Wednesday, October 6, 2010

How Not To Rape People: A Handy Guide For Modern Men And Footballers

In my perusings of the modern media landscape, a worrying trend has come to my attention: young men who apparently just can't stop having non-consensual sex with others. It's a tricky problem, and one to which there are, clearly, no easy solutions. I mean, it's all very well to say "No means no", but as popular ex-footballer/arachnid Peter "Spida" Everitt says, when a girl goes home with a guy at 3am, it's not for a cup of Milo. So we can see there are two sides to every story: on the one hand, a young lady might feel violated, but on the other hand, why do these women keep going round to strangers' houses in the hopes of having some Milo? Why don't they buy their OWN Milo? Young people today, I ask you.

The point is, as a man myself, I know how hard it can sometimes be to not be a rapist. Masculine identity is so ill-defined these days, what with the sexual revolution, feminism, meggings and so on: it's so difficult to know what women want: do they want us to hold the door open and pay for dinner, or do they want us to wait until they're blind drunk and have sex with them against their will? How can we tell? After all, as ABC The Drum commenter "James" says in response to an article by Lauren Rosewarne, "Why are young women so strange?"

Indeed, why? When young women are free to go around being strange all over the place, how can men be expected to know how to behave? This is why we see so many comments around the internet along the lines of "Why do these women put themselves in this situation what do they expect they are just after bragging rights they can't change their minds after the fact I agree with Kerri-Anne Kennerly"?

When people start agreeing with Kerri-Anne Kennerly, society has gone too far, and this is why I have prepared, for the benefit of my fellow man and also people who play football, a Handy Guide To Not Raping People. Feel free to print it out and keep it in your shirt pocket, men, so next time you find yourself in an awkward situation where it seems you have no choice but to rape someone, you can check the guide and gracefully extricate yourself from the sticky predicament.

THE HANDY GUIDE TO NOT RAPING PEOPLE IN SEVEN EASY STEPS

1. When you meet a girl who doesn't want to have sex with you, don't have sex with her.

2. When you meet a girl who wants to have sex with one of your friends, remember the golden rule: You Are A Different Person To Your Friends. Maybe this handy mnemonic can help: Yentl Acted As Ducks Probed Three Yucky Frenchmen. This will help you remember that a girl who wants to have sex with one person does not necessarily want to have sex with every person she meets. Confusing, I know; what can I say - political correctness, etc.

3. If you meet a girl who DOES want to have sex with you, but then a bit later she says she'd rather not, don't have sex with her. Again, pretty confusing, I know, but it's due to a special Scientific Fact: sometimes girls change their minds. Like, remember the time you wanted a kebab, but then you thought no, I'll have a hamburger instead? It's a bit like that, only with sex.

4. When you meet a girl who is unconscious, don't have sex with her. This is true even if she was drinking before. I may be delving into some fairly arcane theory here, but scientists have discovered there is actually technically a difference between "drinking a lot of alcohol" and "saying yes I want to have sex with you". I realise this difference is probably hard to spot for a lot of you guys; you might have to squint a bit.

5. When you go home with a girl, try not to have sex with her until after she says she'd like to.

6. Practise not having sex with people. I know it's hard - sometimes you just look down and it's like, whoops, I'm having sex with this girl, how did that happen? But I bet with a bit of concentration and discipline, you can actually manage to avoid having sex with someone, even when they're in the same room as you. It's true! Anyone can do it! Why, last week I met at least five women who I actually didn't have sex with, without causing myself any particularly severe internal injuries.

7. When you meet a girl who doesn't want to have sex with you, don't have sex with her. I realise I already said this one, but that was five steps ago, and I have a feeling some of you guys might have slightly short attention spans.

So there you go: seven easy steps to becoming a non-rapist. I bet you didn't think it was that simple, did you? You probably thought you'd need electrodes attached to something. But no, you can do it in your own living room! It's just a matter of staying "on the ball" and learning the difference between a girl who wants to have sex with you, and a girl who doesn't. One way is by listening to what she says: a girl who says "Let's have sex" probably wants to have sex; a girl who says "let's not have sex" probably doesn't. I realise listening to what women say will be a new experience for a lot of you, but I'm confident you can manage it. Practise at home first if you like, with a mirror and a wig.

Anyway, good luck with it all, guys! I know you probably think you could never not rape people, but I believe in you, guys! With a little bit of hard work and determination, anyone can not have sex, any time they want! Amazing but true!

Happy Not-raping!

267 comments:

1 – 200 of 267   Newer›   Newest»
Sadhbh said...

I'm not raping a woman right now. It's easy once you get the hang of it. But, if you are worried it might happen, try throwing out your Milo and getting Bovril instead.

Huge Jerk said...

Is it still considered rape if the girl CAN'T say no? I mean, logically if she can't say no, then she can't say yes either.

This is all very confusing, but with a lot of training, I think I can keep up my not raping any...

Shit.

I'll start not-raping people again tomorrow.

David Horton said...

Superb Ben, just superb. I wish I had written it, but even if I had you would have done it 100 times better. Bravo.

Edward said...

I'm still a bit confused. If I'm raping someone, but I don't want to have sex with them, are they raping me?

Karlos said...

You forgot this one, but seeing as you repeated one way you can just slot this in instead and still have 7 ways. Thats pretty neat becasue you won't have to change the title or the links people are using to go viral on this.

7. Before you actually have sex with a girl, you need an actual, specific and unambiguous, un-conflicted "go-ahead". Like her saying "Lets Have Sex", or ripping your pants off while asking if you've got "protection". If a girl is unable to say "Lets have sex" or in fact can't say "Lets not have sex" or form any sort of coherent sentence or can hardly hold her head up off the pillow/couch/floor - don't have sex with her.

Anonymous said...

If I go home with a girl who's drunk and wants to have sex with me, and has sex with me and wakes up the next day and wishes she hadn't, so says that she didn't want to, is that rape?

And how would you know the difference?

Anonymous said...

Sorry to ruin your media narrative Ben, but as far as your claim about a "worrying trend" goes... rape is on both long term and short term decline.

Bronnie and family said...

I almost didn't clink on the link to this via twitter, because I thought: How could anyone make the subject of rape funny. You have done it beautiful though ... I myself have several male friends who do not rape me on a regular basis. So there, boys, it can be done! Seriously, well written ...they should hand this out at bars, sports matches or anywhere where men gather regularly.

berenichi said...

I think they need this on locker room walls. In extra-large font. Those footballers have taken so many knocks to the head, we all know they lost a few brain cells. Ones they could ill-afford to lose.

Fiona said...

Maybe you should add diagrams, or reporduce this in comic-strip form for those non-essay readers?

techydude said...

just imagine how complicated this all would've been if Ackermankiss hadn't told all his gay mates to stay in the closet?!?

Sue said...

I. THINK. I. LOVE. U.

(But don't necessarily want to have sex with you ... sorry it's all soooo confusing!!)

duckduckgooose said...

In response to 'Anonymous' - rape is not on the long term or short term decline. Rape has remained steady throughout recordable time, and international trends show a consistent rate: 1 in every 4 girls will be raped by the age of 18, 1 in every 7 boys.

However, of all rapes, only approximately 1 in 5 are ever reported. (Which, I imagine, has *nothing* to do with the response from friends, family, media, community). So, we cannot - unfortunately - rely on legal statistics.

Tammois said...

Excellent work, Ben. Glad you've cleared that up for the apparently many who don't get it (still).

Anonymous said...

Can you clear up one fuzzy area for me: what about surprise sex? You can't ask them before hand if it's supposed to be a surprise

ImpotentAnger said...

I find that restricting a woman's ability to talk removes that pesky "did she say yes or no" dilemma that plagues us sexually active men.
Rohypnol used to be handy too, but with the prices these days...well...a hand over the mouth is a much cheaper option.

catie_mac said...

Your guide also reminded me of this:

Sexual Assault Prevention Tips Guaranteed to Work!


1. Don’t put drugs in people’s drinks in order to control their behavior.

2. When you see someone walking by themselves, leave them alone!

3. If you pull over to help someone with car problems, remember not to assault them!

4. NEVER open an unlocked door or window uninvited.

5. If you are in an elevator and someone else gets in, DON’T ASSAULT THEM!

6. Remember, people go to laundry to do their laundry, do not attempt to molest someone who is alone in a laundry room.

7. USE THE BUDDY SYSTEM! If you are not able to stop yourself from assaulting people, ask a friend to stay with you while you are in public.

8. Always be honest with people! Don’t pretend to be a caring friend in order to gain the trust of someone you want to assault. Consider telling them you plan to assault them. If you don’t communicate your intentions, the other person may take that as a sign that you do not plan to rape them.

9. Don’t forget: you can’t have sex with someone unless they are awake!

10. Carry a whistle! If you are worried you might assault someone “on accident” you can hand it to the person you are with, so they can blow it if you do.

And, ALWAYS REMEMBER: if you didn’t ask permission and then respect the answer the first time, you are committing a crime- no matter how “into it” others appear to be.

From: http://nonotyou.tumblr.com/post/195900043

sancz said...

it's good that everyone can be witty and flippant about sexual assault. more of that

Dave said...

