Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

This is actually believe it or not a rather serious question, I am using this and a few other surveys and polls as the basis for some research I am doing. Please do not post hate messages or anything childish or immature. Thanks in advance.

This is based on the belief that all things are not fair. At the moment it is policy for the military and government that sleeping with an intoxicated person is rape, regardless of your own state of inebriation. So then the logical question that follows is who raped who? If both parties are roughly equally intoxicated then where do we as a society place blame.

Beyond rape, when a person is intoxicated they are held accountable for their actions. A good example of this is drunk driving. If a person is intoxicated and kills someone with their car are they guilty of manslaughter/murder or are they given a lesser charge because they didn't know any better because they were drunk? Answer to that one is easy, they are guilty. (in most cases, money for some reason seems to preclude this charge, must be some sort of loophole in the legal system I am on aware of, IE Ethan Couch)

I would suggest a rephrasing of the title. It is very click baity

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
It is very click baity

On dakka OT? Someone baiting on an old, already argued over question? Is such a thing even possible?

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
I would suggest a rephrasing of the title. It is very click baity

NO sarcasm here, what would you recommend for the title? PM it or post it please

Imho

if its just drinking then yes. its consensual. you made a conscious decision to go out and get drunk.

If various other malicious drugs are involved then no.
but it would take a lot to prove that (right?)

 Desubot wrote:
Imho

if its just drinking then yes. its consensual. you made a conscious decision to go out and get drunk.

If various other malicious drugs are involved then no.
but it would take a lot to prove that (right?)

For the purpose of this poll it is ONLY drinking together, the level of intoxication is roughly the same and no drugs or coercion are being used.

SemperMortis wrote:

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
I would suggest a rephrasing of the title. It is very click baity

NO sarcasm here, what would you recommend for the title? PM it or post it please

"Serious question about alcohol consumption and sexual contact."

SemperMortis wrote:
This is actually believe it or not a rather serious question, I am using this and a few other surveys and polls as the basis for some research I am doing. Please do not post hate messages or anything childish or immature. Thanks in advance.

This is based on the belief that all things are not fair. At the moment it is policy for the military and government that sleeping with an intoxicated person is rape, regardless of your own state of inebriation. So then the logical question that follows is who raped who? If both parties are roughly equally intoxicated then where do we as a society place blame.

Beyond rape, when a person is intoxicated they are held accountable for their actions. A good example of this is drunk driving. If a person is intoxicated and kills someone with their car are they guilty of manslaughter/murder or are they given a lesser charge because they didn't know any better because they were drunk? Answer to that one is easy, they are guilty. (in most cases, money for some reason seems to preclude this charge, must be some sort of loophole in the legal system I am on aware of, IE Ethan Couch)

What exactly are you researching?

Also you specifically use woman in the title of your poll when your post content sees you use 'person' when discussing the intoxicated parties. Wondering if that is deliberate.

What exactly are you researching?

Public perceptions relating to alcohol consumption and sexual contact

For the most part this is to determine whether or not the public perceives intoxication as a valid excuse for poor decision making.

As I stated in the opening post, for some reason we consider intoxicated people that had sex to be raped when one person comes forward after the fact and says they were not in a position to make decisions due to their intoxication and they were therefore raped.

But by the same logic we hold ALL drunk drivers liable for their actions when they are drinking and driving. It seems a double standard and I want to know whether or not it is in fact the popular belief or whether or not it is the media influencing this perception.

SemperMortis wrote:
Public perceptions relating to alcohol consumption and sexual contact

For...

SemperMortis wrote:
for some reason we

You aren't starting tabula rosa and moving from there. You already have a position and your wording screams this.

The Internet is a big place. Somewhere out there is a site better suited to this discussion than DakkaDakka.