# Can women drink and have sex?



## Centurions (Jan 31, 2013)

Greetings!

So, since when did women not want to go to a club, dance, drink like crazy, and find some sexy man to fvvck her good? I've seen this weird attitude from some women in other threads here talk like, somehow, if a woman's been drinking, OMG!--you shouldn't fvvck her! She somehow can't consent!

I'm sorry, fellas. I've seen far too many women in clubs and hotels, especially with Marines, that scream *consent*!! Lol. Dancing, getting freaky, going to hotels, listening to the women scream and laugh, watching them get crazy and start fvvcking like rabbits, every weekend, all night long, and into the next day. Drunk women say "yes" all the damned time. It's *easy* for a man to simply move on if a woman isn't hungry and eager.

It's been awhile since I was at a club. Has this changed?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

If you're clubbing, you might want to start carrying a portable breathalyzer. Not for your drive home, but for with whom your driving.


----------



## TBT (Dec 20, 2011)

It's been a long while since I've been to a club myself,but I assume its the same now as it was back then. The majority of women that I've met don't drink to get drunk and have sex.


----------



## kag123 (Feb 6, 2012)

TBT said:


> It's been a long while since I've been to a club myself,but I assume its the same now as it was back then. The majority of women that I've met don't drink to get drunk and have sex.


Really?

Because I got the shock of my lifetime when I started college, going to the clubs and finding out how many girls went specifically to go home with some random guy. I really didn't think it was common till I started finding that pretty much none of the girls I started the night with were coming home the way they got there.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

Centurions said:


> Greetings!
> 
> So, since when did women not want to go to a club, dance, drink like crazy, and find some sexy man to fvvck her good? I've seen this weird attitude from some women in other threads here talk like, somehow, if a woman's been drinking, OMG!--you shouldn't fvvck her! She somehow can't consent!
> 
> ...


Yes, they can...
But it's rape.


----------



## doobie (Apr 15, 2014)

I haven't been out clubbing in a long time - not really my scene. However, I have (in the past) taken guys home with me for no strings sex - as long as you're careful and use a condom, I can't see that there's anything wrong with it. I will state that I'm not very good at drinking and can get quite tipsy on just two drinks. If you do decide to do this sort of thing, it's probably best to stay reasonably sober. One of the guys that impressed me the most was a really young, good looking guy. He'd been chasing me for several weeks and we both knew that a sexual encounter was on the cards. The night it happened I was a little drunk and as we were about to really get down to business, he pulled back, looked me in the eye and asked "Are you sure you want to do this - we can stop right now if you want?" Although he was several years younger than me (and also a little drunk), he had the respect for me and the control over himself to stop and ask the question. I think this is a great habit for men to adopt if casual sex is on the cards in this way. As a footnote to this story, we went on to have a casual relationship that lasted a few months that we both enjoyed. When we see each other nowadays (years later), there's always a little twinkle in his eye and there's an unspoken mutual respect and affection which I find really cool.


----------



## TBT (Dec 20, 2011)

kag123 said:


> Really?
> 
> Because I got the shock of my lifetime when I started college, going to the clubs and finding out how many girls went specifically to go home with some random guy. I really didn't think it was common till I started finding that pretty much none of the girls I started the night with were coming home the way they got there.


As I said,it's been a long time since I've been to a club. Just curious,but as you said you were shocked,do you believe a majority of women would feel that way,and not just exclusively to college life.


----------



## NotEasy (Apr 19, 2015)

Technically, yes they can have sex.

Your real question should be: Can they press rape charges later?


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

NotEasy said:


> Technically, yes they can have sex.
> 
> Your real question should be: Can they press rape charges later?


I can't imagine that would even be a question. Of course they can.


----------



## gouge_away (Apr 7, 2015)

The stuff that comes out of a good girls mouth during drunk sex.... Just record it.... Case dismissed....


----------



## NotEasy (Apr 19, 2015)

technovelist said:


> I can't imagine that would even be a question. Of course they can.


Oh, you answered the question and made it too easy for the OP.

Next 2 questions: 
What is the probability she will press charges?
Do you like Russian roulette?

