Girls - don't get drunk and complain about not getting a rape conviction

SwingsitlikeHogan

Major Champion
Joined
Jul 24, 2012
Messages
35,059
Visit site
Kind of obvious that if a lass get blind drunk and in blackout and gets raped then she isn't going to remember much about what happened. And if she doesn't remember much about what happened then what is she going to tell a jury that will enable them to convict the accused.

So why are women's rape groups up in arms over a judge stating this all too obvious fact - girls - don't get drunk to blackout. It really isn't a good idea. Same applies to blokes of course.
 
Kind of obvious that if a lass get blind drunk and in blackout and gets raped then she isn't going to remember much about what happened. And if she doesn't remember much about what happened then what is she going to tell a jury that will enable them to convict the accused.

So why are women's rape groups up in arms over a judge stating this all too obvious fact - girls - don't get drunk to blackout. It really isn't a good idea. Same applies to blokes of course.


(I swear I'm not following you around teh forum this afternoon, it just seems that way!)

I would think that they are up in arms because it could come across (I haven't seen the quote) as if it blames the drunk person, whereas if the person is blind drunk, they still shouldn't be raped. The onus should completely, 100%, without fail, be on the person doing the raping.
 
I think the thinking goes that if the girl is too drunk to remember then she's too drunk to consent. How a jury can ever decide that is beyond me and it's no wonder so many people accused get found not guilty. While not saying any girl who gets helplessly drunk is "asking for it" they have to take some blame, especially when the male is probably in a similar state and free of inhibitions.
 
I worked in a Crown Court for 3 years and heard a large number of Sexual Assault and Rape cases. It is very hard to get a conviction in these cases as it is normally one persons word against the others and if the "victim" says that she was drunk and cannot really remember what happened on the night then the jury will not convict. I also seen a number of cases where the woman admitted she lied to police after walking up sober and regretting her actions when drunk.
 
Let's see how far we can get into this thread before some mostly elderly male posters, commenting on the plight of women, degenerates into every day misogyny. I give it 9 posts, if indeed it hasn't already. And it will be closed by thread 27.
 
Last edited:
Let's see how far we can get into this thread before some mostly elderly male posters, commenting on the plight of women, degenerates into every day misogyny. I give it 9 posts, if indeed it hasn't already. And it will be closed by thread 27.

Not sure that you do your objective any good by selecting a target age group fro a stereo-typical dig. Especially when the phenomena of drunkenness and sex could be said to be more related to younger groups; and, sadly and unfortunately binge drinking seems to be increasing at a higher rate among young girls.
 
Not sure that you do your objective any good by selecting a target age group fro a stereo-typical dig. Especially when the phenomena of drunkenness and sex could be said to be more related to younger groups; and, sadly and unfortunately binge drinking seems to be increasing at a higher rate among young girls.

No but it satisfies his Guardianista conscience.

Yet again someone thinks their prejudices are OK whilst others are to be condemned.

Personally I think women do have a duty of care to themselves which it is difficult to fulfil if drunk.

However, there is a greater duty upon the man not to take advantage of that woman's inebriated state. Just because she may be too drunk to say "No" or "Stop" does not mean she has given implied consent.
 
Let's see how far we can get into this thread before some mostly elderly male posters, commenting on the plight of women, degenerates into every day misogyny. I give it 9 posts, if indeed it hasn't already. And it will be closed by thread 27.

We often have differing views and that's healthy enough where debate takes priority over insult. Unfortunately this post of yours is not worthy of your intelligence.
 
While not saying any girl who gets helplessly drunk is "asking for it" they have to take some blame, especially when the male is probably in a similar state and free of inhibitions.

So if a women is drunk, they have to take some of the blame for a drunk man raping them?

Please repeat that a few times to yourself, outloud. I would love for you to hear how ridiculous that sounds.

if you got too drunk to stand, and someone stabbed you, how much of that is your fault, or how much of that is the fault of the person stabbing you?
 
I couldn't disagree more. Women have a duty to do what they like. They shouldn't have to worry about getting raped while drunk.

No woman/man should ever be raped that goes without saying. But they should not get so drunk as not to be awear of their actions. But no one should take advantage if a person that drunk. But unfortunately there are many nasty people out there. So it's dangerous to put themselves in that position.

Don't think I've made much sense here?
 
I couldn't disagree more. Women have a duty to do what they like. They shouldn't have to worry about getting raped while drunk.

Please repeat that a few times and see how ridiculous it sounds.

We all have a responsibility for our own actions. If that same woman stepped in front of the proverbial bus is she not at least partly culpable. Why needlessly place yourself in danger.

