"My suspension of skepticism ends right there, but there's much more, including a prior rape claim by the "victim" at another college a few years earlier. Same victim, same scenario, except that she recanted in that case, saying she wasn't sure it was a rape because she was drunk. All the preceding was ruled inadmissible during Gorman's trial thanks to rape shield laws".
I remember reading about that at the time. IIRC she didn't even say "Stop". She said "I have to go home, I have to go home" and it took him 15-20 seconds to translate from female into plain English that she wanted him to stop. Moral of the story "No means no but almost anything else can mean no too".
Some jurisdictions are claiming that if a woman is intoxicated, then she can't give consent, and therefore any sex would be rape.
I can't figure out - what if the MAN is intoxicated? Then is it rape, too?
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm....