It's rape if the woman is drunk, according to new law

**Major Tom** · 28th-December-2006

From the Daily Mail:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...&icc=NEWS&ct=5

It's rape if the woman is drunk, according to new law

Men face being charged with rape if they have sex with women who are drunk.
The proposal, contained in a Home Office report, is being considered by ministers in a bid to boost conviction rates for sex offences and bring more Â“date rapistsÂ” to justice.
The new law would mean a woman judged to be drunk at the time of having sex would be deemed incapable of giving her consent. That would potentially open the way for the prosecution of thousands of men for having sex with drunk women Â— regardless of whether agreement had been given at the time.
Successful prosecutions for rape often founder before they get to court because of the difficulty in proving to juries that a victim had not given consent.
The law change would end that uncertainty and is expected to lead to a huge rise in the current conviction rate of five per cent.
Proof of whether a woman was drunk would come from medical tests Â— including those taken many hours later using a Â“back calculatingÂ” technique Â— as well as evidence from witnesses and victims.
The new offence will be proposed in a report on countering date rape by the Home OfficeÂ’s Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs.
The report also looks at the role played in sex attacks by drugs such as GHB and rohypnol, which are used by rapists to sedate their victims.
It warns that many attacks are missed because some medical staff fail to realise that rohypnol can be detected up to 36 hours after it was administered Â— unlike GHB which lasts about 12 hours Â— and so fail to take tests.
To counter this, it calls for medical guidance to recommend that samples be taken whenever possible. It also recommends the increased testing of victimÂ’s hair, which retains drug traces weeks later, and the increased provision of testing kits to enable urine and other samples to be taken swiftly.
At the moment, a drunken woman is deemed to be capable of giving consent so long as she is not unconscious.
This makes it difficult to bring rape prosecutions when the victim has consumed large quantities of alcohol because of the difficulty in countering defence claims that the victim agreed to sex.
The report, to be published shortly, recommends tackling this problem by removing the issue of consent in cases where the victim was inebriated.
Although the council concedes that the wording of a new law will be difficult to achieve, its intention is that the prosecution would be required only to show that the woman Â— or man Â— had drunk sufficient amounts to seriously cloud their judgment.
Similar ideas that could lead to a change in the definition of Â“consentÂ” in rape cases are being considered by the Solicitor General Mike OÂ’Brien as part of a government review designed to tackle low conviction rates.
A spokeswoman said the Home Office would be publishing its plans for increasing the number of successful rape prosecutions, including possible legislative changes, in the New Year.

The comments are mostly negative:

So even one drink prior to consensual sex will now mean rape has taken place? What sort of nonsense is this?

- Adrian, Reading, UK

How come a drunk man is held accountable for his action but a drunk women is not. The court seems to have double standards, while it is ok for a drunken women to behave like an animal and be considered under the influence but a man under the ifluence must be able to behave like a gentleman. Both are equally guilty for drunkeness and whatever the consequence to that. Women should not drink more than the limits that makes them lose their judgement and alertness.

- Ann Hunter, UK

This is ridiculous.

So a drunk woman is not held responsible for her actions? But a drunk bloke is.

This will get thrown straight out of court - the law is wrong on this one.

Jeez what ever happened to equality

- Frank, Herts

How can a law JUST protect women? As previous comments point out - what if the man has also been drinking?

It is totally unworkable and very unfair to men. They used to call us the 'Fair Sex'. Doesn't really apply anymore. Women have a level of responsibility for their own safety - make them take it - don't bring in stupid laws.

- Ann, Tiverton, UK

**Rebadow** · 28th-December-2006

Women should be encouraged to have self respect and not get drunk,but of course that doesn't fit in with PC womens lib thinking does it?The stupid lefties have let down a whole generation of women and continue to do so.

- Kenny, south of the river

Now see, this is what I'm talking about. "stupid lefties have let down a whole generation of women". WOMEN? HEY WHAT ABOUT MEN WHO GET THEIR FREEDOM ET AL TAKEN AWAY BECAUSE OF THE ACCUSATIONS OF THESE POOR LET-DOWN-BY-LEFTIES WOMEN?!?!!?

Damn, misandry runs so deep that even those who do not attempt to be misandric, turn out to be just that - and they don't even know it.

**Rebadow** · 28th-December-2006

Are the government worried about women and rape OR are they more worried about their statistics looking poor.

Ah let me think?

- Doug, Birmingham UK

THE BEST COMMENT EVER. At least someone sees through the bullshit. This is the real motive behind it all. They want to look tough on crime, plain and simple, WOMEN GET IT, THEY REALLY DON'T GIVE A SHITE ABOUT YOU BEING RAPED OR "RAPED". THIS LAW IS ABOUT SERVING THE GOVERNMENT (AND ONLY GOVERNMENT) !!!!

**Rebadow** · 28th-December-2006

Major Tom, the last three comments you posted seem good at first sight. But they are missing the point.