@Anonymous - October 6, 2010 5:08 PM

Considering it is impossible for a girl to GIVE consent when she is drunk, its pretty cut and dry. Moron.

Still Confused said...

What if someone is drunk, says she wants to have sex with me, has sex with me, but after going home with a hangover to her boyfriend, then claims she didn't?

Do I then need to
1) engage in time travel to warn my past self that (insert future-past tense) am/will be/was a rapist,
2) engage an expensive solicitor and give him my house and wordly possessions,
or
3) go on Oprah and plead forgiveness?

Kerri Sackville said...

I have been dilligently practising these tips all morning and have not yet raped anyone. Of course, I am a married mother of three, and I am currently alone in my house, so it's been fairly easy. Still, you can never be too careful.

Andrew said...

With regard to point #6, I did a maths degree once, and I found that helped a lot.

Girl Clumsy said...

Ben, thank you for your lucid thoughts on this often controversial subject. As a woman, I find it hard sometimes to go about my business, what with all the raping and all.

Anyway, about 18 months ago I constructed a flow chart guide for footballers. I thought you might be interested in it.

http://www.drawanywhere.com/live/22a1281235890.jpg

Cheers, Natalie.

Anonymous said...

Might be a good idea to throw in a few rules about not having sex with girls who want to have sex with you, but are to young to legally.

Dave said...

@Still Confused


Which part of, YOU CAN NOT GIVE CONSENT WHEN DRUNK. Are you having trouble with?

Frances said...

If I go home with a girl who's drunk and wants to have sex with me, and has sex with me and wakes up the next day and wishes she hadn't, so says that she didn't want to, is that rape?

No. However, if she is very drunk - stumbling, slurring and on the verge of passing out - she does not have the capacity to truly consent.

And how would you know the difference?

Be a grown up and ask. Ask if she's sure. If either of you are at all unsure, DON'T HAVE SEX. Life will go on if you do not have immediate sex with a random drunk girl. Even if you're really horny.

Shali said...

Thanks Ben,

It is confusing, isn't it. I mean, yes no means no and all that, but will he understand when I take my knickers off in front of him and twirl them around my finger that that means yes? In fact it means yes right now please hurry the fuck up?

Because I'd hate to not be clear about it.

Anonymous said...

It sounds like people are redefining consent, so let's just lay down the dictionary definition: to permit, approve, or agree; comply or yield. There is nothing in here saying that being drunk means you can't consent.

On the contrary, the alcohol becomes a cause for your consenting.

I hope this helps.

Anonymous said...

This write-up is humorous in it's satire of clarification to understandably moronic 'rapists'.

HOWEVER, the comments above that are jokingly suggesting commentators confused about raping someone or slipping up and, whoops, raping someone are disgusting and offensive, especially from some individuals who present as male - the dominant rapists in all societies. Thanks for continuing the fearsome commentaries of rape. Maybe if they were aimed at you most of your life you'd get the point that it's not an f-ing joke all the time.

Signed,
A Rape Victim

Birmo said...

Fuck, I wish I'd written this.

A Nonny Moose said...

To anyone thinking they're as clever as the original post and trying to make a clever rape joke - that means you Impotent Anger, and various "anonymous's" - DON'T. The premise of a rape joke is usually to perpetuate the opression of the victim.

Oh, and anyone trying to justify drunken girls are consenting - just WHAT have you got invested that this idea perpetuates, hmm?

So yeah, shut up and listen to the victims - their experiences are more important than your stupid rape culture perpetuation jokes and excuses. Because there is NO excuse.

i.hate.my.name said...

Hi Anonymous,

I feel like I should mention that in the case of rape, it is not the dictionary definition, but the definition under Australian Law that matters.

Anonymous said...

To the Anonymous who tried their hand at defining consent, it's not just the dictionary definition that applies. It's the legal one.

In Victoria, if you are drunk, you legally cannot consent.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous,

Dictionary definitions of consent are not the same as legal definitions of consent.

I'm pretty sure the legal definition of consent involves an assessment of your capacity to make that judgment.

Being drunk diminishes your capacity to consent.

The statutory rape principle is along the same lines. Doesn't matter if a 14 year old girls says she wants to have sex with you. Under the law she doesn't have the capacity to issue that consent.

And whatever happened to the old-fashioned chivalrous idea of not taking advantage of a lady when she's pissed . . . oops, sorry, I forgot, turned into 'what did she expect'. You may want to blur the legal definitions but common decency is pretty clear on this one.

Dave Molloy said...

Thanks, Ben. Thanks to your handy guide, I haven't raped all day! It's only early morning, but I think it's all gonna be ok.

Glen said...

hmmm, for the anon's raising the question of whether consent can be given while drunk or whatever, think about it this way: If you can't figure out if someone is giving consent or not because you are drunk (or just stupid) then don't assume consent is given.

So rather than an ethics of risk, where potential rapists attempt to ward off the risk of becoming a rapist, the way Ben has ironically presented it above, a better way to think about it is in terms of an ethics of care.

If you care for your potential sexual partners, then you treat them more as people who make mistakes rather than as conquests and consent as an outcome of proof and probability.

Thick-necked-knuckle-head said...

Once, as a bartender, I refused to serve a girl who sounded pretty damn drunk only it turned out she had some kind of speech impediment and her friends told me I was an asshole. How can I assess if consent from a girl to have sex is valid when I can't tell the difference between a really drunk girl and a girl with a disability?

Carol said...

Ben,

Truly fantastic.

Of course some people won't get it or will find reason to be offended, but this is one of the best things I've ever read.

Love (in a purely platonic non-sexual kinda way),

Carol

Dave Molloy said...

It's really sad that 70% of Aussies responding to a Sunrise survey said that Spida Everitt had a point. Ben Pobjie has a point. Spida Everitt does not have a point. He is a moron.

Andrew said...

@Thick-necked-knuckle-head

I think we can all agree that, just to be on the safe side, it might be an idea if you don't have sex with anyone, ever.

Anonymous said...

No means no, that's for sure.

However I'm getting a little sick of the implication that the girl is the only one drunk and therefore is unable to provide consent because she is drunk.

How does it work if the dude is also drunk? Surely if she is absolved of having given consent because she is drunk then he is likewise absolved of taking advantage of the situation.

Everyone talks like guys are hunters preying on drunk women when often they are also drunk and have just as impaired sensibilities.

What would happen if a guy woke up the next morning and was like "I didn't really want to do that, she raped me." and he went to the cops, he'd be laughed out of the station.

Why do we always imply that it's the men who have the power in these situations? And why do we always imply that the men are staying stone cold sober, well within their wits and making calculated decisions to rape a woman?

cale said...

I thoroughly enjoyed reading this. Twice. The first time, I learned not to rate women. The second, not to rape. Both valid. One moreso. Thanks.

Jason Wilson said...

Anonymous @ October 6, 2010 6:28 PM
You should go look up "ignoramus". Hope this helps.

Nice post Pobjie.

Jason Wilson said...

Jesus. @ Anon October 6, 2010 7:10 PM.

You're saying being drunk should absolve you of responsibility for committing a crime there, chief. Assuming you're not just a troll, does that sound wise to you?

Risk Taker said...

Funny article Ben but this point probably highlight's the guts of the issue in many cases:

"5. When you go home with a girl, try not to have sex with her until after she says she'd like to. "

How often does this actually happen? I don't recall a girl ever clearly stating she wants to have sex with me but many cases where she quite obviously did (in my judgement). I had sex with those women. They wanted me to call the next day and didn't press rape charges so presumably my judgement was correct. Am I a rapist? Perhaps we can render the population debate a moot point by insisting on written consent in all cases.

When will this one sided debate acknowledge that this is not a black and white issue. It's ridiculous to suggest that there is no ambiguity in situations leading up to sex. It's built in the DNA of that process. And where there is ambiguity there will always be cases where it abused by either the man or the woman involved. However clumsy their words people like Spida should not be vilified for pointing this out.

No, certainly means no (unless there's a safeword involved) but the absence of 'yes' doesn't necessarilly equate to no.

Anonymous said...

@Jason Wilson

If you're going to throw out insults, why not also respond to the content of the post (not mine).

Anonymous said...

@ Jason Wilson if it absolves you of being complicit in an act which later becomes a crime then yeah I guess it should also absolve the crime.

And you can't say that offenders of other crimes where drugs and alcohol have been present haven't had that taken into account.

My point, obviously not well written is that just like the girl, the guy's actions are impaired.

I agree with the article above that he should not even venture into it if he and or she is impaired. But in the event that they do, then they do it together.

ICanBeAnonymousToo said...

@Anonymous

Yeah. I drove home pissed last night, but as I said to the coppers it's not fair to charge me with DUI because I was obviously off my face and therefore my judgement was impaired.

Jason Wilson said...

Anonymous @ October 6, 2010 7:24 PM

That's the point. There's nothing to respond to. The OED, the Macquarie, even Webster's have nothing to do with the legal definition of sexual consent.

Anonymous said...

"5. When you go home with a girl, try not to have sex with her until after she says she'd like to."

Yeah right, you have a clue about what women expect of men.

ICanBeAnonymousTooAsWell said...

