Laaame. You don’t know their situation, seriousness, or arrangements. Fuck around. Fuck as many people as you’d like. You only live once, and your junk stops working once you’ve figured it all out.
Comment on Anon pregames
hoshikarakitaridia@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Cheating on her boyfriend with you will end in cheating on you with a new guy.
He dd the right thing, no regrets. It sucks a lot tho, and it’s hard.
curiousaur@reddthat.com 1 week ago
Noodle07@lemmy.world 1 week ago
That’s rape apology right there
southsamurai@sh.itjust.works 1 week ago
I wouldn’t go that far. If you look at what they said, they were talking about cheating, or rather helping someone cheat.
Still a less than stellar ethical stance, but the comment they were responding to was about cheating, not consent, so I suspect that those of us that saw the ugliest possibilities in the post saw their comment with that in mind. I know I did the first time I saw the comment. It wasn’t until I came back after a response to a comment I made that I noticed the difference.
Mind you, they then went full jerk, so they aren’t exactly a pleasant individual. But I’d rather that be the issue than something they didn’t actually say.
Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 1 week ago
To be fair he is right. The girl could have given consent before they began drinking. Its possible the story actually isnt rape even if they have sex.
Theres even a situation where the girl would be justified in being upset they didnt hook up.
We can’t predict the future and theres not enough details here to make a specific determination on what is right and wrong.
It is a good post to stoke discussion around consent and honesty though, just don’t take it so seriously.
curiousaur@reddthat.com 1 week ago
To think you wonder why you don’t get invited to parties.
Noodle07@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Yeah sorry I really don’t want to go to your party
VelvetStorm@lemmy.world 1 week ago
And he didnt rape her which is more important than the cheating.
festnt@sh.itjust.works 1 week ago
how would he be raping her anyway? she was the one trying to force him to have sex with her even after he made it clear he didn’t want to
lepinkainen@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Drunk people and consent is a moral and legal gray area - it doesn’t matter if they initiate
Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 1 week ago
Depends how drunk
festnt@sh.itjust.works 1 week ago
well if someone gets really drunk (not being drugged by others, but doing it because they want to) and commits a crime, thats still a crime they commited
if im wrong please explain
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 week ago
is there a legal basis for this statement? There very well could be, i don’t do a lot of raping so i wouldn’t know anything about this lmao
southsamurai@sh.itjust.works 1 week ago
I’m going to give a longer explanation than was already given.
So, imagine yourself at a hospital. You’re about to have a minor surgery, and get knocked out. While you’re under, some nurse comes in and fucks you in the ass.
Is that rape?
Switch things up. You’re at a bar, having a good time, someone slips something in your drink. While you’re under the influence of that hit of whatever, they take you into the bathroom and fuck you in the ass, and you agreed to that, you may even like it.
Is that rape?
On a fundamental level, if someone is visibly drunk, or even olfactorily drunk (meaning your can smell the booze on them), they are in a state of mind that is the same as being drugged. It doesn’t matter if they are initiating contact, they are unable to give meaningful consent.
Now, if you want to argue we need another term instead of rape, I’m okay with that. We can call it whatever. But we have statutory rape already, which exists because we recognize that even when someone is the initiator, there are states of mind and being that simply can’t make a choice to have sex in a meaningful way. So using the term rape for violating meaningful consent is fine, even when it’s an adult, and even when they initiate.
I am also aware that there are edge cases where consenting before consuming a substance could/should count as meaningful consent. And I’m aware that there is a range of inebriation where meaningful consent is still possible. However it is nearly impossible to tell without testing what a person’s blood alcohol level is, so we’re limited. That in turn means that the standard for (at least colloquial usage) what is and isn’t inebriated rape has to be broader than it would be if we had reliable testing on the fly.
I also agree with your point that she was ignoring consent, and being an absolutely horrible person, and if she had persisted by force or coercion and he had given in, I wouldn’t accept her being drunk as a defense against any charges brought.
But there’s a fundamental inability to consent when drunk. How drunk? That’s something that would need to be addressed by medical science and then legislated. What’s the maximum BAC someone can give meaningful consent for other things? But that fact is there, that alcohol serves to break down the ability to consent, and sex without consent is considered rape, on at least a colloquial level, if not always on a legal level everywhere.
Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 1 week ago
I think you argued that if the night ended in sex, they both would have raped each other?
Is it rape because she would have gotten him to go against his morals for a short time?
The story seemed to imply she wasnt physically capable of forcing sex, she was trying to appeal to his sexual urges.
I do understand drunk people commiting crimes is a thing and they should be responsible for that, but this specific case, I don’t know it was possible for her to be the raper.
I don’t disagree with you but its hard to reconcile that being drunk makes someone both not responsible and responsible for their actions at the same time.
Jax@sh.itjust.works 1 week ago
I want to point out two things
1: She threw up, assuming she doesn’t have a pocket dimension in her throat she likely threw up most of the alcohol.
2: OP was almost certainly drinking. OP makes no mention of throwing up. We can pretty safely assume OP is also drunk, and likely has more alcohol still in his system than her.
Seems like a lot of people ITT think that consent is a one way street. He said no and was drunk, she pushed. We can at the very least admit that she sexually assaulted him, and if you think otherwise you need to rethink some things.
KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 week ago
yes, but now let’s say they need to insert a catheter in your to prevent you from pissing yourself, is this also rape? Or was this previously consented to (obviously it was, just a primer here)
this would be rape on pretext, similar to robbing someone at gunpoint.
i’m inclined to agree here, however there is a small problem here, they intentionally, and knowingly got themselves to that point of intoxication. If i do way too much street fent, nearly die, and wake up in an alley somewhere, am i responsible for what happened to me in between those points? Or not? It’s not like i stopped existing as a person. Physically, i am fully responsible for what happened in that state, psychologically, i am to some degree at the very least tangentially responsible.
the rest of the comment is good, thorough coverage of most important things.
festnt@sh.itjust.works 1 week ago
i agree with most of that but if someone is really drunk and tries to have sex with someone else who may or may not be drunk, who is also explicitly saying they dont consent, isnt that person in the wrong, kind of like a really drunk person whos going to drive is in the wrong?
what i mean is: commiting a crime while drunk is still commiting that crime. if im wrong please explain
AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee 1 week ago
Yikes…
festnt@sh.itjust.works 1 week ago
thats not really helpful, could you explain to me where i was wrong?
i dont mean to sound like “i know im right” or something. i actually just want to know