Rape is rape no matter the outside circumstances. You sound like Hillary condemning the women accusing Bill.
Naw, those women were all proven liars at the time. Then they dredged them up again 20 years later and we forgot they had all been proven as liars.
Paula Jones claimed that Clinton's dick had a "distinguishing characteristic". His medical records show otherwise. Paula Jones was a liar.
Juanita Brodderick signed two affidavits saying she never had sex with Clinton. Brodderick is a liar.
Kathleen Wiley claimed Clinton groped her... but then spent the next year sending letters to the White House begging for a job. Kathleen Wiley is a liar.
See how that works. You actually look at someone's story, and if you catch them LYING, then you call them liars.
Never called Monica Lewinsky a liar. She told a consistent story and had the cum-stained dress to prove it.
Now, on to the topic at hand...
A woman gets drunk at a bar, takes 5 shots AND some pills, and then she's complaining because she woke up at some dude's house and didn't know where she was?
Are we going to require men to give women field sobriety tests before they do the deed? I mean, that would be a mood killer.
You need a mirror badly. Her complaint was not that she did not know where she was. No one is really denying she was raped. The argument is state law makes rape legal in this instance.
Because I supported Sanders you are going to defend rape. Man, it doesn't get much worse than that.
She blacked out. How does she know she did not give consent?
Oh, blacked out eh? Boy, that sounds like everyman's dream encounter...A lifeless woman, passed out on the bed....NOT....Look, I've been reading through this, and can't beleve it, but so far I am with Pknopp on this....Men have the responsibility to take care in terms of taking advantage of the women in question, to not only protect themselves from accusation, but making sure that is what the woman wants to partake in....
We've all made decisions when we were young, that we look back on today and regret. Is it rape? Maybe, maybe not, but like I did when I was raising my kids, was to impress that the act of sex was something special, and shouldn't be entered into lightly...It can turn into a path that may not be what was desired...
Now, in this day and age with contraceptive abortion at will being in the mix, I think it has developed into situations like these....Is the MN law insane? I think so....But, we only have ourselves to blame....
THe terminology in the article is unclear about what actually happened. Was she unconscious or was she just not remembering what happened.
"taking advantage of"? That is some old fashioned terminology there. Is it really applicable today?
Have you ever had sex with a drunk woman?
Oh, I think we can imagine what happened....She was drunk, and went with the guy on promise of attending a party. When they got to the destination, there was no party, just the guy's pad, and an end goal. She may not be remembering the details of every aspect, but that what I mean when I say at that point it is up to the guy to do the right thing and NOT take advantage of the situation...HE made the choice...
And, YES "taking advantage" is applicable, because that is IMHO, what went on....Think about it...Is having sex so important to you that you'd do the deed on a passed out, lifeless woman? Save yourself the trouble and visit Rosey....
Have I? sure when I was younger...But that was a different time....And you know what? It was always more satisfying when my partner was into it....I didn't have to get some woman knock out drunk to have sex...Maybe you do....
IMO, the dividing line should be, are we talking drunk and not remembering or passed out?
The law as it stands, right now, is that a man and a woman get drunk together and have consensual sex, the woman can after the fact decide it was rape, adn the man goes to prison.
That is an injustice.
If that is what happened here, the man is, imo, innocent of any wrong doing.
It was in the opening of the article in the OP....
" After a 20-year-old woman took five shots of vodka and a prescription pill, she said she was standing outside a Minneapolis bar in May 2017 when a man invited her and a friend to a party. She agreed but soon found out there was no gathering, she later testified."
Now, not withstanding that the girl was drinking underage, she did 5 shots of vodka, and took a prescription pill, now what was that pill? Because depending on the drug, on top of a fair amount of liquor, in a short amout of time, I would say she passed out....And clearly they didn't "get drunk together", as the article points out she was standing outside the bar, and this guy showed up to invite her to a party.....All kinds of red flags there....
IF the woman lost consciousness and the man had sex with her without her consent, that would be rape.
Again, let's go to the article;
" She “blacked out” instead, waking up on a couch and found that the man she had just met was allegedly sexually assaulting her, according to court records. "
So, I think it is pretty clear that she didn't have the capacity to consent to sex....
The article is unclear what actually happened in this case.
I disagree, the opening paragraphs outline a man that saw an easy mark at the bar, and took advantage of the situation....
The law being used, was obviously written to deal with the injustice of the first scenario.
If fit is being applied in the second, then it was poorly written and is being misused.
I think the acceptable socitial norms at this point are pretty clear....The woman in that situation is in charge of whether or not to have sex. If she lacked the capacity to consent, or was passed out, or "blacked out" she lacked that capacity....Therefore, the guy took advantage, and it was rape....The lower courts agreed, and only the Supreme Court didn't taking the law as written....The law is ridiculous, and needs to be redone....
