Facepalm

2647 readers

639 users here now

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Anticorp@lemmy.world

357

Do they still make these posters? (lemmy.today)

submitted 9 months ago by CMake to c/facepalm@lemmy.world

257 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] m0darn@lemmy.ca 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Yeah but isn't the whole crux of the thing that people aren't responsible enough to give consent while drunk?

Not exactly how I'd frame it but go on...

But if you're not responsible for your actions while drunk

Wait what, who who said that? That's not a conclusion based on your premise. All we said is that intoxicated people can't consent.

I mean sure don't have sex with a lady if she's way too drunk, but that can be difficult to determine.

Would it be reasonable to believe they would consent to sex with you while sober?

And yeah, I've woken up with women I wouldn't have been with had I been sober. Was I raped?

Was it reasonable for them to think that you would have consented to sex with you while you were sober?

[–] Ookami38@sh.itjust.works 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Wait what, who who said that? That's not a conclusion based on your premise. All we said is that intoxicated people can't consent.

The poster did. If your actions as a prosecutor are to punish one party who is at the same level of drunkenness as the other, who you're letting go, for the same actions (sex with a drunk person), then yeah, you're saying at least sometimes, you're not responsible for your actions while drunk.

Being drunk leads to poor reasoning and poor decision making whether you're male or female. Either apply the same standard or don't. If she wants to pursue action against him, or the state does, then they both face the same penalty, considering the same crime.

You also seem to default to making judgements about what another person's theoretical state of mind would be if they weren't drunk in this situation. That might work for prosecution, but it's a shit heuristic for actually preventing anything. I don't know most people's states of mind when we're both sober, and now you're expecting a drunk person to figure out another drunk person's sober mindset?

[–] m0darn@lemmy.ca 2 points 9 months ago

People are responsible for their actions, and the foreseeable consequences of their actions.

If it was not reasonable for her to believe he would consent to sex while sober, she should not have had sex with him.

It's my hypothesis that prosecutors will only bring charges if they think they can convince a jury that a person was not reasonable to believe the other party would consent to sex while sober.

That might work for prosecution, but it's a shit heuristic for actually preventing anything

Yeah which is why posters like this are good. Don't have sex with drunk strangers. Don't have sex with drunk platonic friends. Don't have new types of sex with existing serial sexual partners unless it's reasonable for you to believe they would consent while sober.

I don't know most people's states of mind when we're both sober, and now you're expecting a drunk person to figure out another drunk person's sober mindset?

No I'm asking them not to try. If your judgement is impaired by alcohol, don't try to assess if someone has consented to sex with you.