Would It Be Wrong If I Told People That...
Family & Relationships0 min ago
At Last Someone Daring To Instil A Little Common Sense In This 'date-Rape' Debate, And A Female At That.
67 Answers
http://
Now a man has to prove that he has gained consent for sexual intercourse to take place, so how will they do this? Record the consent on his mobile phone, but perhaps that would not stand as evidence in a court of law, well what about getting the other party to sign a declaration of willingness on a piece of paper?
Now a man has to prove that he has gained consent for sexual intercourse to take place, so how will they do this? Record the consent on his mobile phone, but perhaps that would not stand as evidence in a court of law, well what about getting the other party to sign a declaration of willingness on a piece of paper?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
I haven’t read all the posts, but she’s right. I think a lot of women who are willing participants at the time decide after the event to cry rape – and hence a lot of men are quite wrongly branded for life. A man has little chance of proving that the night (or moment) of passion was consensual - it’s his word against hers - but unfortunately for him we appear to live in a culture that deems the accused guilty before tried.
“…If young men are taught that simple empathy and courtesy indicates if a woman is a willing sexual partner or not, then the so-called 'consent' area will disappear.”
I beg to differ, Andy. In the heat of the moment both participants may well display “empathy and courtesy” and the woman may well give her apparent consent. But if she happens to be drunk when giving that consent it may be declared invalid the next morning.
I think the real issue here is the question of a woman’s supposed incapability to provide her consent due to inebriation. A man may well receive a cast iron approval for his advances but if I judge the DPP’s remarks correctly that approval can be declared invalid if it can be shown she was too drunk to know what she was doing. How drunk is too drunk to give consent? How is a man supposed to judge the level of incapability?
Jim’s “open door” analogy is interesting. It’s certainly true that leaving your door open does not mitigate or excuse theft. However, if Jim’s Dad left the door open, some strangers entered and Dad said “come in, help yourself to my cash and the wife’s jewellery” a charge of theft would fail (the goods have to be taken without consent). However, if Dad was drunk at the time, would his consent be invalid?
Of course these guidelines do not alter the law and all matters must be decided by a court. But there will be men brought to court arguing that sex was consensual and there will be CPS lawyers telling juries that such consent must be considered invalid due to drunkenness. Hopefully there will also be judges directing juries wisely on the law, rather than CPS guidance. Otherwise, as has been said, the number of charges will increase and the percentage of convictions will go down.
I beg to differ, Andy. In the heat of the moment both participants may well display “empathy and courtesy” and the woman may well give her apparent consent. But if she happens to be drunk when giving that consent it may be declared invalid the next morning.
I think the real issue here is the question of a woman’s supposed incapability to provide her consent due to inebriation. A man may well receive a cast iron approval for his advances but if I judge the DPP’s remarks correctly that approval can be declared invalid if it can be shown she was too drunk to know what she was doing. How drunk is too drunk to give consent? How is a man supposed to judge the level of incapability?
Jim’s “open door” analogy is interesting. It’s certainly true that leaving your door open does not mitigate or excuse theft. However, if Jim’s Dad left the door open, some strangers entered and Dad said “come in, help yourself to my cash and the wife’s jewellery” a charge of theft would fail (the goods have to be taken without consent). However, if Dad was drunk at the time, would his consent be invalid?
Of course these guidelines do not alter the law and all matters must be decided by a court. But there will be men brought to court arguing that sex was consensual and there will be CPS lawyers telling juries that such consent must be considered invalid due to drunkenness. Hopefully there will also be judges directing juries wisely on the law, rather than CPS guidance. Otherwise, as has been said, the number of charges will increase and the percentage of convictions will go down.
andy-hughes
I am just a straight taking person who tells it how it is, in the hope that some will take a look at what i have criticised them for, and still hope that in the end we can still remain friendly towards each other, but obviously you are not that type of person which only goes to strengthen my criticism of your smugness and aloofness
/// I don't look down on anyone - only yourself and your personal acolytes seem to think so, and they are vastly outnumbered by the posters who have agreed with me over the years. ///
Oh so you admit to looking down on all those who disagree with you then? incidentally I and my personal followers (or Acolytes as you chose to call them), are not the only ones who have criticised you in the past for your extreme pomposity.