@ICanBeAnonymousToo

And my judgement was impaired last night to so I said 'yes' when I really meant 'no. I can't be held responsible for saying 'yes'

Anonymous said...

I'm Anonymous 5:08pm.

I wasn't asking as a joke. It's not a situation I've found myself in. I don't get drunk and go home with random people.

However, we appear to have a dilemma here.

A man and a woman can go home together, both completely smashed, and sleep together.

Legally, in Victoria, no consent was given by either party.

The consensus appears to be that the drunk male is responsible for making sure he doesn't have sex with the woman if she's drunk, but the woman is incapable of consent because she's drunk.

Rape is always bad. Always. Every time.

I'm not excusing the behaviour of sober, or even half-tanked footballers taking advantage of a girl who's smashed off her face.

But are we seriously saying that a drunk woman is incapable of making a decision about consent, but an equally drunk man is capable of making a decision for both people?

There really appears to be a double standard here. Equality at all times, except when everyone is drunk?

Anonymous said...

A worrying trend is how overlong and indulgent some of Ben's articles have become.
I bet his favourite song right now is Painters & Dockers' All Men Are Bastards (Except for Me).
Cheap and too generalised. A more interesting inquiry into power imbalances would be whether the Collingwood FC investigation will be compromised by the obvious clout of the club's higher ups.

Anonymous said...

To the anonymous who seems to think that the law is everything, I hate to break it to you but a definition is a definition. The law gets a lot of things wrong - just because it's in the law, doesn't make it right either.

Here's another one for you: the law says you can't legally smoke pot, yet people smoke pot. I wonder how this fits in your "law defines reality" universe?

jim said...

Great post. I wonder, Ben, if you could also demystify the complicated social etiquette that surrounds when it is and is not ok to flash your privates?

Cam said...

@Anonymous at 5:08 and beyond.

This article "On the element of consent in rape" may offer some food for thought:

http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2010/02/25/25295/

Anonymous said...

I don't understand how it's a difficult concept to avoid the situation in the first place.

No means no. If there's no yes, or no comment, it's a no.

It's not rocket science.

It's frustrating to read some of these comments and know that some (insert insulting name here) can revel in the concept of it. Said in sarcasm or not.

The entry itself was good though and the list should get posted somewhere handy for both men and women.

Outrage Fairy said...

If I go home with a girl who's drunk and wants to have sex with me, and has sex with me and wakes up the next day and wishes she hadn't, so says that she didn't want to, is that rape?

no, it's not rape and clearly the footage from your hidden video camera back you up.

Michelle said...

Gold. Just gold.

Maybe this should go in the AFL handbook.

Andy Thompson said...

I loved this. Well done. I look forward to many years of not-raping thanks to you.

Courtney said...

I haven't been raped all day, and I'm confident that it's all due to Ben Pobjie's wisdom and advice! Thanks, Ben!

Senor Drunkington said...

Excellent article.

It is a fair point, however, that there seems to be some sort of presumption that men are 100% compus mentus no matter how drunk, whereas women lose their ability to communicate after a shandy or two. Some of the comments here suggest that many of you have never actually been drunk, or never had sex, or both.

A very careful distinction has to be drawn between "two people who are reasonably drunk and think that they want to shag on the night and later can't imagine what they were thinking" and "evil fairly sober predatory male takes advantage of semi-conscious, boozed female". The former happens every night of the year around the nation leading variously to hilarity, embarrassment, dating, marriage and children, the latter is clearly wrong and illegal.

And for you legal experts - it can actually amount to a defence to committing a crime if you are so drunk you don't know what you're doing. If you are so drunk that you can't form the necessary intent (which is an element of most crimes) then you may not be criminally liable.

Now, I need to get back to not raping anyone.

Sparkly Tiara said...

Bless you and thank you for your wise words, sir, on behalf of the millions of women everywhere who really quite enjoy not being raped.

Thompson said...

It's no good just coming in and saying how 'frustrated' you are at people 'not getting it', how no means no and it's all so black and white. It's NOT black and white at all.

Consent is a complicated issue, and it's pretty still muddy even when you get to legal definitions and interpretations (yes, laws need interpretations, it's not black and white even in the courts). These well publicised incidents involving footballers, further clouded by media frenzy, highlight other issues like double standards of judgement for males and females, honesty and shame in the public sphere, double standards for 'role models' in our society, and exactly how we should define a 'victim'.

Telling commenters off for raising (sometimes valid) questions is not only counter-productive and revealing of your lack of understanding, it's also a kick in the teeth for those involved in these situations. Rape is a complex issue and it can define lives. Don't assume you know all there is to know and if you do, don't broadcast it, you're holding the discussion back.

Anonymous said...

Nobody tell Triple R about this post, okay!

AR said...

If a guy was drunk enough not to be able to establish consent with his sex partner you'd have to wonder how he was able to perform.

Anonymous said...

So, I can't give consent if I'm drunk.

But, if I drive drunk... I'm responsible for my actions, but not when I have sex with someone...

How drunk is drunk? What if he is drunk? How does one know?

I hope these collingwood people get the book thrown at them now they are convicted. Oh wait, not convicted yet? Charged? no, not that either. Oh, its an allegation? Wow. Lucky we don't jump to conclusions based on past behavior.... like one might if a drunk girl has been making out with you for a few hours.

Look, rape is a crime, rapists should be prosecuted by the law.
But all this just stinks of a bunch internet intelligentsia having fun at those people who beat them up at high school.

Anonymous said...

Rape is never OK but it's time take responsibility for our behaviour, girls. The prevailing attitude that nothing is ever our fault or our responsibility is wrong. Going home with drunk footballers while being drunk yourself is a recipe for disaster. Minimise your chances of getting in harms way by thinking before you act.

Sparkles said...

I cannot believe people are trying to define consent.
Children might be able to say yes or no, however they cannot consent. same with disabled people.
Despite this, i mean, not sure why you think having sex with someone who is not of clear thought and mind, slurring, falling over, passing out is really the right thing to do. Be a gentleman and call her a cab, ensure her safety. What happened to human decency?

Anonymous said...

And if he is also drunk? Or is it his responsibility to stay sober, make this informed judgement and send her home?

If a footballer (or any one) specifically preys on a drunk person for gain (i.e. a drunk woman) then yes - let the police and justice system do their jobs and prosecute them to the full extent of the law.

But again, this is predicated on the basis of 'Sober bastard takes advantage of drunk helpless woman not in full control of their faculties'.

IS THAT ACTUALLY WHAT HAPPENS? Or are we jumping to conclusions because it fits a narrative of 'All footballers are misogynist bastards'

Anonymous said...

I think I just raped myself by reading this article.

Myli said...

A warm cup of Milo is so much nicer than that bumping nasties stuff.

Myli said...

A warm cup of Milo is so much nicer than that bumping nasties stuff.

Anonymous said...

Sparkles, we're not talking about being a gentleman, we're talking about being a criminal. Few people would suggest that getting sloshed, taking a drunk girl home and sleeping with her is a gentlemanly act, but that's beside the point.

Taking this line of argument too strongly takes you dangerously close to denigrating women in general. A drunk woman isn't a protected species at the expense of everyone else, not when it comes to the law.

Sparkles said...

Anon - No i am not referring to ONLY men, however in the context of footballers and modern men, yes those people should act like a gentleman as opposed to a criminal.
I am a woman, would not take advantage of strangers or friends, despite all parties being inebriated, i would do the DECENT thing as a human, which is ensuring the safety of others - moreso if for whatever reason you have thoughts of sexual assault, or you arent sure of consent because you too are blind drunk and you are such a deviant you cannot have people passed out at your house - send the girl home! its not about denigrating women or men or any such tripe - its about the comment that if the men are drunk, how can they know if theres consent. if you are not sure, if you cannot control your behaviours, if you cannot act like a human being but instead an animal, ensure your female guest is sent home. Its acting properly. Which given the context - yes, its expected that people act with basic morals. thats not a stretch is it?

Anonymous said...

Good luck getting footballers to behave like gentlemen. They're not cricketers, you know.

Anonymous said...

It's not basic morals at all, Sparkles, people wouldn't be engaged in debate if it was.
Many instances of sexual assault are complicated enough that outlining 'basic moral goods' aren't enough to establish blame or innocence.

The reality is that sex in these complicated circumstances does happen, every day, and not everyone acts in accordance with such a strong moral compass like you suggest they should. Again, this might be morally wrong in some sense (often not at all in a strong sense), but moral wrongness does not equal legal wrongness.

Individual cases have to be examined in isolation, it's not useful at all to say things like the men involved are 'acting like animals' or without basic human decency, that's skating over the intricacies involved.

dino said...

aah I see that if you accidentally knock a girl unconscious isnt mentioned...room there for the boof heads yet...

newswithnipples said...

I just snorted tea out my nose. Awesome post Ben.

ImpotentAnger said...

Surely the title should be "How to Not Rape People"

Because "How Not To Rape" indicates that there is a correct way to rape that is an acceptable method.

Will the next installment be "Rape And You: A Users Guide To Nonconsensual Intimacy"?

F.Baller said...

Gees if I listened to "no" all the time Id never get a root...

jennigan said...

Ben, I love you. This is brilliant!

Andrew said...