I don't think the two probabilities are the same, but this seems to be where the legal framework is heading, if it wasn't already there.


----------



## NotEasy (Apr 19, 2015)

gouge_away said:


> The stuff that comes out of a good girls mouth during drunk sex.... Just record it.... Case dismissed....


I am not a lawyer or policeman, so I don't know court cases or investigations. And I am Australian, while I guess the OP is American. I only do vague arguements, more around ethics and probabilities.
I fear affirmative consent and her drunken state may trump any recording.
I think the recording may not say what you would like. Could anyone clearly decide in the heat of the moment and then stop?
Might the recording be used to show pre-meditation on his part? Which might result in a stronger charge. Or maybe it would be an extra charge as an illegal recording perhaps.
Or maybe the charge is for child support, in her drunken and excited state she lied that she was on the pill, non-fertile time of month, whatever.
But my main issue is how many times do you want police knocking on your door?


----------



## Mrs.Submission (Aug 16, 2015)

I can't see how anyone can truly consent to sex if they are drunk or high.

That said, I know that some women will try to press rape charges if they regret sleeping with a man. 

I have a very loose cousin. She went to the Dominican Republic and slept with three men in one week. There an extra two who tagged teamed her when she was very drunk, but refers to that as rape because she only wanted to sleep with one of them. When my cousin told me this, I told her that she needs to get tested for STD's. She responded that she remembers telling them to wear condoms, which led me to think that perhaps the sex was consensual after all. 

I had my fun when I was single but I never even slept with three men in three months let alone a week. I think that's incredibly gross.


----------



## MountainRunner (Dec 30, 2014)

I was a bouncer at a VERY popular rock n' roll nightclub in the SF East Bay back in the eighties....The stories I could tell you.


----------



## kag123 (Feb 6, 2012)

TBT said:


> As I said,it's been a long time since I've been to a club. Just curious,but as you said you were shocked,do you believe a majority of women would feel that way,and not just exclusively to college life.


It didn't seem like many other girls in college were "shocked", it seemed common for a lot of girls from all walks of life to go home with a random guy without a care in the world. No judgment here towards those that did it, BTW. I just never did. 

I am only child and grew up with an ultra protective father who drilled into my head from a young age all of the dangers lurking for a young girl/woman. So my constant thought was about avoiding being mugged or murdered or raped. Getting into the car with someone I didn't know to go to an undisclosed address scared the sh!t out of me, so I never did it. Likewise I got in quite a few very heated arguments with roommates over insisting they not bring random guys from the bar into our house for one night stands - never won that battle, but went to sleep many nights clutching a knife under my pillow and padlocking my bedroom door! 

Nothing terrible ever really happened. I was just overboard with the worst case scenarios in my head at all times.

I think most women are used to having those borderline experiences where someone is a little too forceful with you or tries to get away with something that you don't want. I've had many, and learned quickly how to assert myself when it was needed.

Worst thing that happened at a "club" - I was assaulted in a parking lot once when I left (alone) to go home > the girls I had come with all left with random guys. The guy that I turned down in the bar decided to follow me when I walked out of the place (without me knowing) and tried to coerce me to go home with him by blocking me from getting to my car. It escalated and he tried to force me into a vehicle, he was drunk and uncoordinated luckily. I kneed him in the balls and pushed him into an alley (he wasn't hurt badly, just too drunk to retaliate) and I ran to my car and sped away. Never saw him again. 

The idea of casual sex never seemed bad to me, it was more that I could never get past all of the scenarios listed above to ever let it happen. I figured I was just a prude.


----------



## AliceA (Jul 29, 2010)

Not sure what the point is here. There'll be drunk people right now having sex, probably lots of them. I'm drinking right now, and I'm pretty sure will be having sex later.

If there is a specific law you are referring to (and I don't know what country you are in) that says a person cannot give consent when intoxicated, then I'm pretty sure it wouldn't specify that only women can not give consent, but would be a law that protects both sexes.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

breeze said:


> Not sure what the point is here. There'll be drunk people right now having sex, probably lots of them. I'm drinking right now, and I'm pretty sure will be having sex later.
> 
> If there is a specific law you are referring to (and I don't know what country you are in) that says a person cannot give consent when intoxicated, then I'm pretty sure it wouldn't specify that only women can not give consent, but would be a law that protects both sexes.


