In most states, I believe there's no "perhaps" about it.
Of course, expecting the young man, who is himself also sloshed, to be perfectly capable of making these decisions is itself illogical.
IOW, even an entirely ethical young man who intends to obey the law may make poor choices when drunk and horny.
I have never and will never understand the "meet in bars and go home with a stranger" routine.
The young women is stating, by her actions and in the most blatant way possible, that she utterly and completely trusts this guy she just met not to do her harm. Why? On what is that trust based?
They guy, OTOH, is equally trusting that she won't make a false accusation that will very likely ruin his life. Why does he trust her to this extent? What is the trust based on?
Worse yet is the double standard applied to the liability of the act. The woman, being drunk, is considered incapable of a rational decision to have sex or not, due to her diminished capacity. Yet the male, equally drunk and equally diminished, is held wholly liable and capable of forming criminal intent!
Not only is this morally indefensible — it still takes two to wango-tango — it is logically and legally unsupportable as well. But we all know that women are sexual victims and men are just pigs, so that trumps justice.