/// If you feel looked down on, then that is a matter for your own self-belief, it's not something I have ever felt in all my years on here. ///
We mere mortals have to accept our position in life, and it is not surprising that yourself in your lofty position never feels looked down upon, I mean who could from such dizzying heights?
Just take another look of this line you typed:
***vastly outnumbered by the posters who have agreed with me over the
years***.
Once again that vast self superiority complex creeps out.
/// Surely you have the courage of your convictions AOG? If you need to apologise in the same thread as you are rude to me, it suggests that your heart is not really in it. Either be rude if you must, or preferably not, but don't be mealy-mouthed, it doesn't suit you. ///
Oh, so you throw away my attempt to remain friends, by calling me mealy-mouthed do you, have you forgotten the number of times you have done the same to me and I have accepted your apologies, obviously I have come out from all this as the better person, so it can't all be bad.
/// If you feel looked down on, then that is a matter for your own self-belief, it's not something I have ever felt in all my years on here ///
That sounds very much like an alcoholic who although being told he has a drink problem refuses to accept that he has.
I am just a straight taking person who tells it how it is, in the hope that some will take a look at what i have criticised them for, and still hope that in the end we can still remain friendly towards each other, but obviously you are not that type of person which only goes to strengthen my criticism of your smugness and aloofness
/// I don't look down on anyone - only yourself and your personal acolytes seem to think so, and they are vastly outnumbered by the posters who have agreed with me over the years. ///
Oh so you admit to looking down on all those who disagree with you then? incidentally I and my personal followers (or Acolytes as you chose to call them), are not the only ones who have criticised you in the past for your extreme pomposity.
/// If you feel looked down on, then that is a matter for your own self-belief, it's not something I have ever felt in all my years on here. ///
We mere mortals have to accept our position in life, and it is not surprising that yourself in your lofty position never feels looked down upon, I mean who could from such dizzying heights?
Just take another look of this line you typed:
***vastly outnumbered by the posters who have agreed with me over the
years***.
Once again that vast self superiority complex creeps out.
/// Surely you have the courage of your convictions AOG? If you need to apologise in the same thread as you are rude to me, it suggests that your heart is not really in it. Either be rude if you must, or preferably not, but don't be mealy-mouthed, it doesn't suit you. ///
Oh, so you throw away my attempt to remain friends, by calling me mealy-mouthed do you, have you forgotten the number of times you have done the same to me and I have accepted your apologies, obviously I have come out from all this as the better person, so it can't all be bad.
/// If you feel looked down on, then that is a matter for your own self-belief, it's not something I have ever felt in all my years on here ///
That sounds very much like an alcoholic who although being told he has a drink problem refuses to accept that he has.
'/// I don't look down on anyone - only yourself and your personal acolytes seem to think so, and they are vastly outnumbered by the posters who have agreed with me over the years. ///
Oh so you admit to looking down on all those who disagree with you then?
ANOTHEOLDGIT, do you have problems with comprehension? Andy said it is only you and your followers who believe he looks down on folk.
Oh so you admit to looking down on all those who disagree with you then?
ANOTHEOLDGIT, do you have problems with comprehension? Andy said it is only you and your followers who believe he looks down on folk.
/// and there will be CPS lawyers telling juries that such consent must be considered invalid due to drunkenness. ///
Due to drunkenness, interesting that one, how can anyone but the two involved know of anything that took place, was she drunk, if so how much was she drunk, and did she give consent or did she not?
In the years of non corridor steam trains, it was a brave man who got into a coach with a lone female already in the coach.
Simply because there were many cases were a female would demand money from the male or else they would scream rape. Imagine the poor guy he would not have a leg to stand on.