In the USA, as far as I know, the law is applied as follows:

If a man and a woman are both drunk, it's rape. If the woman is drunk and the man isn't, it's rape. If the man is drunk and the woman isn't drunk, it isn't rape (unless it is *actual* forcible rape, of course). 

Theoretically it may be sex-neutral but in practice it isn't.


----------



## Mrs.Submission (Aug 16, 2015)

technovelist said:


> In the USA, as far as I know, the law is applied as follows:
> 
> If a man and a woman are both drunk, it's rape. If the woman is drunk and the man isn't, it's rape.* If the man is drunk and the woman isn't drunk, it isn't rape (unless it is actual forcible rape, of course). *
> 
> Theoretically it may be sex-neutral but in practice it isn't.


This bothers me because if a drunk woman cannot consent to sex, a drunk man cannot do the same either. 

I once read an article which spoke of men being raped by obese women while drunk; the idea was that men will sleep with women whom they would normally deem unattractive because the men are intoxicated and the women take advantage of that. 

If we truly lived in an equitable world, men would be able to press rape charges against women and be taken seriously.


----------



## LainyLove22 (Aug 22, 2015)

Nothing at all wrong with tipsy sex but if a woman is flat out drunk and passes out ...... having sex with her could be deemed as rape since it wont be with her consent !?

A few glasses or even a bottle where you have that nice buzz and nothing feels wrong ...... is a good feeling and that's before the sex :smile2:


----------



## thefam (Sep 9, 2014)

Isn't there an elephant in the room in these drunk women getting raped because they were too drunk to say yes or no situations? Does no one think young women should be advised not to go out and get so pissy drunk that they can't make a decision on their own behalf?


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

Mrs.Submission said:


> This bothers me because if a drunk woman cannot consent to sex, a drunk man cannot do the same either.
> 
> I once read an article which spoke of men being raped by obese women while drunk; the idea was that men will sleep with women whom they would normally deem unattractive because the men are intoxicated and the women take advantage of that.
> 
> *If we truly lived in an equitable world*, men would be able to press rape charges against women and be taken seriously.


Yes, but unfortunately we don't live in an equitable world.
And even more unfortunately, many people don't want us to.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

thefam said:


> Isn't there an elephant in the room in these drunk women getting raped because they were too drunk to say yes or no situations? Does no one think young women should be taught not to go out and get so pissy drunk that they can't make a decision on their own behalf?


Yes, some people think that; I'm one of them.
Other people think that is misogyny.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

Mrs.Submission said:


> If we truly lived in an equitable world, men would be able to press rape charges against women and be taken seriously.


Men DO press rape charges against women. Unfortunately the social stigma associated with doing so prevents many men from reporting incidents like these. Sadly, the men who DO press rape charges tend to get ridiculed by _other men_ and become the butt of jokes. I think we'll start seeing more support among men for this sort of thing when the socially acceptable standard for "being a man" goes from "have sex with as many women as possible" or to "it's okay to be choosy and have low numbers". My 2 cents


----------



## Mrs.Submission (Aug 16, 2015)

technovelist said:


> Yes, some people think that; I'm one of them.
> Other people think that is misogyny.


There's nothing misogynistic about women taking responsibility for their actions just like men need to. 

I will never blame a woman for being raped while she is drunk. Rape is never the victim's fault. What I will blame anyone for is willingly becoming so drunk that they are extremely vulnerable.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

Mrs.Submission said:


> There's nothing misogynistic about women taking responsibility for their actions just like men need to.
> 
> I will never blame a woman for being raped while she is drunk. Rape is never the victim's fault. What I will blame anyone for is willingly becoming so drunk that they are extremely vulnerable.


No, of course that is not misogynistic, in reality.

But unfortunately there are people who refer to any attempt to suggest that women should take responsibility for their actions as "misogyny", at least when that suggestion is made by a man.

