ext_39544 ([identity profile] wight1984.livejournal.com) wrote in [community profile] politicartoons 2013-04-03 09:50 pm (UTC)

"It can also be spun however you want. You are spinning it now adding and then dropping elements to fit your narrative. I use you own words and I am spinning somehow."

As I just explained, it's a hypothetical scenario. We can alter it it to fit whatever point we are attempting to illustrate.

Trying to put a spin on real life situations, but hiding some facts and drawing attention to others, is deceptive because they really happened. Hypothetical scenarios are not real; there is no foul play in changing the 'facts' of a hypothetical scenario around.

The ethics of a 'revenge fuck' are not relevant to the ethics of having sex with the severely intoxicated. If the former was becoming a distraction, it's best to drop it so we can turn our focus on the actual topic.

"Adults are presumed competent to consent. "

Unless drunk.

As I previously mentioned, it is illegal to have sex with a severely intoxicated person in the UK. They are not legally able to consent, and it is considered (by law) to be rape.

"People have drunk sex all the time. Some regret this decision. It doesn't mean that it is rape."

If I was trying to argue 'all drunk sex is rape' then I wouldn't have taken the time to craft an example about someone who was severely intoxicated.

Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting