Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

AZJonnie

(1,651 posts)
1. Obviously in and of itself, a person's intoxication should NOT provide any legal cover to forcibly rape (force) them!
Sat Sep 20, 2025, 04:57 PM
Sep 20

If such laws exist they should be struck for sure

However a philosophical question (if you will)? Say two people get drunk together, consensually, both of whom are presumably aware that their inhibitions are likely to be lowered. Then they consensually have sex. Then one or both parties wakes up thinking to themselves "Damn, I'd NEVER have agreed to this person if I weren't drunk". I'd be VERY surprised if less than 50% of the population have experienced this, uh, phenomenon, so I'd guess many if not most of you know what I'm talking about.

Now the philosophical question I have about this is ... can this then rightly be called "rape"? Is "later regret" a sufficient basis for such a claim?

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The Push to Eliminate New...»Reply #1