However, those people don't know how to respond when a *woman* makes that same suggestion of responsibility for women, which is why it is important that women do so.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

Lila said:


> Men DO press rape charges against women. Unfortunately the social stigma associated with doing so prevents many men from reporting incidents like these. Sadly, the men who DO press rape charges tend to get ridiculed by _other men_ and become the butt of jokes. * I think we'll start seeing more support among men for this sort of thing when the socially acceptable standard for "being a man" goes from "have sex with as many women as possible" or to "it's okay to be choosy and have low numbers".* My 2 cents


I'm sure *that* will happen... right after I'm elected President. >


----------



## Mrs.Submission (Aug 16, 2015)

technovelist said:


> No, of course that is not misogynistic, in reality.
> 
> But unfortunately there are people who refer to any attempt to suggest that women should take responsibility for their actions as "misogyny", at least when that suggestion is made by a man.
> 
> However, those people don't know how to respond when a *woman* makes that same suggestion of responsibility for women, which is why it is important that women do so.


The people you are speaking of would admonish me for "taking the side of the oppressor" and being "anti woman". 

Rights come with responsibilities.


----------



## Runs like Dog (Feb 25, 2011)

5,000 years of recorded human history isn't wrong.


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

As a "girl" I can say that I have gone out specifically to have a few drinks and enjoy the companionship of an attractive man who understands things like leaving before morning and just because we hooked up doesn't mean I want to date him or even see him again.

Hell, I don't think I know any single women who don't deliberately go out every so often for the express purpose of getting drunk and getting laid. 

My guess is the kind of chick that talks about "affirmative consent" isn't the same kind of chick you meet at the clubs.


----------



## Hardtohandle (Jan 10, 2013)

In NYS its about consent or lack of consent..

So being drunk doesn't mean lack of consent.. The victim would have to paint a picture that she OR he could not give consent.. 

The clubbing scene all depends on your age I think as well. Me going into a club with 20 year olds is just gonna look creepy, no matter how sexy I think I look.. Just not for me either..

I have to say going out with the GF clubbing with an older crowd in there late 30s and 40s.. I usually see couples going in, but I don't see single people hooking up.. I might be missing it, but I just notice the same guys coming in alone and leaving alone.. 

Oddly enough I think I have a better chance to score with my GF being there and being solo.. I truly do think it's about having something that someone else has.. The more I go to the same night club with the GF the more woman look because at least I think they see me as a steady guy in a stable relationship.. If I am making any sense here..


----------



## Hardtohandle (Jan 10, 2013)

MJJEAN said:


> As a "girl" I can say that I have gone out specifically to have a few drinks and enjoy the companionship of an attractive man who understands things like leaving before morning and just because we hooked up doesn't mean I want to date him or even see him again.
> 
> Hell, I don't think I know any single women who don't deliberately go out every so often for the express purpose of getting drunk and getting laid.
> 
> My guess is the kind of chick that talks about "affirmative consent" isn't the same kind of chick you meet at the clubs.


As hot as this sounds..
It bothers me that my GF might have thought that at some point in time.. I just don't want to believe the GF would do that.. But I also know she might have before me.. 

I'm immature that way.. I know I need to grow up a bit even at 48..


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

Hardtohandle said:


> In NYS its about consent or lack of consent..
> 
> So being drunk doesn't mean lack of consent.. The victim would have to paint a picture that she OR he could not give consent..
> 
> ...


*That* is called "pre-selection". Whatever you do, don't read Preselected by women and why it's important - Evansville Pick Up Artist | Examiner.com, or you will probably become a horrible misogynist! :grin2:


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

MJJEAN said:


> As a "girl" I can say that I have gone out specifically to have a few drinks and enjoy the companionship of an attractive man who understands things like leaving before morning and just because we hooked up doesn't mean I want to date him or even see him again.
> 
> Hell, I don't think I know any single women who don't deliberately go out every so often for the express purpose of getting drunk and getting laid.
> 
> My guess is the kind of chick that talks about "affirmative consent" isn't the same kind of chick you meet at the clubs.


Probably right for the most part, but what if the woman gets pissed off at the man for some reason, and affirmative consent is the law? Since it's essentially impossible for him to prove that he had affirmative consent for every act, she could charge him with violation of such a law and make it stick.

