than one occasion, I can say clear-headedly that this behavior on the part of the man was honorable and there is nothing about honor that has anything to do with law. If such a fellow had failed to behave in honorable fashion, I might have said nasty things about him to my friends (i.e., not a person who is safe to be intoxicated with) but would have no cause to pursue legal remedy, as I took my foolish chances and thereby relied on my own (faulty) judgment, which is my right to include my own right to privacy; which, had I waived (by blabbing to my friends) is no longer my expectation; i.e., shows me to be a person of poor judgment. Just saying.

    In such a case that an “honorable” man, having passed the above-described “honor” litmus test, should desire to pursue more serious acquaintanceship with me, I would need to know whether his judgment in pursuing a woman of poor judgment such as myself was mitigated by not just his demonstrated sense of honor but his chastisement of my own poor judgment for subjecting myself to his attentions unescorted and unprotected and his pledge to protect me from my own poor judgment by restricting my attentions to only honorable him. Or a girl can dream can’t she?

  3. I think the line is put there to cover the cases were the person is not really taking part in the act but also not fighting it.
    Meaning they were so intoxicated that they lay there not really aware or able to put in much of a protest (i have met people who get that drunk).
    Male or female it doesn’t matter as they cant give consent its rape. The problem is were do you draw this line and how do you decide.

Brevity and Civility

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s