Alcohol, Consciousness, Rape and Consent

Permabear · 09-08-2010 1:57pm

This post has been deleted.

Nevyn · 09-08-2010 2:10pm

In date rape scenarios it happens.

It doesn't have to be forcible at all for it to be rape.
If someone held a gun to one of my children, while someone raped me, they would not need to be phyically forceful at all but it would still be coerced and non consensual and therefore rape.

Consent was given but does the inability to revoke consent not factor into it?

Macha · 09-08-2010 2:12pm

No, you see your partner is communicating to you that she wants to engage in some sort of sexual activity. If a few minutes later she decides she doesn't want to, she's allowed to stop and you should not force her to continue. If, however, she doesn't object to continued proceedings then you can take it as consent because she is fully capable of consenting or showing her withdrawal of consent and is therefore displaying continuous, conscious consent. However, if someone is unconscious, by the very nature of their state, they cannot give conscious consent so you cannot assume anything. You see you're not really assuming anything in the above scenario because she is very clearly communicating her consent on a continual basis.

Well that is a question I'm asking you. I am asking you if you think that all rape or sexual assault involves physical coercion. You defined rape as" having forcible intercourse with someone against his or her will" earlier on and I am wondering if your definition limits it to physical force.

No because as I said in response to The Corinthian's discussion about burden of responsibility, if you are asleep or unconscious yourself, then you cannot have consciously carried out any act, including a sexual assault. But if we accept that you were unconscious and therefore without the capacity to willfully carry out such an act, then we must also accept that an unconscious person is without the capacity to consent fully, in my opinion.

There have been cases where accused have been acquitted of sexual assault on the grounds of suffering from sleep sex disorders.

The Corinthian · 09-08-2010 2:32pm

That is still coercion - to force someone against their will. Drugging someone would be the same, as you are 'taking' their will away from them.

It should certainly factor in (at the very least because anyone who consents and half way though changes their mind probably has issues that would make me not want to have sex with them). The question is to what level.

As politically incorrect as it may be to suggest, there do appear to be different scenarios that qualify as rape, with often vastly differing and mitigating circumstances.

With homicide we have murder, manslaughter, wrongful killing, self defense and so on, to differentiate between each scenario. However we are supposed to treat rape with a one size fits all measure (there is statutory rape, which may or may not be treated differently, now that I think of it). Not sure if that is appropriate.

metrovelvet · 09-08-2010 2:35pm

If someone stops midway, it could be because of pain or tearing, or if they've been drinking, want to vomit or it's just not happenning for them. They may not necessarily have issues.

The Corinthian · 09-08-2010 2:44pm

Pain or tearing as reasons is a fair point. 'Not happening for them' is egocentric to the point of issues, IMO. Whatever happened to politeness?

metrovelvet · 09-08-2010 2:48pm

That's another conversation.

Permabear · 09-08-2010 3:04pm

This post has been deleted.

drkpower · 09-08-2010 3:21pm

These are (almost;)) good points but there is one fundamental difference between these examples and the case at hand. Where someone is going under a GA or getting on a rollercoaster, it is anticipated and accepted that one will not be able to revoke consent thereafter; in the situation at hand, is it anticipated and accepted by the consent-giver that they will soon thereafter not be able to revoke consent? That is doubtful (in most cases) and is where your examples fall down.

Perhaps; but going to bed together nude is not necessarily an implied consent to sexual intercourse.

Permabear · 09-08-2010 3:30pm

This post has been deleted.

MiCr0 · 09-08-2010 3:34pm

t4k30 banned for 2 weeks

Elle Collins · 09-08-2010 3:34pm

If those last two scenarios constitute rape then I've raped my partner more times than I can remember and thoroughly enjoyed being raped innumerable times by him also! It's ridiculous to label such actions between a loving couple rape.

Permabear · 09-08-2010 3:58pm

This post has been deleted.

Macha · 09-08-2010 4:21pm

Here again you are conflating consent to initiate a sexual act with consent to complete the act. You have acknowledged this implied consent and I have questioned it. It's clear we're not going to agree on it. For me, it isn't about "consent to penetrate" equals "consent to climax", rather it's about recognising the right of someone to withdraw consent at any time, unless the couple had agreed something previously.

In fairness, I have repeatedly acknowledged that if a couple have previously agreed that this is OK, ie given prior consent, then away with them. But to try to compare this to a medical procedure is a bit odd, I don't really see the connection. Sex is something different to a medical procedure even if both require consent.

There is also force through coercion and threats.

What do you mean by "normal boundaries"?