Everyone who is sane had better hope this doesn't become law, because if it did, the undesirable consequences would be horrendous.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

MJJEAN said:


> My guess is the kind of chick that talks about "affirmative consent" isn't the same kind of chick you meet at the clubs.


I'm not so sure about this. There are several woman on TAM who have done the kind of thing you talk about doing and would do it again if single. They are also not anti-affirmative consent. After all, shouldn't a person agree to having sex.

"No" means "No" assumes that having sex is the default. So the only way for it not to happen is to object by saying "No", or some other words that mean no. 

Affirmative consent assumes that sex only happens (legally) when both parties agree to having it. It's a very important distinction.

I do believe that affirmative consent laws would be no better than current laws.. why? Because it is impossible to prove if "No" was said or not. Just as it will be next to impossible to prove if "Yes" was said or not.

This is exactly why some societies lock women behind doors and only allow them out of the house with male family escorts. It takes away the uncertainty in a lot of situations. >


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

EleGirl said:


> I'm not so sure about this. There are several woman on TAM who have done the kind of thing you talk about doing and would do it again if single. They are also not anti-affirmative consent. After all, shouldn't a person agree to having sex.
> 
> "No" means "No" assumes that having sex is the default. So the only way for it not to happen is to object by saying "No", or some other words that mean no.
> 
> ...


Affirmative consent laws would be MUCH WORSE than current law, assuming they are like the current "administrative law" rules. Why? Because they remove the presumption of innocence, but force the accused to prove his innocence. This is an almost impossible burden on the accused, which is why it is not required in any other criminal accusation.

Hopefully the Supreme Court would strike down such terrible laws, but I'd rather not rely on that, given their record of issuing decisions that are very hard to reconcile with the Constitution.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

technovelist said:


> *That* is called "pre-selection". Whatever you do, don't read Preselected by women and why it's important - Evansville Pick Up Artist | Examiner.com, or you will probably become a horrible misogynist! :grin2:


Why would you say that? Clearly a guy who wants to inseminate as many women as possible and then whinge about child support absolutely just *loves* women.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

always_alone said:


> Why would you say that? Clearly a guy who wants to inseminate as many women as possible and then whinge about child support absolutely just *loves* women.


Obviously!


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

technovelist said:


> Affirmative consent laws would be MUCH WORSE than current law, assuming they are like the current "administrative law" rules. Why? Because they remove the presumption of innocence, but force the accused to prove his innocence. This is an almost impossible burden on the accused, which is why it is not required in any other criminal accusation.
> 
> Hopefully the Supreme Court would strike down such terrible laws, but I'd rather not rely on that, given their record of issuing decisions that are very hard to reconcile with the Constitution.


If someone robs me. They are presumed innocent. The prosecution has to prove beyond reasonable doubt that I did not willingly give the person the things of mine that were found in their possession.

If someone rapes me. They are presumed innocent. With "no means no", the prosecution has to prove beyond reasonable doubt that I said "no" or that I was not able to consent. If there are AC laws, the prosecution has to prove that I did not consent or that I was not able to consent.

It is still up to the prosecution to prove that a crime was committed. It's no more easy to prove that someone did not say "yes" as it is to prove that someone said "no" or that someone was unable to consent.

IMHO, a university has no business dealing with this issue instead of it being handled by the law. They do not have the ability to do the forensics required, they do not have the experience with investigating that the police do. And they do not have the experience with the law. It's just wrong.

I completely disagree with the campus tribunals having to do with rape. What crock. Rape is a crime. If someone was raped they go to the POLICE and report it. If the accused is prosecuted and convicted, then the school can kicked the person out if they choose. The same goes for any conviction of any crime.

Universities/colleges should be in touch with the police and courts in these types of cases. I've read that the guys have been found to actually be rapist on campus tend to commit 6 rapes on average during their college career. If 6 woman accuse the guy of rape over time and 6 rape kits show that he's the guy, then I'd agree with kicking him out of school before prosecution. At that point the school could be held liable for keeping the guy around and not making him wear a scarlet letter.

