Female college student suspended for having sex with drunk male student

[7437]

In my time in the military, I never once heard someone say this.

I did, but i worked at legal for a little while

 

[Trotsky]

What exactly was frivolous? He was drunk was he not? According to school rules he was unable to consent. Seems pretty obvious. It also highlights the absurdity of the rule at the same time

I wasn't speaking about the facts of this case. I was speaking about @alanb 's call to arms afterwards, i.e. fighting back within the system. It works on the presumption that a lot of men are getting impermissibly punished for sex that the woman-accuser objectively wanted to have and therefore men should engage in sex that they want and then frivolously claim sexual assault even though they would have pursued the interaction regardless because their having had a tip of alcohol automatically breaks the consent. That's a ludicrous extension of the logic.

However, being drunk does not automatically destroy consent, particularly is you are making the affirmative decision to drink, and consensually engage in intercourse, just so that you can get revenge on someone for what you suspect could be abuse of consent guidelines.

While I agree that social norms and legal rules on consent are frustratingly blurry and hard to encode into black letter law without being absurdly overbroad or underinclusive, the way to "fight back" against the system isn't to knowingly file frivolous claims.

 

[Judge]

I am glad men are starting to learn to work within the system to fight back. The reality is progressives have forced this system onto us and it is impractical to work from outside the system. Now if a man has been violated by a women he should take action just like this fellow did. Through the regulatory process. All I am saying is the law has been enforced against men in this situation many times so if women start getting in trouble for in reality is consensual conduct maybe this epidemic of men being target will slow down .
Maybe if women learn that they to can be penalized for alleged sexual misconduct they will stop filing frivolous cases like this women did.


https://reason.com/blog/2018/05/11/cincinnati-rape-title-ix-doe-roe-sex

How is this fighting back exactly? This is just so-called men being bitch mades. It is the job of REAL MEN to get rid of this sissy ass leftist shit and not join up.

 

[HunterAcosta]

not even close....

for example in the Military you are flat out told not to engage with a women once they have anything to drink....

yet that has never so far once in US military history been applied the other way....

The pt of these things is to prevent guys from feeding girls alcohol specifically for that purpose, but if you're both happening to be drinking....you both can't consent then right by their argument?

so you're both rapists?

it's ridiculous

I think most people, right now in society, have sex w/ someone the first time in a situation that generally involves alcohol be it a drink on a date or at a bar.

And never in the US military history has that rule been followed to a tee. Ive known plenty of military guys who fuck drunk slags while barely or not at all, being drunk themselves. Lets be honest. Rules are just shit written on paper by dudes in suits. They often don't pertain to the way the real world works and how people act in real life scenarios. Young, testosterone fuled men are gonna slang it if its thrown there way. Morals are either in them or not, Military Moral code not withstanding.

 

[Lord Coke]

I wasn't speaking about the facts of this case. I was speaking about @alanb 's call to arms afterwards, i.e. fighting back within the system. It works on the presumption that a lot of men are getting impermissibly punished for sex that the woman-accuser objectively wanted to have and therefore men should engage in sex that they want and then frivolously claim sexual assault even though they would have pursued the interaction regardless because their having had a tip of alcohol automatically breaks the consent. That's a ludicrous extension of the logic.

However, being drunk does not automatically destroy consent, particularly is you are making the affirmative decision to drink, and consensually engage in intercourse, just so that you can get revenge on someone for what you suspect could be abuse of consent guidelines.

While I agree that social norms and legal rules on consent are frustratingly blurry and hard to encode into black letter law without being absurdly overbroad or underinclusive, the way to "fight back" against the system isn't to knowingly file frivolous claims.

What I am saying is that historically if a man was drunk and a women came on to you you put up with it even if you were drunk.. I've been in that position myself. In the case of a women that has filed a complaint on your buddy for the exact same behavior she is engaged in with you then I say good enough for the gander good enough for the goose.

 

[bushman505]

I don't know about you guys, but I would say, about 95 percent of my sexual encounters/experiences have all involved alcohol.

Not saying that I or she was blacked out drunk and passed out, but we were certainly inebriated .

Rapist.

 

[JamesRussler]

k

 

[Seano]

I don't know about you guys, but I would say, about 95 percent of my sexual encounters/experiences have all involved alcohol.
.

Literally no one is surprised by that.