It's funny to have a laugh at footballers making a lot of money for doing comparatively little.
It's funny to have a go at them for the stupid footballer stereotype.
It is never, ever funny to make a joke out of a rape, alleged or otherwise.

The article itself might have something behind it, as a halfway witty jab at a few specific incidents, but some of the comments above are just not warranted. Would you make the same joke directly to a rape victim? If the answer is no, bite your tongue and grow up.

Anonymous said...

This is brilliant satire. Sadly the knuckle-draggers who'd most benefit won't read it.

Come to think of it, Can footballers read? I just thought they made monkey noises, cross-dressed and ran around waving sex toys at each other.

knifey said...

There are literally billions of people on this planet.

And every day, I busy myself not raping every single one of them.

I am however, guilty of raping myself several times today, but that is an internal matter, and shall be dealt with accordingly.

On a serious note- all of this talk and debate creates more awareness. Thanks for this post, and thank your parents for having you from me. More humour, less stupids.

Tim said...

I will need to say that I find no excuse for people who treat girls without respect for a quick thrill.
However - and try hard not to be shocked by this - when a man gets violent when he is drunk, to say "I was drunk" in no way mitigates his guilt. He knows he is violent when he is drunk, and he gets drunk anyway, and so he bears responsibility.
To young women who who have a tendency to get drunk and put themselves in compromising and dangerous situations, the rule applies. In no way does it mitigate the behaviour of an arse-hole, it is not an either/or thing. But if this tends to happen to you, it may be that getting blind drunk is not for you. A shame, a burden, but some people just shouldn't go there.

knifey said...

Tim is right- having said that, it's a pointless argument, because an intelligent person like Tim is expecting young people whose intelligence is veiled by intoxication or the more standardised total loss of a sense of personal responsibility, to think about what they're doing.

And all they wanna do is get loaded.

"Sober is the light of the morning."- me, 2010.

Write that down.

Stating The Obvious said...

And here, in the comments, lies the crux of the issue; a significant portion of the male population believe, for a variety of half-baked reasons/excuses, that one or more of these handy hints don't apply to them, nor apparently does the legal definition of consent.

Frankly, I'm surprised it took so long for anyone to suggest that the victims should take responsibility for putting themselves in the situation to begin with - yep, perfect, blame the victim and make excuses for the perpetrator - the Australian way. It only takes a little research into conviction rates to see that even our legal system reflects this abhorrent view.

Anonymous said...

It's not an abhorrent view, it's an easily misconstrued view. This isn't the forum for this discussion, but it's a lot easier to condemn a complex view than to understand it.

Aron said...

LOL

Kath Lockett said...

You are utterly brilliant! This should form part of the 'Welcome to the AFL' pack given to every footy player!

Stating the Obvious said...

Anonymous, if you actually believe that placing the blame on victims isn't an abhorrent way to go about justice, then we'll just have to agree to disagree. The very reason I condemn this view is because I understand precisely where it comes from, and I've experienced the repercussions first-hand.

Those who constantly trot out the anecdotal excuses, the media included, like "She was drunk, changed her mind the next day and cried rape" or "She knew what they were there to do" not only misrepresent the vast majority of sexual assaults, but they also perpetuate a dangerous attitude that further marginalises victims and makes them less likely to report the crime, let alone seek support from their support network.

Anonymous said...

I take your point, Stating the Obvious, though I'm not advocating placing the blame on victims of sexual assault. Rather, I'm advocating less jumping to conclusions and employing stereotypes as evidence in serious cases like sexual assault.

"She was drunk, changed her mind the next day and cried rape" is exactly the kind of circumstance I'm talking about. If the accused rapist in such a case is John Everyman, people are often willing to hold back on condemning him. If the accused is a high profile football player, the particularities of the case are often largely ignored and a witch hunt mentality takes over. These cases are complex in terms of who is 'to blame' (a loaded concept), who is a victim ('a' victim, not 'the' victim) and should be treated as such.

Drawing knee-jerk lines in the sand under the guise of protecting victims will only further marginalise them. There are cases where it is clear who the victim is, and cases where it is not. Open discussion and reporting of crimes is less likely to occur when you discount certain individuals and circumstances without appropriate consideration.

I agree completely, protecting the victims is paramount, but it must be ALL victims, not just those easily identifiable.

Senor Drunkington said...

I would really like to hear a considered answer to this question.

If a man and a woman are both drunk to a point where they are incapable of giving consent, and they have sex, is one of them a rapist and the other one a victim? If so, which one is which, and why?

Anonymous said...

I noticed a lot of comments responding to online newspaper articles implying that women who've been in this situation shouldn't have gotten so drunk.

Really, though, why can't a women get drunk if she wants to? Why do we say "she shouldn't have drunk so much?"

If a man is assaulted when he is drunk, we don't say "he shouldn't have drunk so much", we say "the assailant shouldn't have assaulted him."

It doesn't make sense to say that a woman shouldn't have:
- worn revealing clothes
- walked alone in the dark
- drunk so much
- gone home with a stranger
- etc.

It does make sense to say that an assailant shouldn't have assaulted someone.

Anonymous said...

Hi Ben, enjoyed your rant, however, I have one question? when you opened with, and I quote 'young men who apparently just can't stop having non-consensual sex with others', were you talking about men raping other men? It kinda sounds like it, and I was unaware of so much man-rape being reported about in the media.. moreover who were the awkwardly brave men who came forward about being bent over backward?

Jac said...

@Senor Drunkington:

I wonder, if the woman rolled the drunk man over and used a finger or a strap on to anally penetrate him, who would you say was the rapist?

AR said...

Drunkenness is not a legal defence so you can not use drinking as an excuse for assaulting someone physically or sexually.

A woman is not equally at fault' for being drunk as being drunk is not a crime. Duh.

If both parties were drunk and one feels they were too drunk to consent then there would have to be evidence to suggest that consent was not given and rape occurred.

Men of Australia can rest easy as women do not in fact often 'cry rape' after drunken consensual sex and the conviction rate for sex offences is ridiculously low.

Anonymous said...

I think it comes down to respecting your potential lover.

I'm a dyke, and a very randy dyke at that, and I have turned down sex with quite a number of attractive women when we were both drunk and I didn't get their consent beforehand. I find when I get sloshed, even hammered, I can control myself enough not to have sex with them even when they're all over me (yes, I'm very attractive) just because I don't want to do something that I'll regret.

My rule is: if the other person is sloshed give them a glass of water, let them have your bed and you can sleep on the couch. They'll probably appreciate this kind of respect and care and want to have sex with you later.

I think that once you're so drunk that you can't make coherent decisions you're probably too drunk to have sex as well. It can get quite complicated.

Jac said...

I really like this article. I know that rape is something which should not be joked about, but the gentle snark in this cautionary guide does not deride or vilify rape victims. It points out the absurdity of the idea that men "can't help it" and are not responsible for their actions.

There are so very many "How Not To Get Raped" articles telling women that men are mindlessly rambling erections, and that if they are permitted to share a space with anyone or anything they suspect they could stick their dick into, that they will do so with or without invitation.

Reading this article as a parody of one of those blithely hysterical "you are asking for it if..." articles that crop up in "women's magazines" works for me.

And this article is a way that the target audience might actually get the underlying message: They'll read it because it's funny, and they're more likely to "hear" it because it was written by a man.

Vicki K said...

Goodness me. It's not bloody rocket science.

If you're both drunk, but the girl is so drunk that you can't be sure that she's:

a) into it
b) has said yes
c) is capable of consenting

Then do not have sex.

If you get too drunk to control your actions and wake up next to an extremely distressed person who claims you had sex with them against their will, then you will have to wear the legal and moral consequence of your actions.

A good place to start would be having respect for all people, regardless of their gender and having a code of values that makes it unlikely you'll ever end up in this situation. Plenty of men can do it. It's not genetically impossible.

Combine with a healthy dose of not getting so drunk that you can't control yourself and you're well on the way to never being in danger of being a rapist.

Anonymous said...

Agreed with your first post Senor Drunkington, and am also very interested in hearing an answer to your question in your most recent one too.

It's not just men who are questioning this. I'm a woman, and I'm disturbed at some of the things being said here. 'Women can't give consent if they're drunk' - in that case, I've been sexually assaulted/raped many times in my life, as have many of my partners. It's just a ridiculous thing to say, and clearly it's not the case. I have consented to sex many times when under the influence, and I've regretted it occasionally. Regretting it doesn't mean my original consent somehow wasn't actually consent. I've also consented to sex hundreds of times without stating as much in a clear and unambiguous manner as some people here seem to be expecting. Again, does this doesn't mean that I didn't give my consent.

Jac said...

I think that "the capacity to consent" has much the same legal considerations as "the capacity to sign a contract".

That is: if someone is drunk or drugged, whether they got that way deliberately or someone else got them that way, if they are too effected to legally sign a contract to buy a house or sell their car, they are too effected to be able to give legal consent.

Similarly, minors cannot sign legally binding contracts. Or legally consent to sex.

Also: you can't bully, intimidate, threaten or torture someone into signing a contract because the contract will not be binding. Oh, and if someone tries to force someone else into consenting to sex by those means, that is also not legal consent.

