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.
Which is why getting drunk and jiggy with strangers is so stupid.
You can wake up the next morning, and if accused of rape not even be able to say honestly that you are sure you didn't do it.
All you can say is that you don't believe you would do such a thing.
If a drunk man drives his car into another, I’m curious, what defense should he have for that?
If I take a shotgun into a mall, blindfold myself, and start randomly shooting in various directions, can I honestly say I didn't intend to hurt anyone? Surely, I did not purposely aim at anyone, and people in the mall could clearly see that I was incapacitated (blindfolded), so shouldn't they have hid or taken me out?
Discuss.