 

[PolishHeadlock]

All I know is the dude is gay

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

I wasn't speaking about the facts of this case. I was speaking about @alanb 's call to arms afterwards, i.e. fighting back within the system. It works on the presumption that a lot of men are getting impermissibly punished for sex that the woman-accuser objectively wanted to have and therefore men should engage in sex that they want and then frivolously claim sexual assault even though they would have pursued the interaction regardless because their having had a tip of alcohol automatically breaks the consent. That's a ludicrous extension of the logic.

However, being drunk does not automatically destroy consent, particularly is you are making the affirmative decision to drink, and consensually engage in intercourse, just so that you can get revenge on someone for what you suspect could be abuse of consent guidelines.

While I agree that social norms and legal rules on consent are frustratingly blurry and hard to encode into black letter law without being absurdly overbroad or underinclusive, the way to "fight back" against the system isn't to knowingly file frivolous claims.

If there is a rule saying you can't consent while drunk then the rule must be followed or done away with.

Even if somebody planned to give consent only to have it undermined by getting drunk, the rule applies. Somebody can either give consent when intoxicated or they can't. How then can a suit be frivolous?

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

How is this fighting back exactly? This is just so-called men being bitch mades. It is the job of REAL MEN to get rid of this sissy ass leftist shit and not join up.

I think this is the best way to fight it. They may see their craziness for what it is if you rub their nose in it.

 

[BassAckwards]

lol chick got #meetoo'd

 

[vengeful]

If there is a rule saying you can't consent while drunk then the rule must be followed or done away with.

Even if somebody planned to give consent only to have it undermined by getting drunk, the rule applies. Somebody can either give consent when intoxicated or they can't. How then can a suit be frivolous?

It's frivolous if he intentionally tried to get drunk with this chick just to have sex then claim he was raped....if he planned all of that then he was really consenting to it in a roundabout way if you really think about it.

If she really did file a suit like that against his friend.....then there's no way in hell a guy would try that with this chick knowing what she could do to him unless he wanted to get revenge on her.

 

[HereticBD]

All I know is the dude is gay

Dude who was drunk and feels violated = Pussy

Girl who was drunk and feels violated = Rape victim

Not that I'm strongly disagreeing with the assessment that the dude complaining is being ridiculous, but this is what happens when laws and rules are created that are this fucking stupid.

Times like these make me glad that I'm not young and partying it up anymore.

 

[Liquid Smoke]

Who's the first guy that will bang a sober fattie while drunk, and then claim they didn't consent the next day?

If prime Bill Clinton had this weapon at his disposal, our great nation would have been spared the cost of a trial.

 

[PolishHeadlock]

Dude who was drunk and feels violated = Pussy

Girl who was drunk and feels violated = Rape victim

Not that I'm strongly disagreeing with the assessment that the dude complaining is being ridiculous, but this is what happens when laws and rules are created that are this fucking stupid.

Times like these make me glad that I'm not young and partying it up anymore.

Ok

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

It's frivolous if he intentionally tried to get drunk with this chick just to have sex then claim he was raped....if he planned all of that then he was really consenting to it in a roundabout way if you really think about it.

Not true. First of all he never gave the other participant consent when he was sober. Also a lot can change between that time and getting drunk.

It also doesn't change the fact that, according to the rules, you cannot consent while intoxicated.

If you upfront told somebody we are gonna have sex tonight and then get drunk and try to make a claim, then that'd be a little more like what you are suggesting.

 

[Judge]

Dude who was drunk and feels violated = Pussy

Truer words were never spoken. Truer words they are verboten.

Rapist.

Grapist!

 

[floivanus]

just for clarification, i'm not implying people should soberly ply women w/ alcohol to try and bed them, that's ridiculous and should be illegal and treated as a severe sex crime.....

I have a problem w/ the 'if you are drinking you can't consent' modern argument, as it pretty much universally only applies to women. If you're both drunk, neither can consent, right? so why would a guy be charged, and not the woman?

This is literally the only situation in history I've ever come across that this has happened in, which is why many probably thought it was a troll job

Who's the first guy that will bang a sober fattie while drunk, and then claim they didn't consent the next day?

Trailblazing

If you can’t consent to sex while drunk, then you cannot in anyway be blamed for driving while drunk. We must prosecute all relatives, spouses, friends and drink dispensers for allowing drunk driving.


Of course, I’m not saying passes out in the floor drunk, I’m saying “somewhat inebriated” drunk. Let’s call it two past the legal limit

 

[lilelvis]

Fucking is fun

Edit: Fucking used to be fun.