It's pretty simple, if you look at it that way: if someone appears to be available for sex but they are horribly drunk, taking them up on the offer is about as ethical as it would be to take up their offer to *give you their house*.

I mean... really? What kind of utter prick would do that to some foolishly drunk person?

kim at allconsuming said...

Ben, there's a loophole - what if they want a Horlicks? Could a guy rape a girl then? Is it just with Milo?

GOODNESS it is confusing isn't it.

I'm thinking maybe a venn diagram?

Concern Troll (By No Means a Rapist, no way) said...

The dictionary definition of consent specifies that if a man is drunk too well it's really him who's been raped if you think about it. All your awful stereotypes about footballers can't conceal that the grey areas here mean that I can shag my Collie if I want to because who's to say? QED

Concern Troll (By No Means a Rapist, no way) said...

Like because if we've both been drinking how could I possibly just fuck off home and jack off and not fuck someone who's unconscious, right? I mean come on. THAT, my friends, would be injustice. QED Case Closed.

eyeswiredopen said...

Every weekend literally 1000s - possibly 10s of 1000s - of Australians go out and get inebriated so they can pick up a member of the opposite sex - also likely to be experiencing at least a degree of inebriation - and get laid. According to some of the nauesatingly pious numbnuts posting here, that makes all of them rapists, though only if they are male. Apart from when the pious poster has sex with someone after both have supped from the bottle. Oh, of course (slaps forehead) - that NEVER happens!

Anonymous said...

where does 'dry-humping' fit into this set of rules? Or perhaps even frottage?

Luke said...

I am still not sure I have the hang of it.

If a girl says no she doesn't want to have sex with me, but her boyfriend and my mates who just had sex with her say she does- is it rape?

Five 'yes' one 'no'- gotta be "yes" right?

Anonymous said...

It's all very confusing. Here's a nice little experiment.

Jenny isn't attracted to Ben, but Ben is hot for Jenny. One night, Jenny gets drunk and Ben has sex with her. Ben is a scumbag rapist.

Ben isn't attracted to Jenny, but Jenny is attracted to Ben. One night, Ben gets drunk and has sex with Jenny. Ben is user jerk who used her and should have known better.

Two situations - EXACTLY reversed. Yet the man is the bad guy in both.

Something's not right there.

Anonymous said...

I would really like some clarification on this issue, and I see that a number of men have raised the point of contention regarding consent here, without a satisfactory answer yet. So I will present a hypothetical scenario.

A man and woman, strangers unto each other, meet at a nitghclub. Both continue drinking heavily throughout the night. They find each other physically attractive, and flirt with each other. Eventually they end up going home together and having sex. When they wake up, they both wish they had not slept with the other person. They both feel like they wouldnt have wanted to. However, neither can remember much of the night clearly, including who initiated the sex. Or most of the actual sex for that matter. Has a rape taken place? By whom?

Would the answer change if i added the following:
Both parties were exactly as drunk as each other
It could be proven that absolutely no force, or intimidation was used

Also, imagine a situation where a sober woman sleeps with a drunk man. Yet, the sober woman is very attracted to the man, but the drunk man does not feel the same way at all, yet in his state accepts her advances. Has a rape taken place? I am aware of this happening to a few friends, and the idea of rape has never been brought up. Mostly it is that male feeling bad/embarassed, and people making fun of him (light-heartedly of course).

I would never try to defend a rapist, or trivialise anything to do with rape, but I really am a bit confused. Help would be appreciated.

girlzfreedom said...

All the talk about consent can be summed up in one word - respect. If you really respect a person, you would make absolute certain they absolutely wanted sex - quite simple really.

A smart move would be to have a personal policy of self-respect, as in 'if I'm drunk, I don't have sex with random strangers'. Get their phone number and see what they look like in the morning. Chances are you'll feel a whole lot different about your actions in the light of day. It seems as though in most instances, drunken sex = regret in some form - usually for the woman. But with the rate of STIs sky rocketing, regret can take on a whole new meaning.

Paul of Melbs said...

Quote - But are we seriously saying that a drunk woman is incapable of making a decision about consent, but an equally drunk man is capable of making a decision for both people?

My answer to that - In case you didn't notice, but men are the one at fault in virtually most instances of any conflicting matter these days, the tables have turned, and there is no genuine equality. People are no longer capable of using their own initiative effectively due to poor social sense and mentality, mainly due to mass media being the main influence in young people’s lives, especially that of young women.

So yes buddy, you have to think for everyone including yourself while intoxicated, heck you even have to have your eyes open for people crossing the street while driving a vehicle, as most pedestrians are incapable of opening their own eyes, all while watching out for every other lunatic out there on the roads with you too.

Anonygeniuses said...

All these anons with their blistering Socratic hypotheticals have convinced me that there's no such thing as rape, especially if people have been drinking. Sorted!

Anonymous said...

I'm glad this article got some people thinking about the issue.

I disagree with the smug superiority regarding a complex social phenomenon.

I don't think there are any easy answers. I think pretending that there are is harmful.

Anonymous said...

Sigh, and this is just one of the many reasons I don't drink.

I find the whole 'I regret it in the morning so it's rape' argument idiotic. It's an insult to actual rape victims to call this rape, and when you go back to doing the same shit again and again you really must be stupid.

We also see heaps of people trying to defend these idiots using legal arguments..... It's because of people like you that I have a sign on my matress saying 'If swollowed seek medical advise'. Use your brain for once and try to avoid situations you'll regret in the morning. I've even had to prevent a couple of my female friends from ending up in these situations yet they go straight back to doing the same thing cause they know the law will cover their stupidity.

This doesn't mean their aren't cases where it's a crime but calling it a full blown rape is a bit much.


Lastly I know of a person in their early 20's who has had 1000's of sexual encouters. They usually patrols pubs and bars searching for people who are drunk and easy to score with. They also consider it a challenge to get with people who are in a relationship (who will most likely regret it in the morning). In my opinion they are pretty much the deffinition of scum and yet I don't see them ever being charged criminally for this. Why? because they're a girl.

Elki said...

There seems to be numerous comments about men being drunk and being raped by a woman, or they are both drunk, or whatever, now I admit I am no expert on the matter, but from what I do know, men can barely get it up when they're drunk, let alone able to use it! There goes that argument rape advocates. Great article BTW

Senor Drunkington said...

Vicki K -

"If you're both drunk, but the girl is so drunk that you can't be sure that she's:

a) into it
b) has said yes
c) is capable of consenting

Then do not have sex."

You're missing the point. You're still doing the same thing that has been pointed out several times now, i.e. assuming that the girl when drunk is helpless and incapacitated whereas the guy is still rational, objective and capable of making decisions for both of them.

If either party is literally borderline unconscious then I agree with you, but that's not really the difficult case - the difficult case is when both are seriously hammered but still able to communicate, albeit drunkenly.

As others have said, getting pissed and doing something you regret is NOT rape and diminishes the seriousness of actual rape.

I can't get away from thinking that some people here are far more focused on penetration than they realise. A hell of a lot of these assumptions would disappear if human reproduction was achieved by shaking hands, i.e., I think that some people are instinctively placing the male in the role of 'aggressor' even in situations where there is no suggestion of force, compulsion, intimidation etc.

Anonymous said...

So being drunk isn't an excuse for drink driving or various other offences, but being drunk should be an excuse for sexual assault? Give me a break. Actually getting pissed and having sex with someone against their will, is rape - even if you regret it the next day.

Oh and if you are in a relationship and you go home with someone you meet in a pub - that's your choice', the annonymous person hasn't made any commitments to your partner - you have.

Anonymous said...

Here's another idea - if your only defence is, 'well she didn't say no' - and you can't think of anything that indicated a positive 'yes' then you probably have raped someone. ANyone else noticed how many guys just say, 'well she didn't say no so i just assumed that meant yes'

Wildly Parenthetical said...

"You're missing the point. You're still doing the same thing that has been pointed out several times now, i.e. assuming that the girl when drunk is helpless and incapacitated whereas the guy is still rational, objective and capable of making decisions for both of them."

Not really. The point here is if two people are so drunk that they can't a) give consent or b) know whether the other person is giving consent, then they shouldn't have sex. This goes for both sexes; it's not about men having to be more rational. The reason that it's being articulated as if men were the decision-makers is that, weirdly enough, in a rape scenario, it's not the woman's decision to get raped. The majority of rape cases involve men who feel entitled to sex, which can mean that when drunkenness comes into it, their priorities become the having of the sex (the thing they want), not the ensuring of the consent (the making sure they want what their partner wants).

You can see it here, from an Anonymous commenter above:
"I find when I get sloshed, even hammered, I can control myself enough not to have sex with them even when they're all over me (yes, I'm very attractive) just because I don't want to do something that I'll regret." The fantasy of drunkenness excusing people from responsibility is weirdly enough only applicable to men who rape: men are meant to be excused from making sure they don't rape or get raped because they're drunk, while women are meant to be careful not to get so drunk that they'll be raped. The problem is that the story about men 'not being able to help themselves,' mixed in with 'no, they really can't because they were drunk' still presumes that men who want to have sex ought to be able to have it; that potentially raping someone doesn't matter enough to them to think 'This could be a situation I'll regret, I'm going to back off.'