If you read my comment in full you will see that I place the emphasis upon the man not assuming that in her drunken state she is giving any sort of consent.

To state that women (or anyone) have a duty to do what they like is, I am afraid, indicative of the attitude within society of everyone knowing their rights but not being prepared to accept their responsibilities.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Problem here is that people should be able to go out drinking and be safe in the knowledge that they will not get taken advantage of. Back to the real world though, there are some nasty unscrupulous people out there that will take advantage of a woman in a drunken state. Right or wrong that is how the world is and it is the persons responsibility to not put themself in a position that something could happen to them.
 
I might have read the thing differently or some might be missing the point in their velocity to reach the moral high ground but...
The issue is the drinking part. To convict in a court of law there must be no doubt of the guilt. Alcohol affects the mind and in particular the memory. Too much alcohol and the woman or man (lets just say victim as it can swing both ways), the victim has more likihood of not remembering fully, or at all, what happned and with who. This then presents the problem of reasonable doubt for a judge or jury.
The victim, by dint of being blind drunk, becomes unreliable.

So what I took from it was that people need to be aware that being that drunk can diminish the possibility of a conviction. That is above and beyond the fact that is should not happen, ever.
This can be a cruel world we live in and unfortunately crimes like rape do happen, my view is that people should be protecting themselves (and their health) by not risking being on that position and the problems that can be a symptom of more alcohol then their system and mind can handle.

Thats what I took anyway.
 
So if a women is drunk, they have to take some of the blame for a drunk man raping them?

Please repeat that a few times to yourself, outloud. I would love for you to hear how ridiculous that sounds.

if you got too drunk to stand, and someone stabbed you, how much of that is your fault, or how much of that is the fault of the person stabbing you?

I don't think it is right to assign any 'blame' to a woman if she raped even if she is blind drunk; however you might blame her for the accused being acquitted as a result of her being unable to remember anything that might help the jury convict. On this basis the judges point was making a legal point not a morality point.
 
A lot of young ladies drink far too much these days and get blind drunk and things happen , Its not right that they get get rape , lets get that clear so there is no misunderstanding . If you put yourself in a position that endangers your well being then you have made what happen to you possible . if you play with fire you will get burn , if you gamble that nothing will happen then your gamble will go wrong one day . its like everythink in life , if you dont put yourself in a certain position then your chances are reduced . many a time going home late from work i have come across young lady in a bad way , more then once i have got their numbers and rang their homes and waited nearby till their parents came and pick them up , there is good karma in that , My mum is 88 and i move my business to a new location the other week and she when to buy the newspaper and got lost , we could not find her , but a taxi driver saw her and knew she was my mum and brought her back , 2nd time it was a young lady , she has got use to the new place now but its nice to know there are also many decent folk about
 
So if a women is drunk, they have to take some of the blame for a drunk man raping them?

Slight change to the scenario.... if (in this instance) a woman was drunk and stepped out in front of a car then should she take some of the blame?

and back to the original scenario..

If you get drunk and prior to that you took NO steps to make sure you were going to be safe once completely blotto out of your skull should you NOT accept some of the blame?


added: my point being that if you get blind drunk then you should accept (some) responsibility no matter what the outcome, even if you end up being the victim of a car accident or an assault. That doesn't mean that the other party is necessarily innocent of course.
 
Last edited:
Slight change to the scenario.... if (in this instance) a woman was drunk and stepped out in front of a car then should she take some of the blame?

and back to the original scenario..

If you get drunk and prior to that you took NO steps to make sure you were going to be safe once completely blotto out of your skull should you NOT accept some of the blame?


added: my point being that if you get blind drunk then you should accept (some) responsibility no matter what the outcome, even if you end up being the victim of a car accident or an assault. That doesn't mean that the other party is necessarily innocent of course.

Got it!

I think.
 
Got it!

I think.

Seems to me that most girls these days try and watch out for each other getting pissed and so to ensure they stay safe. But too many folk just get hammered these days either oblivious or not particularly caring about any risk or consequences. Doesn't say a lass is 'asking for it' but might well lose her some sympathy and compassion when she is unable to help get the accused convicted.
 
I notice all too often girls putting themself in a position for something bad to happen. They stand at the bar taking drinks from someone all night and then on the way home tries to get rid of them. Most men will say ok, chalk it up to experience and go home. But some are not like that and will not take no for an answer. As wrong as it is, that is how it is in today's world. Now comes the next problem, when the girl goes to the police it is her word against his. He has multiple witnesses to say the where drinking together and she was quite drunk when they left arm in arm together, she has no witnesses saying that he assaulted her, hence he gets away with it.

bottom line is if you put yourself in harms way then there is a risk something will happen to you.
 
Top