If you enter into a binding contract with someone while they are intoxicated to the point of impairment, the contract can be invalidated on those grounds as long as impairment can be proven in a court.
You can’t give reasonable consent while impaired. If it can be further demonstrated that one party intentionally attempted to induce intoxication for the purposes of attaining contractual consent, they can be held criminally liable for that act.
Consent isn’t only about sex. It’s much murkier and dubious in cases of mutual intoxication and interpersonal relations. This poster is simply trying to make people aware of fairly basic laws regarding consent in the United States. And it’s worth knowing.
Men also drink more than women. I’ve seen way more drunk men than women.
This poster implies that women become mindless defenseless fuckdolls after a few drinks while men become sexual predators without any impairments. And that’s just stupid.
That’s fine and well, but the fundamental point of the poster is to help legally protect men. Feeling butthurt about it doesn’t change that fact.
Basic physiology dictates that nonconsensual sex is easier to accomplish with the aggressor possessing a tumescent penis, regardless of the other party’s wishes. And the significant and overwhelming statistics and cases regarding rape committed by men vs women bear on any case like this brought before a judge. 94% of rapists and sexual abusers are men.
The overwhelming amount of rapists are men. Men are raped at significant levels as well. Typically in prison. By other men. If you’d like to find out, be on the wrong end of one of these cases and find yourself in prison.
You’ll find that whether your dick is hard, you can and will be fucked by someone else with a hard dick and the desire to do so.
Perhaps it would be easier for you to think of it this way: if you’re a man, and you’re hanging out with another man, and he’s cool, and you’re bro-ing down, at some point he intimates he’s attracted to you, and you end up too drunk and things are getting blurry, and he wants to help you home, are you more or less worried than if it’s a woman offering you the same help? Why?
You know why. 99.9% of the time, it’s fine. But the other .1% of the time you wake up with a bloody asshole, confusion, fear, and shame. Don’t be obtuse.
And you just created a completely false argument by simply assuming that whatever is happening is rape to begin with.
You assume, that men in this situation can only be an aggressor and nothing else, and whatever they’re doing is automatically rape. And that’s just plain wrong.
You’re robbing both sides of their autonomy in the name of victimization.
If you enter into a binding contract with someone while they are intoxicated to the point of impairment, the contract can be invalidated on those grounds as long as impairment can be proven in a court.
You can’t give reasonable consent while impaired. If it can be further demonstrated that one party intentionally attempted to induce intoxication for the purposes of attaining contractual consent, they can be held criminally liable for that act.
Consent isn’t only about sex. It’s much murkier and dubious in cases of mutual intoxication and interpersonal relations. This poster is simply trying to make people aware of fairly basic laws regarding consent in the United States. And it’s worth knowing.
I am never buying a car sober again! “This one trick car dealers hate”
Trying buying a car with financing while demonstrably drunk and see how far you get. 😆
Men also drink more than women. I’ve seen way more drunk men than women.
This poster implies that women become mindless defenseless fuckdolls after a few drinks while men become sexual predators without any impairments. And that’s just stupid.
It does make it sound like drunk men are responsible for their decisions but drunk women are not responsible.
Curious what the organization’s thoughts would be if a sober woman and a drunk man had sex.
Clearly the drunk man would be guilty or rape because he wasn’t in a state to clearly assertain consent from the sober woman.
That’s fine and well, but the fundamental point of the poster is to help legally protect men. Feeling butthurt about it doesn’t change that fact.
Basic physiology dictates that nonconsensual sex is easier to accomplish with the aggressor possessing a tumescent penis, regardless of the other party’s wishes. And the significant and overwhelming statistics and cases regarding rape committed by men vs women bear on any case like this brought before a judge. 94% of rapists and sexual abusers are men.
The overwhelming amount of rapists are men. Men are raped at significant levels as well. Typically in prison. By other men. If you’d like to find out, be on the wrong end of one of these cases and find yourself in prison.
You’ll find that whether your dick is hard, you can and will be fucked by someone else with a hard dick and the desire to do so.
Perhaps it would be easier for you to think of it this way: if you’re a man, and you’re hanging out with another man, and he’s cool, and you’re bro-ing down, at some point he intimates he’s attracted to you, and you end up too drunk and things are getting blurry, and he wants to help you home, are you more or less worried than if it’s a woman offering you the same help? Why?
You know why. 99.9% of the time, it’s fine. But the other .1% of the time you wake up with a bloody asshole, confusion, fear, and shame. Don’t be obtuse.
And you just created a completely false argument by simply assuming that whatever is happening is rape to begin with.
You assume, that men in this situation can only be an aggressor and nothing else, and whatever they’re doing is automatically rape. And that’s just plain wrong.
You’re robbing both sides of their autonomy in the name of victimization.
Nah.