And those who think this is prissy moralism, ffs! Tell me the sex you'd rather have: with a woman who gets naked 5 secs inside the door and tells you she wants you to fuck her right then and there; or a woman who is anxious and ambivalent and falling silent and still during sex? The thing about refusing to have sex with women who aren't prepared to say 'Yes please right now and start here!' is that first of all it destigmatises women who love sex, second, it's likely to make people a lot clearer about their own desires and third, it'll avoid rape, and sexual coercion. That sounds pretty hot to me.

Wildly Parenthetical said...

"You're missing the point. You're still doing the same thing that has been pointed out several times now, i.e. assuming that the girl when drunk is helpless and incapacitated whereas the guy is still rational, objective and capable of making decisions for both of them."

Not really. The point here is if two people are so drunk that they can't a) give consent or b) know whether the other person is giving consent, then they shouldn't have sex. This goes for both sexes; it's not about men having to be more rational. The reason that it's being articulated as if men were the decision-makers is that, weirdly enough, in a rape scenario, it's not the woman's decision to get raped. The majority of rape cases involve men who feel entitled to sex, which can mean that when drunkenness comes into it, their priorities become the having of the sex (the thing they want), not the ensuring of the consent (the making sure they want what their partner wants).

The fantasy of drunkenness excusing people from responsibility is weirdly enough only applicable to men who rape: men are meant to be excused from making sure they don't rape or get raped because they're drunk, while women are meant to be careful not to get so drunk that they'll be raped. The problem is that the story about men 'not being able to help themselves,' mixed in with 'no, they really can't because they were drunk' still presumes that men who want to have sex ought to be able to have it; that potentially raping someone doesn't matter enough to them to think 'This could be a situation I'll regret, I'm going to back off.'

The Simpsons said...

One of the glaringly obvious things I see here is this. Nobody has been charged with rape yet.

Whilst I am glad to see earnest dialogue about a significant social issue, I'm dismayed at the broad assumptions that any time a footballer is accussed of a crime, they are without a second thought condemned in the court of public opinion (thus prejudicing much of the due process involved IF they are subsequently charged). Much like a month or so ago, where barely anybody paused to consider Brendan Fevola might not have flopped his johnson out at a random stranger in broad daylight (charges dropped).

Specifically to the Collingwood allegations; not a single detail has been released beyond the fact that an alleged incident is being investigated by police. And yet, here are many convinced that the 'perpetrators' should be getting a ride straight to jail? Why, because it conforms to a stereotype that says ALL footballers are predators?

I expect that whatever happened that night is extremely complicated, probably quite sordid by most tastes and that at least one party is unhappy about it. But none of us know whether or not a rape occurred, much less whether the woman making the claim was unconscious or completely incapacitated at the time as is being openly asserted in the comments here.

There can be a great deal of nuance to consider in a situation that does not involve a victim being dragged away kicking and screaming by a stranger, that begins with, 'what were all the parties involved doing there & what lead up to them being there'. This is why the police investigate these matters before whacking handcuffs on.

Finally, we each have a responsibility to ourselves primarily, but also importantly to others, in our interactions with eachother. The culture of going out, getting smashed & bagging a root is so commonplace as to be almost unremarkable. . .but there are consequences & sometimes the consequences are very much like this situation. That doesn't mean that we know a rape took place here.

Anonymous said...

I had cousin who spontaneously exploded from not raping people. Still, probably best.

Very funny article and I'm glad it got people talking about rape. Maybe there would be less confusion if we were able to speak frankly, more often about important topics that deal with the dark side of human (men and women) nature.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for writing this guide as it seems it is necessary. So simple really, though it seems lots of folk are having a hard time understanding this, particularly the media. The main point, I think, is that it does not matter what the circumstances were that places a woman in a situation (drunk, wearing revealing clothes etc etc), it is still NOT OK to have sex with her if she does not want to!!!

Anonymous said...

Funny stuff
No means no. Absolutely!!! A woman is allowed to change her mind at any time!!! Consent can be given and taken away at any second. Yay!!!
Hey girls.... just a thought... completely unrelated of course... how would it make you feel if a man changed his mind about marrying you at the last second and left you standing at the altar? Can a man go 'Remember that baby you gave birth to? Well I changed my mind. I dont feel like being a father or paying child support. Bye'. Arent choices wonderful?
Lets make fun of that. No?

Anonymous said...

What shall we do with the guys who believe they have some sort of biological right to have sex? Yes, women and men can change their minds about sex and if you ignore the withdrawal of that consent then you are guilty of rape.
Paying child support is hardly the same thing.

Anonymous said...

@Anonymous..YES BEING DRUNK MEANS YOU CAN"T GIVE CONSENT...THAT IS LAW ACROSS THE WHOLE OF AUSTRALIA. SO IF YOU HAVE SEX WITH A DRUNK GIRL THEN YOU CAN BE CHARGED WITH RAPE LATER.

Anonymous said...

Note to footballers - if a woman consents to having sex with one of you, it does not mean she gives consent to all of you. If you assume you have consent based on consent given to your mate do not be surprised if you are accused of rape.

Anonymous said...

I wonder how all these pro wilfully blind to non-consensual sex men would feel if drunk gay men routinely accidentally raped them

chosha said...

@Anonymous
"If I go home with a girl who's drunk and wants to have sex with me, and has sex with me and wakes up the next day and wishes she hadn't, so says that she didn't want to, is that rape?"

Remorse doesn't make it rape. However, her being so drunk that she can't think straight doesn't equal consent either.

Here's a tip: try having sex with girls who are not drunk.

Anonymous said...

‘Paying child support is hardly the same thing.’ Of course not - child support is IMPORTANT! Its not like sex is important to men…..
I don’t think I have a biological right to have sex. I don’t even think I have a right not to be led on, manipulated and basically ripped off. It is a bit sad, don’t you think? Why are men constantly conditioned to think that they have absolutely no right to expect to get what they want?

Can I be empowered too? Can I have choices and not just responsibilities? Can I withdraw my consent without any consequences?

PS when was the last time a MAN changed his mind about sex?

Anonymous said...

I know observational humour is not meant to be examined to closely, but the problem is rarely with any of the examples given, it's with retrospective removal of consent. This requires the man to have access to a time machine, of course...

As far as drunkeness goes, apart from obvious close-to-paralytic conditions, where's the line? Do we need to breathlise women before they hit the sheets? Could the police run random breath tests in hotel rooms? 'Excuse me sir, this women has blown point oh eight. Your under arrest for rape...'

Anonymous said...

'Excuse me sir, this women has blown point oh eight. Your under arrest for rape...' :D
'Whats that? You have blown point oh nine? In that case, we are also charging you with '#$%^ing under the influence. If I were you I would get a good time machine, sir'

Senor Drunkington said...

Wildly Parenthetical:

"The reason that it's being articulated as if men were the decision-makers is that, weirdly enough, in a rape scenario, it's not the woman's decision to get raped."

I see what you did there. You built the assumption that if anyone is in the wrong in a drunk-sex situation it must be the man by default.

You still haven't addressed how it is any more the man's responsibility than the woman's if two people who are BOTH very drunk to the point of impaired judgment and/or inability to legally consent (but not unconscious or near-unconscious) have sex. On what possible basis do you draw a distinction between the two?

that's mister nora to you, sonny said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
that's mister nora to you, sonny said...

Sorry to be boring here, but I feel the need to make a few points to put some of these concerned minds to rest.

1. Consent is only invalidated by drunkenness if "the person is so affected by alcohol or another drug as to be incapable of freely agreeing." Being "drunk" doesn't necessarily mean you can't consent; it's a matter of degree. If you actively want to have sex with someone else while you're drunk (rather than, for example, being too out of it to express the fact that you don't want sex), it's probably unlikely that you'd be considered "incapable of freely agreeing". Simply having alcohol impaired judgment or reduced inhibitions would not mean you lose the ability to consent.

2. This is why this fear that people have that a drunken but consensual sexual encounter can be turned into a rape by a woman (or man) waking up and regretting it is simply wrong.

3. For a person to be convicted of rape, the prosecution must prove that the alleged offender "intentionally sexually penetrates" another person. That's why it's generally the men who are responsible for rape; part of the very definition of rape involves the offender sexually penetrating another person. However, a woman could rape someone if she penetrated a man's anus with a finger or other object.

4. The prosecution must also prove that the alleged offender was either aware that the complainant was not consenting/might not be consenting, or had given no thought to whether or not the complainant was consenting. In a situation where both parties are drunk, and both actively participate in the sex, it would be difficult to demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt that the alleged offender had the relevant state of mind.

5. A woman who initiated a sexual encounter with a very drunk man who was incapable of freely agreeing to the sexual encounter could be guilty of indecently assaulting him (or rape, if the encounter involved her sexually penetrating him). However, as is the case with male offenders, it would need to be shown that she either knew he wasn't consenting/might not be consenting, or that she didn't give any thought to his consent.

My advice would be to only have sex with people who appear to really want to have sex with you. You know, by either saying "PLEASE ROOT ME" (or similar) or actively participating in the sex and physically encouraging you to keep at it. That way, you probably won't find yourself having sex with someone who is incapable of freely agreeing.

xoxonora

Senor Drunkington said...