Who's word would be accepted the Male's or the Female's.
Due to drunkenness, interesting that one, how can anyone but the two involved know of anything that took place, was she drunk, if so how much was she drunk, and did she give consent or did she not?
In the years of non corridor steam trains, it was a brave man who got into a coach with a lone female already in the coach.
Simply because there were many cases were a female would demand money from the male or else they would scream rape. Imagine the poor guy he would not have a leg to stand on.
Who's word would be accepted the Male's or the Female's.
In all cases such as this, aog, there is the element of "he said, she said" and it is for the jury to decide who told the truth. But these guidelines introduce another factor. These effectively say "she said 'yes', but she was too drunk for that consent to be valid". So there may be no argument over what was said but the argument lies in the statement's validity. I find it difficult to understand how a jury is supposed to decide whether the woman was so inebriated that her consent was invalid, or even to decide just how inebriated one must be before that is a consideration. Many couples in this situation will have had a few drinks. They may end up in bed together with no force or intimidation from the man at all. All perfectly agreeable. Just at what point does the woman cease to be responsible for what she says or does because of the amount she has had to drink?
I'm not envisaging a situation where the woman is semi-comatose and obviously out of it. In that case the man clearly has some questions to answer. I'm talking about the situation where both have probably had enough to drink to make them merry and carefree. I'm also not suggesting that the alleged victim (better than putting it in inverted commas) is responsible for being raped. I'm suggesting that she was not subject to rape at all.
I'm not envisaging a situation where the woman is semi-comatose and obviously out of it. In that case the man clearly has some questions to answer. I'm talking about the situation where both have probably had enough to drink to make them merry and carefree. I'm also not suggesting that the alleged victim (better than putting it in inverted commas) is responsible for being raped. I'm suggesting that she was not subject to rape at all.
"Due to drunkenness, interesting that one, how can anyone but the two involved know of anything that took place, was she drunk, if so how much was she drunk, and did she give consent or did she not?"
I suppose no-one beyond two people involved can know for sure, but forensic evidence can allow for fairly reasonable estimates of the amount of alcohol in someone's body at the approximate time of the incident. And then there may be other evidence eg witnesses who may not have seen the incident itself but interacted with the defendant/ complainant shortly before/ after the incident.
Since, as I've said earlier, it's not enough that the victim was drunk for any sex to have been rape, the alcohol part of the case can be only a small part of the evidence that's collected and available. That also answers the "what if both people are drunk?" question -- if the amount of alcohol consumed was insufficient to cause lack of capability of consent then the case would be dismissed, and if both people genuinely were "too drunk to consent" then it's likely that they were too drunk to perform, too.
At any rate, the most important thing to note is that the claim that people now have to prove that they were sure that consent was given is wrong. Police merely have to remember to investigate this. Indeed this can also on occasion serve to protect the defendant from a false allegation of rape, since it then becomes no longer enough for the woman to say she hadn't consented. If the man could be found to have had a reasonable belief that she had, then there is no rape.
I suppose no-one beyond two people involved can know for sure, but forensic evidence can allow for fairly reasonable estimates of the amount of alcohol in someone's body at the approximate time of the incident. And then there may be other evidence eg witnesses who may not have seen the incident itself but interacted with the defendant/ complainant shortly before/ after the incident.
Since, as I've said earlier, it's not enough that the victim was drunk for any sex to have been rape, the alcohol part of the case can be only a small part of the evidence that's collected and available. That also answers the "what if both people are drunk?" question -- if the amount of alcohol consumed was insufficient to cause lack of capability of consent then the case would be dismissed, and if both people genuinely were "too drunk to consent" then it's likely that they were too drunk to perform, too.
At any rate, the most important thing to note is that the claim that people now have to prove that they were sure that consent was given is wrong. Police merely have to remember to investigate this. Indeed this can also on occasion serve to protect the defendant from a false allegation of rape, since it then becomes no longer enough for the woman to say she hadn't consented. If the man could be found to have had a reasonable belief that she had, then there is no rape.