Well hang on a sec now. These things are in degrees so we have been discussing someone who is unconscious not "extremely sleepy". I'm not sure why you are so sure that the standard of continual, conscious consent is such a difficult one to stick to. I don't have in-depth knowledge of anyone else's sex life but my own so I just have to say I don't know about anyone else. Of course I've had sex while drunk but I have never had sex with someone when they were far more drunk than I was and it would be a complete turn-off to be with someone who wasn't as engaged in the whole thing as I was.

The idea that a large number of people would struggle to be sure of consent from their sexual partner is an unsettling one.

Why do you not consider consent to be so important with sexual activities?

Elle Collins · 09-08-2010 4:44pm

I assume because, as he's already said, in the situation where we're talking about a committed couple consent is already very much implied.

If I were to conk out unconcious halfway through sex my partner would be welcome to take whatever 'liberties' he felt like and because I love and trust him I wouldn't experience it as negative in any way, shape or form. The same would be true if the shoe was on the other foot also.

(Obviously I don't maintain that this is true for all women or for all couples though.)

Macha · 09-08-2010 4:53pm

Yes I agree that it varies between couples. But this only works if both partners are aware of it ie, if consent has been given prior to the actual event itself. Assumptions of consent can be dangerous because, as you note yourself, not everyone would be happy with the idea of someone going at it with their unconscious body, even if that someone is their partner.

Herbal Deity · 09-08-2010 5:06pm

So essentially, the question is whether this is reasonable to assume or vital to establish prior to doing it?

I'd like to think it'd be reasonable to assume. If with a partner you love and trust, I can't really see why anyone would care too much, but maybe I'm an aberration?

metrovelvet · 09-08-2010 5:16pm

How do you know you enjoyed it if you were unconcious?

If you were unconcious you'd have no memory of it.

Nevyn · 09-08-2010 5:45pm

But not using physical force to rape, not all rapes are phyically brutal,
(esp when a woman's body will lubricate out of self defence from unexpected penetration) physical force is not always applied esp if the victim goes into shock or is comatose. So to say that a rape as to be forceful is to make less of those which are not and is a rape myth.

If she has consented to him having sex with her when she is asleep then I don't have an issue with that but it should be something which is discussed and not assumed.

Yes but either party despite being naked has the right to withdraw that consent and demure stating they do not wish such contact " not tonight I have a headache....:P" in the case were a person is asleep they can not exercise that right and I do not think it should be considered waived unless it was done by prior agreement.

Permabear · 09-08-2010 5:46pm

This post has been deleted.

Nevyn · 09-08-2010 5:57pm

True esp as the state of being aroused by the other person could be considered being intoxicated due to the endorphins and other sex hormones present in the body.

metrovelvet · 09-08-2010 6:18pm

She was responsive? She could remember it?

That's not being unconcious. And if she responded positively and actively, isn't that consent?

drkpower · 09-08-2010 6:45pm

Technically, yes! False imprisonment is to take or detain someone without their consent. If the agreement that led to someone sitting into a car was that they would go to Ballyfermot but they ended up in Ballybunion or Belize, he could very easily argue that he was taken or detained without their consent. But I fear this is an analogy too far.....

Permabear · 10-08-2010 1:23am

This post has been deleted.

Herbal Deity · 10-08-2010 9:26am

I think you just won the thread.

metrovelvet · 10-08-2010 9:28am

I know it can be intoxicating alright.

I would still not call that unconcious though.

If we got into the territory of body chemicals exempting us from consent then I could turn around and justify multiple rapes by saying I was "drunk with love.' As Alice said, "I cannot explain myself sir. I was not myself.'

I don't accept that.

However, as I suffer from sleep paralysis from time to time, i would be one of those people who should have one of those talks taco is talking about, or anyone with slerp disorders should.

DF -you obviously trusted her enough that she wouldn't turn around and deny her part or make any accusations. But another person may have.

Elle Collins · 10-08-2010 10:23am

When you wake up wreathing on the edge of an orgasm you can be pretty sure your unconcious body was enjoying itself!

metrovelvet · 10-08-2010 10:27am

And what if you didnt want to have sex?

What if your partner chose not to use contraception while you were asleep?

What if you were going through a bad time with your partner?

Elle Collins · 10-08-2010 10:53am

That's happened both ways round. In that case we each just push the other off and that's the end of that.

I'd be very perplexed if he did. I've been on the mirena for years.

All the better. I find uninitiated sex particularly arousing after an argument,

Nevyn · 10-08-2010 10:53am

Arousal or orgasm does note equal consent.

If a female rape victims body technically becomes aroused, ie the vagina 'tents opening up and starts to lubricate that is not consent but her body doing so in self defence in order to limit the amount of damage which may done to it when she is penetrated. If a female rape victim has an orgasm (which can happen and causes a lot of guilt and confusion) that does not mean she has enjoyed being raped or that or consented.

The same can be said of men, just because a man is aroused it does not equal consent.

Alcohol, Consciousness, Rape and Consent

Comments