To be clear, in this whole drunk-to-the-point-of-inability-to-consent scenario we are talking about here we are NOT talking about forced/coerced sex. The serious question, which is incorrectly being dismissed by some, is why blame should rest with the male in a situation where the element of consent is missing through drunkenness of BOTH parties.

that's mister nora to you, sonny said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
that's mister nora to you, sonny said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

"For a person to be convicted of rape, the prosecution must prove that the alleged offender "intentionally sexually penetrates" another person" Wonderful! So by definition you can only be a rapist if you have a penis?
I guess that explains why women get away with having sex with underage individuals. If I do it I get six years in a cage, if a woman does it she gets a two year suspended sentence (Im a male btw, if you havnt guessed)
Arrrr, makes me feel so equal!

Anonymous said...

Should I get "PLEASE ROOT ME" in writing? Hmmm maybe I should get it notarized just in case :D
God I wish I was gay

that's mister nora to you, sonny said...

Argh sorry about multiple posts. Computer troubles.

As other people have noted, I suspect if both parties are incapable of freely agreeing to sex they would also be incapable of actually having sex.

If it were actually possible to have sex in that kind of scenario, I guess the criminal responsibility of the people involved would really depend on the specific facts of the case, and the awareness of each person of the state of drunkenness the other party was in. Being really drunk doesn't mean you're no longer responsible for thinking about whether the other person is consenting to the sex. That goes for both genderss.

Anonymous said...

"I wonder how all these pro wilfully blind to non-consensual sex men would feel if drunk gay men routinely accidentally raped them"

Well if I followed them home for a cup of milo, started flirting with them and layed down on their bed with my clothes off... I might seriously consider rethinking how I go about my evenings and if there is some way I could prevent such awkward situations from happening again.



How about a radical solution.
If being excessively drunk leads you into being a legal nightmare and causing all sorts of messy cases how bout we outlaw being excessively drunk?

I'm sure it's possible for people to stop after a few bears. It would also be much healthier (cause puking your guts out at 3 am isn't healthy).


Of course this would never work as "it's your body you can do what you want with it" unless it affects someone else. And being stupidly drunk never affected someone else did it?

that's mister nora to you, sonny said...

"So by definition you can only be a rapist if you have a penis?"

Nope, you can only be a rapist if you penetrate another person. Doesn't have to be with a penis.

Also, when it comes to sexual assault of minors, there's a separate crime of "taking part in an act of penetration with a child under the age of 16". A woman who had sex with a young boy could be guilty of that crime because she took part in the act of penetration, even though she didn't actually do the penetrating herself.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous, get back to your own enlightened, gender-equality internets.

I'm pretty sure that most of some of you are rapists.

Anonymous said...

"I wonder how all these pro wilfully blind to non-consensual sex men would feel if drunk gay men routinely accidentally raped them"

Great point!!!!

On the other hand I:

Have never let a gay guy buy me a drink (and yes, they have offered)
Have never rubbed up against a gay guy on a dance floor
Have never stuck my tongue down a gay guys throat
Have never even gone home with a gay guy (even for such a common reason as a 3am Milo drinking session at a complete stranger‘s house)

And what do you know - I HAVE NEVER BEEN RAPED BY A GAY GUY!!! Hard to believe, I know. Girls, I hope you are paying attention. Follow these simple guidelines and you too can avoid being raped by a gay guy.

PS All men are bastards

Anonymous said...

You mean 'most of some of men are bastards'? :D

Anonymous said...

What happens if two people are not drunk, decide to have sex, then both get drunk and have sex, wake up in the morning and both regret having the aforementioned sex.

Are they both victims and both rapists?

Anonymous said...

'Nope, you can only be a rapist if you penetrate another person. Doesn't have to be with a penis'

Im going to get a girl to stick a pencil up my nose just so that I can accuse her of raping me

Anonymous said...

'Are they both victims and both rapists?'

look, its really simple:

penis = rapist
no penis = victim

I hope you are following this

Anonymous said...

What about the case of the organised frame.

Once i did not think it existed, however, now knowing people actually do worse things than frame other people for crimes i am sure there is an element of women and men who plan to get themselves in a situation where some sort of material exchange is required to stop either court action or just gossip. Particularly now that gossip can so easily be spread and in essence this is a severe punishment for a lot of people.

In other words, im going to call you a rapist unless you give me this even though there is no case of rape cause just the damage to your reputation will be enough.

And before anyone tries to use some sort of logic and say, "there are not men or women alive who would do such a thing," then that logic would only lead me to believe that there are no men or women alive who would do worse.

Is it possible that stuff like this above scenario does go on.

I mean lets face it, i have picked up drunk men before, thank god im poor and "i promise not to do it again"

jk:-)

Anonymous said...

What happens if a man or woman slips themselves a mickey during the wine with dinner (presumably prior to the start of actual sex) and after sex has started, say between 30seconds and 10minutes into physical sex, and either the man or woman or both (cause they secretly were both trying to frame the other)get noddy.

ps: what happens also if both parties are alcoholics and they are always drunk?

Anonymous said...

Interesting point. There is another one:
The US military once did a bit of research on how many army rape cases are actually fake. I mean in how many cases it has been proven conclusively that the women involved lied about being raped. The answer? About 40%. They then tried doing a similar survey in the navy. You know what the results were? I don't.... because they made it 'top secret'

Getting an innocent person locked up for up to 20 years should be a serious crime. Isn't false imprisonment a crime? If nothing else it costs us the tax payers up to $100,000 a year to keep someone locked up. That's bad shit. So how were those lying fiends punished you might ask.
Errrrr .... punishment..... what punishment?

Gives you a warm feeling in your tummy, does't it?

Anonymous said...

I reckon just leave it how it is and prescribe a punishment for the accuser, if they get it wrong. Man accuses woman of rape, woman is found not guilty but her reputation is trashed. Woman then gets compensation. Man who messed with her life then has to serve the maximum jail term that she was facing as a rapist.

If the woman is guilty she has to face the jail term.

And vice versa of course!!!!

Anonymous said...

Truthfully Ben, you are the man.

This sort of writing could seriously give you hero status, particularly with women obviously though maybe not so much with men.

I only wish I had thought of it first.

I mean lets face it, men not paying you too much attention is OK anyway, as its women you will be going out to pick up right.....

Anonymous said...

LOL .. thats funny.

YEH MAN, the women he gets now won't have to be drunk

BAHAHAHA

Justin said...

There are a lot of comments about the hazards of going home with drunken girls and engaging in ambiguous consensual sex.

I would just say as a rule. “If a girl is intoxicated, just don't have sex with her”

If a guy is so intoxicated, he cannot make a consensual decision, then he most likely can’t have sex anyway :|

Anonymous said...

Seriously people. Every day of every week in every country drunk people are going home and having sex with each other. Its always happened and always will. These situations are occurring minute by minute right now as we speak. 99.99% of people whether they regret the situation later or not don't cry fowl. (man i was drunk, oh god, chew my arm off, he/she is a pig)Its not gonna change. The only thing that has really changed is technology that now allows us to tell everyone what we did and everyone then to continue telling everyone what happened and then a bunch of people with all differing opinions which don,t really mean shit cause none of us were actually there.

Back to the start ....

Where is the next coffee house or pub where i can poor myself a latte or pull myself a beer and discuss "what might be a sex offence and what may have occurred!"

Anonymous said...

everything will be fine when they make alcohol illegal...

hang on .. no .. id rather make sex illegal

no .. sorry .. having sex while drunk illegal....

oh yeah thats not gonna work ..

that's the same as making sex illegal anyway - only we cant lock everyone up right ..

i mean someone has got to pay to keep one half of the population in jail

Ben Pobjie said...

Well this has been fun, hasn't it?

Anonymous said...

please dont make drinking and sex illegal ...

i pick up that many drunk dudes every weekend for a lay

im only guilty of being called names

but ill sue you if you call me rapist

Anonymous said...

Well done Ben. I've followed your tips and haven't raped anyone. Of course, I haven't had consentual sex either.
There was one woman last night who wanted to have sex, but I told her that she had lost the right to give consent, because she had been drinking. I don't think that she will offer again.

Anonymous said...

your right .. she probably wont offer again

maybe you should buy her a few drinks ..

oh no .. don't do that, you may get arrested for grooming

...i think i had better start getting used to never having sex again

and you all should do the same

ps: it will be interesting to see if men just stop having sex how many women will become homosexual (sorry lesbian p/c)

that will be a battle to watch ..

man i could go all the way with this what with all the equipment out there these days

maggiebloome said...

my god, ben, I'm so sorry about this comment thread. don't worry, it's not you - this always happens when someone mentions rape in any capacity.

My favourite bit is the dudes complaining about the possibility of being drunk enough to accidentally rape someone like their equipment could POSSIBLY be in any way functional if they were sloshed enough not to notice that the woman's not participating. FFS.

Anonymous said...

As a woman, I am offended by the suggestion that a drunk woman can not consent. That is a ridiculous double standard, and very sexist. Even when I've been completely off my face I haven't actually told someone I want to have sex with them unless I have wanted to.

