5 ms·
Are you talking about the phenomenon of blaming poor judgment in consensual sex on alcohol? One major difference is that the unintended consequences of consensu
by selestify 6y ago
Are you talking about the phenomenon of blaming poor judgment in consensual sex on alcohol? One major difference is that the unintended consequences of consensual sex are usually reversible afterwards, whereas there’s no undoing a death. Another is that alcohol is usually used as a face-saving measure in the first place. Even if both partners are not that drunk, they now have a socially acceptable excuse to have sex without being perceived to be “as” promiscuous as they would be otherwise. The “consequences” here aren’t so great anyways, at most maybe an unwanted pregnancy, which yes is something one should take responsibility for one way or the other anyways.
If you’re talking about alcohol as an excuse for sexual assault, I agree, and I don’t know anyone in my social circle who wouldn’t. If you’re unable to control yourself on alcohol, then don’t drink. If you drink and end up assaulting someone, sexually or not, that’s entirely on you and you should be punished for it. Don’t be a Brock Turner. The legal system may have double standards, but the rest of us shouldn’t.
- gmadsen 6y agoyeah I suppose I was considering what seemed at the time consensual, and separately sexual assault(which is not ambiguous at all). It was drilled into us at college and in the military that a woman can not consent if intoxicated, no matter how sober they seem. However, this might just be a zero tolerance policy to better control those without good judgement, It just always seemed weird to me that two people could drink the same amount, both be engaged and consenting at the time, then the day after still be classified as a sexual assault.