THECORBYLOON
/// You said he had ADMITTED that he looks down on folk but he had said nothing of the sort. ///
Oh so you lost round 1, so you are now trying to start round 2 are you?
I haven't the time to continue with your little games, because I must now try and seek out another little gem to put up for debate.
/// You said he had ADMITTED that he looks down on folk but he had said nothing of the sort. ///
Oh so you lost round 1, so you are now trying to start round 2 are you?
I haven't the time to continue with your little games, because I must now try and seek out another little gem to put up for debate.
I don't think andy is necessarily looks down on people but he does come across as incredibly patronising.
I cringe when I read comments like...
andy-hughes
youngmafbog - "//We need to educate young people about the notion of respect for themselves, and each other - which would allow them to ditch the notion that alcohol poisoning equals a good night out, and that casual drunken sex with strangers is a good way to end an evening//
I cringe when I read comments like...
andy-hughes
youngmafbog - "//We need to educate young people about the notion of respect for themselves, and each other - which would allow them to ditch the notion that alcohol poisoning equals a good night out, and that casual drunken sex with strangers is a good way to end an evening//
I’ve read all the posts now and it seems to me that Andy-hughes erroneously redefined (I’m being kind here) divebuddy’s posts, and with reference to Andy-hughes' post AOG got the wrong end of the stick. It would appear that both are in need of rather less ‘highfalutin’ and rather more practice in the art of comprehension. It gets more like a playground every day around here. And for the record, I don’t just claim to tell it as it is – I do tell it as it is. Hope that helps.
Thanks to both New Judge and jim360 for your excellent answers.
But to me it still sounds a very dodgy situation, and in the end it would seem that the Female is to be believed of what happened rather than the Male and that all seems to be a little unfair to me.
All this gives a reasonable argument, that there should be different levels of rape.
Take violent rape by a stranger, the scenario of a rapist hiding in the bushes waiting for a lone female to come along, in cases such as this forensic evidence can take place ie DNA, injuries sustained etc.
But in the case of 'date rape' Jim states that the amount of alcoholic in the blood could be taken to verify if the female was too drunk top give her consent.
That is perfectly true if the female reported that she had been raped straight away, but what about the cases that have been reported much later than when the incident happened?
So in such cases where there are no witnesses and no other condemning evidence, it still all down to who can convince the jury the most, which in the majority of cases they will take the side of the female.
But to me it still sounds a very dodgy situation, and in the end it would seem that the Female is to be believed of what happened rather than the Male and that all seems to be a little unfair to me.
All this gives a reasonable argument, that there should be different levels of rape.
Take violent rape by a stranger, the scenario of a rapist hiding in the bushes waiting for a lone female to come along, in cases such as this forensic evidence can take place ie DNA, injuries sustained etc.
But in the case of 'date rape' Jim states that the amount of alcoholic in the blood could be taken to verify if the female was too drunk top give her consent.
That is perfectly true if the female reported that she had been raped straight away, but what about the cases that have been reported much later than when the incident happened?
So in such cases where there are no witnesses and no other condemning evidence, it still all down to who can convince the jury the most, which in the majority of cases they will take the side of the female.
-Talbot-
/// I don't think andy is necessarily looks down on people but he does come across as incredibly patronising.
I cringe when I read comments like... ///
Yes I think your choice of word is perhaps a little better than the one I chose.
condescending, superior, stooping, lofty, gracious, contemptuous, haughty, snobbish, disdainful, supercilious, toffee-nosed,
/// I don't think andy is necessarily looks down on people but he does come across as incredibly patronising.
I cringe when I read comments like... ///
Yes I think your choice of word is perhaps a little better than the one I chose.
condescending, superior, stooping, lofty, gracious, contemptuous, haughty, snobbish, disdainful, supercilious, toffee-nosed,
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles23 mins ago
Wokery Comes To Tourism Agency...
News25 mins ago
ChatterBank25 mins ago
Body & Soul29 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.