Now that jurisdictions are going back and processing old rape kits that have been ignored for years, they are finding that many of the rapes were committed by serial rapists.. and they then have a trail of many woman who they raped. Last I read a 100 or more serial rapists have finally been prosecuted because of processing those old kits. This is why it's the police who have to handle the cases, not the schools.

Where I work, if someone is accused of rape and they are charged, they will be fired. It does not matter if they are guilty. If they get into any real legal trouble, this is what happens. Most businesses do not care if the person is guilty. They only care if it looks bad for the company to have that person working for them.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

Yes, women should be careful when they go out. Don't drink so much that they don't know what's going on and cannot defend themselves. Don't leave their drink unattended which could give someone a chance of putting drugs in their drink. Do not take any drugs someone gives you at a party, out at a bar, etc. Of course. 

But even a woman who goes out with the intent to get a bit tipsy and to pick up a guy for sex could find themselves raped. Rapists specifically look for women who are vulnerable and in legal grey areas. So don't think that you are somehow exempt if you go out to pick up some guy. You just might not be as in control as you think you are. That guy you pick up for sex might be into rape, not sex... rape is not about sex. It's about control and hurting women. All he needs to do is walk to you to your car to then pull off a rape. That guy who is offering to "protect" you by walking you to your car could be a rapist. This is even if you know him.

And yes, men should be careful of the women they pick up to have sex with. Men also have a responsibility to not get drunk, to not get involve sexually with drunk or tipsy women. That woman who is as tipsy as you who is flirting with you and offers to take you home, she just might be the on woman in town (or on campus) that will lie the next day and say that she did not consent. She might be a nut who does this all the time. So yea, men need to be careful too.

I had a lot of talks with my sons about this as they got into their older teens and early 20's. They told me that they realized that there were some young girls with fake id's hitting on them in parties and it freaked them out. So we talked. They thought that maybe they needed to ask for id's and take photos as proof. They talked about drunk sex and we talked about that it's best to skip drunk sex. They know that there are some pretty nutty females out there.

I agree, there are as many nutty/crazy females as there are men. The rest of us need to avoid them.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

EleGirl said:


> If someone robs me. They are presumed innocent. The prosecution has to prove beyond reasonable doubt that I did not willingly give the person the things of mine that were found in their possession.
> 
> If someone rapes me. They are presumed innocent. With "no means no", the prosecution has to prove beyond reasonable doubt that I said "no" or that I was not able to consent. If there are AC laws, the prosecution has to prove that I did not consent or that I was not able to consent.
> 
> ...


I agree with most of this, other than to say that the way the current AC rules are written strips the accused of the presumption of innocence. I certainly hope nothing that horrible ever makes it into the legal code, but hope is not a plan.



EleGirl said:


> Where I work, if someone is accused of rape and they are charged, they will be fired. It does not matter if they are guilty. If they get into any real legal trouble, this is what happens. Most businesses do not care if the person is guilty. They only care if it looks bad for the company to have that person working for them.


True, and that is only one of the reasons that false rape accusers should be punished severely: they confer a social stigma that is at best very hard to erase.

But as far as I know such accusers are normally not punished at all.


----------



## NotEasy (Apr 19, 2015)

EleGirl said:


> ...
> If someone rapes me. They are presumed innocent. With "no means no", the prosecution has to prove beyond reasonable doubt that I said "no" or that I was not able to consent. If there are AC laws, the prosecution has to prove that I did not consent *or that I was not able to consent.*
> ,,,


The part in *bold* seems to be a significant change in the prosecution of cases (or at least TV shows about them). If the science can be legally verified then when a rape accusation is made soon after then CSI need only do a blood alcohol reading and backtrack the reading. I think they say females filter about one standard drink from their blood every two hours. Scientists probably know more precisely, or maybe they would need to test it each person individually.
Maybe this will only work very soon after the rape. But I recall a TV police patrol show where they booked a guy on his way to work. After 8 hours sleep he was still over the limit.
I suppose one could argue she drank just before going to the police etc. So maybe they do a breath test and a blood test.

I am not complaining about the change, merely noting that it could apply to this thread and to guys to deliberately pick up drunk girls.


----------

