Awesome Protest Signs

[Eiki-mun]

...I do wonder though. If two very drunk people have sex, which one is the rapist?

If persons A and B are drunk and A says no to sex but B forces themselves onto A then B is a rapist even though they were drunk.

If both A and B said yes to sex because they were so drunk but regret it later... That gets more difficult and I think it would be fair to say that both are equally to blame for a stupid decision.

The main deal about having sex with someone who is too drunk is that a sober person who is (presumably) able to think clearly makes a conscious choice to take advantage of a defenseless person. If both (or all in case of an orgy) people are completely wasted then it's not that clear (or at least it is not as easy to prove in court) that there is someone who decided to put another person into a defenseless state and take advantage of their vulnerability.

That's all very well and good, and I don't disagree with any part of this. But, focusing on that second situation, if both parties have willing but highly drunken sex, and both parties regret it once they sober up, isn't it the case that both parties are legally guilty of rape?

I guess it just depends on who decides to prosecute first, person A or person B.

[Askold]

Furthermore, a person who is too drunk to even say no is generally unconscious.  It's never a good idea to have sex with an unconscious person.

Well, that one is obvious. But generally speaking if you get someone so drunk that they say yes (or "yessh") when they would not have done so while sober then it is still iffy. Some people complain about the "she was willing but then got regrets in the morning and accuses him of rape" but honestly I think there are cases where it really is rape even if she was barely conscious but not in proper set of mind (regardless of genders of the individuals involved.)

...I do wonder though. If two very drunk people have sex, which one is the rapist?

If persons A and B are drunk and A says no to sex but B forces themselves onto A then B is a rapist even though they were drunk.

If both A and B said yes to sex because they were so drunk but regret it later... That gets more difficult and I think it would be fair to say that both are equally to blame for a stupid decision.

The main deal about having sex with someone who is too drunk is that a sober person who is (presumably) able to think clearly makes a conscious choice to take advantage of a defenseless person. If both (or all in case of an orgy) people are completely wasted then it's not that clear (or at least it is not as easy to prove in court) that there is someone who decided to put another person into a defenseless state and take advantage of their vulnerability.

That's all very well and good, and I don't disagree with any part of this. But, focusing on that second situation, if both parties have willing but highly drunken sex, and both parties regret it once they sober up, isn't it the case that both parties are legally guilty of rape?

I guess it just depends on who decides to prosecute first, person A or person B.

I don't know how courts handle it but in that scenario I think neither should be prosecuted for rape. If neither person really was able to legally consent then neither person should be guilty either. Or they are both equally guilty of being stupid.

[Ultimate Paragon]

[dpareja]

I prefer this image:

[Barbarella]

I prefer this image:

Now, that's a far better image. I agree.



I made this re-edit of one of those Worst Protest Signs/Political Cartoon to become a Best Protest Sign/Political Cartoon....

....You'll see this (and the original) in a neighboring thread.

The original crapola version had Russell Means shutting up...but I corrected it to become this.

[Sylvana]

What is that an image of exactly? It looks interesting, but I dont understand anything about it, so it lacks any significance to me.

[davedan]

I believe it's a picture of polio patients inside Iron lungs. Polio which has now almost been entirely eradicated due to vaccination.

[dpareja]

I believe it's a picture of polio patients inside Iron lungs. Polio which has now almost been entirely eradicated due to vaccination.

Yes, it's a picture of a polio ward. I'd probably put some sort of caption on it if I actually wanted to bother to rebut antivax arguments with it.

[Even Then]

Really, it speaks for itself.

[Barbarella]

What is that an image of exactly? It looks interesting, but I dont understand anything about it, so it lacks any significance to me.

A lot of people who got polio got it so bad that it basically paralyzed them to the point where they lost the ability to breathe on their own. They would be put in this Iron Lung contraption that would help them breathe.

Here's more about the Iron Lung....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_lung

[dpareja]

Really, it speaks for itself.

Not if you don't know what you're looking at in the first place. If I showed it to a teenager who's bought into antivax propaganda it could well have no significance to them and even telling them it's a polio ward might not mean much since polio, in the developed parts of the world, is no longer a menace.

[RavynousHunter]

"My producers said songs like 'Uh Oh, Polio' wouldn't connect with today's youth!"

[Zygarde]

So I worked my admiditly bad Photo Shop skills and I made this.

[Ultimate Paragon]

[Even Then]

Now that's gold.