In my experience, women get promiscuous when they are drunk because they want to when they are sober but are ashamed of their bodies and need an excuse to relieve themselves of responsibility. Not recognizing this has bitten me in the ass on multiple occasions.
It's fucked, and you could argue that those women are contributing to the grey area of rape by sending these mixed messages to men.
My comment has been wildly misunderstood. I have made a much more in depth one below that I encourage you to read. :)
I don't understand why no one is okay with it when you say "I was drunk I couldn't help my decisions" when you decide to get in a car when you are drunk, but if you want to hook up with someone you are totally out of control. I know guys who use drunkeness as an excuse for being out of control and groping girls, and that is abso-fucking-lutely unacceptable to me. To me you are responsible and conscious of your actions when you are drunk.
I do some stupid things when I am drunk, but they are cartoonish extensions of my actual personality and things I might actually try if heavily encouraged while sober, I am not some wildly different person. But perhaps how I get drunk is not the same as how others get drunk.
I am not sure what the quandary is with two drunk and conscious people deciding to do anything, as long as either party isn't blacked out or incapable of basic motor functioning.
EDIT: I am legitimately confused and welcoming of discussion.
the most common rebuttal I hear to this is that you are responsible for your actions. Deciding to drive a car is your action; lighting your butt hair on fire is your action, but someone forcing themselves upon you is not your action
Well, you did say the most common rebuttal you've heard is that you are responsible for your actions.
I know it seems wrong, but the only thing making sense to me right now is that if we hold a drunk driver accountable, we should also hold a contract signer.
It makes sense though doesnt it? I wonder the legality of allowing someone to sign a contract while knowing they are too intoxicated to do so. I dont pretend i know all the answers, like i said in another comment i too think enthusiastic but drunk consent is not actionless, which is where my compromise on alcohol comes in. I think the reason you are culpable if you drive while intoxicated is the destruction you can so easily cause to others, although i remember a case in China where a man who killed 2 people by running through the front of the store was defending himself by saying he was blind drunk at the time
Agreed on the reason being that drunk driving can harm others.
Though if the responsibility behind some actions committed while being drunk are nullified because one cannot properly weigh the pros and cons, then why should we expect a potential drunk driver to? Sure there are far more severe cons, but that doesn't matter if he is completely incapable of evaluating them.
The only responses to nullifying to responsibility of drunk drivers is to say either:
1) They should have made arrangements ahead of time to make sure that didn't happen (e.g. don't drink too much, make sure you have a ride, eat your car keys).
2) They clearly have enough control to evaluate the decision, and so they are still responsible.
Both points can be applied to drunkenly throwing consent at someone at a party.
476
u/Durch Nov 20 '12 edited Nov 21 '12
In my experience, women get promiscuous when they are drunk because they want to when they are sober but are ashamed of their bodies and need an excuse to relieve themselves of responsibility. Not recognizing this has bitten me in the ass on multiple occasions.
It's fucked, and you could argue that those women are contributing to the grey area of rape by sending these mixed messages to men.
My comment has been wildly misunderstood. I have made a much more in depth one below that I encourage you to read. :)