You don't suddenly become retarded after a few drinks. It lowers your inhibitions. If you regret it, you regret it. That isn't rape - that's a bad choice. It's only rape if you don't want it to happen, never consent, and/or if you ask someone to stop and they continue even if you initially consent. Being drunk is a cop out on both sides. For committing rape, and for falsely accusing someone of rape because you regret giving consent.

Anonymous said...

There is a difference between rape and drunken sex you regret.

For those people who are concerned that having drunken sex may lead to rape accusations, this may be mixed up with guilt over drunken sex. Are their false rape accusations - for sure, but are there many many more rapes that go not only unreported but undiscussed - unfortunately, absolutely yes.

But being raped while in a situation where both of you were drunk is still rape - just makes it harder to deal with as there are these layers of guilt.

So these debates don't always help people in the real situation of having to get over their experience of being raped and acknowledging the behaviour that led them to being vulnerable (for me, too much booze). It is still raw even after nearly 20 years.

All I can say is I hope to bring up my son well and if I have a daughter, help her develop reliable friends she can trust, and finally teach them both about the risks of drinking to the point of getting drunk.

By the way, I really liked Ben's seven tips.

Anonymous said...

CAN all of this

I reckon whoever "I THINK" is a rapist should be witch hunted

I see dead peop....rapists

Anonymous said...

Having reviewed the comments to this point, I'm struck by an interesting correlation. There appears to be a striking relationship between still being confused about how not to rape people, having the name 'Anonymous,' making shit arguments, and struggling to construct an english sentence. oh, wait... oh shitings.

Anonymous said...

Question about #1. What if every girl i meet wants to have sex with me?

Anonymous said...

So women get raped by men and it's their fault because apparently accepting a drink from someone means I must want to fuck ,or going home with one guy means you want to fuck everyone else that happens to be there. Men have no responsibility for this because we have to accept they are incapable of not having sex so we must not place ourselves in that situation ... and the conclusion is women should stay at home and behave in public.

Logic dictates that as men are the ones claiming they are uncontrollable sexual beings, they should be forced to stay at home - it's the only way to guarantee the safety of both men and women. Of course, they're only dangerous when wicked women trick them into being so.

Anonymous said...

i hope those footy players are guilty

but then again ...

i am a stkilda fan

Anonymous said...

As someone who had great difficulty getting her friend into a cab after one drink that was spiked - actually, after 1 drink you can indeed be retarded. And no, the drink was not given to her by a stranger.

There appears to be some people that consider accepting a drink = fuck me please. I'm sorry but sex is not a guaranteed right , even if someone goes home with you. If they change their mind you accept that - you don't rape them.

Anonymous said...

my husband and i have sleep sex all the time, sometimes i wake up and hes out to it .. but ready ... if you no what i mean .. so i just jump on board

but then again like most people i just kept raping my husband until he agreed to marry me

Anonymous said...

lol .. and after he agreed to marry you the raping stopped right


damn .. that sounds like my marriage

Anonymous said...

If I picked up a guy and said come home with me, I want to fuck you with a strap on and he agreed, if at the time of penetration he said no I don't want to do that - no one would question that to continue would be rape. Consent to some form of sexual activity isn't consent for all sexual activities. Here's an idea, don't assume you have consent.

Anonymous said...

i imagine that if every person had every molecule of there existence analyzed, somewhere along the line every man and every woman would probably have done something inappropriate sexually in someone else's opinion and if you were put in the "sexual scapegoat spotlight" you would look at yourself and go .. man .. that was nothing

and you would be right

unfortunately you would still be guilty, but only of being put in the spotlight though

Anonymous said...

Your wrong strap on girl.

That is a perfect example of the point being missed.

If a man said yes then and went all the way home with you and then said no he is the idiot.

You would be "hi-fived" and he would be laughed out of existence.

You have made the point of inequality almost better than anyone.

Anonymous said...

But if the strap on girl did continue no one would question that it was rape - it is you have missed the point. People are allowed to change their minds, especially when it comes to sex. That is what people would say to the guy, you changed your mind and she had no right to penetrate you against your will. There would be none of this, 'oh you shouldn't have gone home with her' crap.

Anonymous said...

yeh right .. if in that case you would actually be found guilty strap on girl then you would have a valid point

problem is you would never be found guilty let alone even have a day in court

that should work both ways ..
hey and it is about equality right ..

Anonymous said...

Actually I would expect that to go to court - I am opposed to rape and pro prosecuting it, regardless of which sex has done the raping. It is you who are saying that people should not be prosecuted for rape - not me. Your choice of equality is for men and women not to be prosecuted - my choice of equality is that all rapists should be prosecuted.

Anonymous said...

Yes they would question it was rape.

Whether anyone likes it or not or whether its true or not conditioning is men rape - women don't.

Its changing .. but slower than the changes women have been trying to validly affect for many years.

We are no where near strap on girl ever being found guilty of anything.

Anonymous said...

Go back to your MRA group. Women have been found guilty of raping men with strap-ons. The fact that men can still use, 'oh thought there was consent because she came home with me and then i ignored everything she said afterwards' - can still be said indicates men still feel entitled to sex and feel legitimate in forcing people to have sex with them.

You're right about one thing though, equality is a long way away.

Anonymous said...

if you are in jail and you become someones bitch and they continually have sex with you and you dont want them to but you consent to avoid other forms of harm .. can you then ever prosecute them as a serial rapist

Anonymous said...

and are they gay even when they get out of jail or is there a magical thing that happens to people who leave jail that stops them wanting a bitch on the outside

Anonymous said...

Coerced sex -whether it is in prison, at home, in a nightclub car etc is rape - what part of coerced makes you think consent has been given?

Having gay sex doesn't mean you are gay, just as having straight sex doesn't mean you are straight.

Also, just because it is difficult to prosecute a crime doesn't mean that you can't or that a crime was not committed. Most sexual abuse is not reported until years after the fact, shall we just not prosecute paedophiles because it's just too hard?

Anonymous said...

since when do you spell pedophile with an "a"

Anonymous said...

this thread is just funny

Anonymous said...

Since learning how to spell English properly

Anonymous said...

It makes you wonder how much rape goes on in society and never reaches the light of day.

After reading a lot of this and seeing rape isn't just the violent abuse imagery we see in the movies i wonder if technically some ridiculous amount of women and men, married and unmarried should actually be prosecuted.

Anonymous said...

could be a population problem solver

Anonymous said...

scenario:1

Married couple, she wants sex but he doesn't .. she begs .. he agrees .. they have sex.

5 years later .. nasty divorce

He prosecutes her for rape as she coerced him into sex in similar fashion many times.

Yes he did say yes .. but she coerced him .. she is a rapist right?

She is found guilty and gets sentenced to 14 years as not only is she a rapist .. but a serial rapist right?


scenario2:no nasty divorce

man and woman live happily ever after.

Is this scenario at all possible?

Anonymous said...

Unfortunately I would say this scenario is possible, though not a widespread occurrence and rarely would the man be the protagonist anyway in such accusations.

Anonymous said...

for the idiot that made the analogy about the strap on...

here's a recent case from WA.

http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/stripper-linda-naggs-cleared-of-rape-at-bucks-party/comments-e6frg12c-1225758218172

a stripper penetrated a man with a strap on, even though he specifically denied consent for this to happen.

verdict?

not guilty as it was "a joke that went too far" and Ms Naggs' barrister Paul Higham told jurors "if there had been penetration it was an accident.

"This is the case of the accidental rape, if there was one,"

Anonymous said...

yeh .. thats the real problem.

strap on girl should get done for rape .. happy to admit that.

strap on girl wont get done for rape
.. oh well .. keep on living

role reversal

strap on guy .. see you when you get out .. after you have been violently raped and abused during your "however many years stint" in jail, if you actually get out alive

are you happy to admit that?

Anonymous said...

Under 0.5


or


Under Arrest

Anonymous said...

I am actually starting to compile a list .. well the ones i can remember .. of woman who picked me up when I was drunk.

If anyone else wants to do the same email me at:

whataloadofcrap@dribblemail.com.au

Lets get some sort of criminal action going and see how many people we can get into the court system.

I know ill regret it after wards, like so much of the coerced sex iv'e had, but i have a completely irrelevant point to make here o.k.

Anonymous said...

I think this whole point of drunken sex is going to take a back seat soon, as most sensible people will just say, my mum and dad had drunk sex, i had drunk sex and my kids will end up having drunk sex, to the new problem of "mummy and daddy's little prince and princess mentality" which is already rearing its ugly head.

Be very careful all you single and not so single people who are out there picking up in pubs every weekend. The ID available these days with technology advancements is, I have no doubt being used enormously.

It wont be long before unsuspecting "guys and girls" will discover "when they are hit with a lawsuit and/or blackmail payment" that the person they just slept with is actually not who they and their ID said they were.

Its amazing what some people will do for attention these days and if you doubt that there are a lot of people out there who do this, best get into your submarine and head back down to the depths.

Anonymous said...

what planet are you living on thats already happening

just add it to the drunken bullshit .. lol

Anonymous said...

its all bullshit

go out

pick up

get drunk

have sex

enjoy life

same as always

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 267   Newer› Newest»