It's not about only the man being responsible because the "law" says so. Even if they will change this and this "law" will be gender-neutral (i.e. the woman could also be charged with raping a drunk man), it doesn't take a lot of thinking to see what will this mean in practice and who will get laughed out of court/at the police and who will be taken seriously (men can't be raped, dontchaknow etc).

That's why it's very dangerous to object to this "law" (just) because it's not gender-neutral (and stop at that). The authors will then simply say "OK, we'll make women responsible too" and under the disguise of "gender neutral law" yet another unjust and dangerous law will be implemented. Don't give them this option to take the easy way out.

See the domestic abuse laws. This will be the same. Any critique, and the answer will be "the law is gender neutral, there is no bias. Also, we badly need this law, because the number of rapes actually tippled since it was first implemented".

Like I said, the only purpose of this "law" is to be self-serving, not to really help rape/"rape" victims.

This "law" is/will be a crime. Not because it currently only makes men responsible by the letter of the "law", but because it goes against any kind of justice to make somebody (male - or eventually female) responsible for another drunk adult's actions.

This "law" (proposal) should be challenged on the principles of justice I bolded and underlined (don't just look at it through gender lens). And for that reason, this proposal should/must be showed down the author's throats, and not merely be challenged because it's not gender neutral! They shouldn't be given a chance to fix it. They must be forced to take it back, repent of this most heinous sin they've just committed, feel ashamed and most humble 'till the end of their miserable lives and when that won't help (as it shouldn't), they should burn in eternal flames of the Abyss for even daring to think about such a proposal!!!!

**mirwalk** · 28th-December-2006

Well, looks like half the taverns will go out of business soon.

What happens if both parties are drunk. What if nobody really asked but both just start going at it? Well of course the man will be at fault since he has to get permission first. So alot of men will tossed in the clink the morning after.

Or how about having sex with a guy you want to have thrown in the clink. Then the day after take some GHB or the Proplyn (sp?). Wait a week and used the hair sample to convict him. They won't be able to see what day she took it. Great fraud material there.

God, more and more of this. Makes me want to start an armed revolt.

**Commander_Riker** · 28th-December-2006

This is insanity. What more can be said?

**Janus** · 28th-December-2006

And what if he's drunk? Will she be charged with rape? It's completely logical if thier goal is to stamp out "date rape".

I know a guy who passed out drunk at a party, woke up to find a woman having sex with him. He was mortified and shoved her off. Her reacting was basically "wtf did you do that for?".

She was raping him, he pushed her away and left. Yet he didn't report it to the police, nor does he make a big deal about it. Just tells you what feminism has done to men these days. They can't go to police ("what are you some fag?") can't go around crying about, because then he's some pussy and a emotional wimp, and possibly a fag because he didn't like it. Nor can he stand up for himself and his rights, also for the above reasons.

**** the people behind his law. I hope they walk into oncoming traffic.

Disaffected · 29th-December-2006

Any female predator who wants to send a man to jail will just have to keep a little sniffter of vodka in her purse, take a glug after intercourse, and call the bobbies.

You still call them bobbies right?

It's been 30 years since I lived in Islington.

Never really understood its bad reputation...

Grew up in Chicago.

Now, that's a tough street.

WHY are Brit men allowing this feminist gulag to despoil a once knightly isle?

**Mr.Lomax** · 26th-November-2007

This follows no logic.

Thank god I don't drink, but I still oppose this to incredible lengths.

Either the feminists whined and stamped their feet to get their new law or the governments are looking after their statistics.

I can not live in a world where I could be held accountable for something I probably couldn't control. {A woman can and will make a man drunk, have sex with him, and take him to court and rip his testicles through his wallet} But the reverse of this is unthinkable. And to think this is all because men have bigger clitorises.

It really shows who the weak sex are.

**Exposing Feminism** · 26th-November-2007

There is an easy solution to this new law and the rapex condom.

Feminism is keen to brand all men rapists, we know that much. Feminised women use sex as currency, on that we all agree.

All we have to do is abstain from sex until reason prevails once more.

(I said that the solution was easy, the practise is going to be somewhat harder. Sorry fellas!!)

**Mr.Lomax** · 26th-November-2007

Hell, I don't mind giving up sex, I'm finding it less glamorous and appealing every day.

**FFFF** · 26th-November-2007

I though the whole purpose of why women go round town with their tits hanging out and pissed out of their heads was so they could pretend that what the wanted they did not want afterwards?

Fucking slags!

**ACLAF** · 26th-November-2007

Quote from Exposing Feminism

All we have to do is abstain from sex until reason prevails once more.

Does anybody know Playboy's stock symbol? Hustler? Penthouse? Better yet, how about Allure Pictures or Vivid Entertainment Group?

Since I'll soon be masturbating a lot, I might as well make some money doing it right?

**sir_iw** · 26th-November-2007

I think we should all go out and get drunk and sleep with a woman and file rape charges against her.

The law is the law, we file first, the women must be put in jail!

Do this a few hundred times. Let the womens groups fight that.