Sexual Assault ?

Heckler

I saw a vlog yesterday about a 17 year old at the time (now 18/19 or) and her experience.

She went to a party, got wasted drunk and ended up blowing a guy. This was caught on camera and passed around.

She reckons this was sexual assault and has a devastating effect a year later.

She blacked out and has no memory of about a 6 hour span.

Her only evidence of assault is her performing oral sex.

Is A drunk woman willing to perform sex acts on me a crime ? If so guilty. Vice versa !

368100

Heckler wrote: »

I saw a vlog yesterday about a 17 year old at the time (now 18/19 or) and her experience.

She went to a party, got wasted drunk and ended up blowing a guy. This was caught on camera and passed around.

She reckons this was sexual assault and has a devastating effect a year later.

She blacked out and has no memory of about a 6 hour span.

Her only evidence of assault is her performing oral sex.

Is there a question here?

Heckler

just did

368100

Just did what? To me it's a statement rather than a question. Have you an opinion about it yourself whatever your question is?

jonon9

It seems that if a women is drunk and performs some sort of sex act its assault but if a man does it his just a horny bastard and a rapist . This opinion is formed from reading and watching the internet from the last 2-5 years.

What Im trying to say is you aint gonna get a straight answer.

Noveight

Consent can be a tricky one, it's not always as straightforward as we'd all like it to be. Add in drink/drunkenness and it's a recipe for disaster.

Heckler

Is A drunk woman willing to perform sex acts on me a crime ? If so guilty. Vice versa !

368100 wrote: »

Is there a question here?

Sorry. The last part of my post seemed not to turn up.

jonon9

Heckler wrote: »

Is A drunk woman willing to perform sex acts on me a crime ? If so guilty. Vice versa !

Sorry. The last part of my post seemed not to turn up.

Its only a crime when a drunk woman shouts 'Wolf' same for a man but that seems to fall on deaf ears somewhat.

368100

Heckler wrote: »

Is A drunk woman willing to perform sex acts on me a crime ? If so guilty. Vice versa !

Sorry. The last part of my post seemed not to turn up.

Without seeing the video and working on the assumption that theres no evidence that she was forced into it then I don't see how her claim stands up.

If her drink was spiked it might be a different matter but to choose to get wasted, blow a guy and then cry that it was sexual assault is ridiculous and I hope whatever authority she's reported it to charge her for false allegations. At least there's video evidence to prove what happened.

Obviously not condoning genuine cases of sexual assault but I've seen first hand the damage false claims can have. A friend of mine was accused of rape by a girl with special needs who just took a fancy to him as he was friendly to her and would chat from time to time. He had an awful time of it, eventually she admitted she made it up but he feels although he was cleared in full it still affects him. Maybe just his perception but he feels people still think "what if he did". This is years ago, horrible thing that I wouldn't wish on anyone.

NinetyTwoTeam

When you mature a bit you'll realize that taking advantage of a drunk girl is scummy. I dunno about assault, each situation is different but really you should make sure a girl is sober enough to consent.

That said, without alcohol I dunno would anyone get laid in this country, many women in Ireland still seem very inhibited and prudish when sober and nearly seem to only give themselves permission to act on their desires/accept advances from men when booze is on board. But that doesn't mean that they should be preyed on while drunk, and I can't imagine it feels good to know you've taken advantage of someone like that. I'm glad to see that men who are doing stuff like that are getting called out so that young men will hopefully be aware how unacceptable it is.

And I think filming someone else in a sex act without their consent and distributing it should be an offense. That's an awful thing to do, the man won't get any criticism while the woman is ruthlessly slutshamed.

derfderf

NinetyTwoTeam wrote: »

When you mature a bit you'll realize that taking advantage of a drunk girl is scummy. I dunno about assault, each situation is different but really you should make sure a girl is sober enough to consent.

That said, without alcohol I dunno would anyone get laid in this country, many women in Ireland still seem very inhibited and prudish when sober and nearly seem to only give themselves permission to act on their desires/accept advances from men when booze is on board. But that doesn't mean that they should be preyed on while drunk, and I can't imagine it feels good to know you've taken advantage of someone like that. I'm glad to see that men who are doing stuff like that are getting called out so that young men will hopefully be aware how unacceptable it is.

And I think filming someone else in a sex act without their consent and distributing it should be an offense. That's an awful thing to do, the man won't get any criticism while the woman is ruthlessly slutshamed.

Women get slutshamed for the exact same reason you think it's bad form for a bloke to take advantage of a drunk girl (it is), but don't mention it happening the other way around.

And yes, it does happen. I know two blokes paying maintenance for children, and they have no recollection of being at the conception.

Rubberchikken

Anyone who takes advantage of a drunk girl or so an is the lowest of the low.
But any woman who claims rape and later retracts it or is found to be lying should be jailed.
No one comes out of these things looking good.

NinetyTwoTeam

NinetyTwoTeam wrote: »

And I think filming someone else in a sex act without their consent and distributing it should be an offense. That's an awful thing to do, the man won't get any criticism while the woman is ruthlessly slutshamed.

^^^ What he said^^^

Without seeing, or wanting to see, the video, I'm not sure "assault" is the right word. Assuming the male partner had no active knowledge or involvement of the filming, then he's hardly to blame. The individual who made the video and distributed it is bit of a toerag tbh though. Not that it makes a difference to the outcome, but did they think they were in a private bedroom or were they just blatantly doing in front of other party-goers on the kitchen floor? There's no link to a published news story about this, but either way the invasion of privacy and personal space is not good,

I don't know anything about these two particular people, but it's always surprising in other similar cases that the man is never depicted as somehow violated or just as much the victim as the girl. What if further down the line he is trying to start a serious relationship with a partner who sees this video? Why is the man in these things always a stud who scores free pints from his mates while the girl is sneered at?

eagle eye

A sober guy taking advantage of a drunk woman is wrong. A drunk guy having sex with a drunk woman is different though. If both are drunk then I don't think it's fair to blame the male.

Either way the girl has to have a large part of the responsibility for letting herself get into that condition.

Obviously I'm not talking about cases where a drink has been spiked. In those cases the person who has spiked the drink should do big time imo because this is clearly pre-meditated.

NinetyTwoTeam

derfderf wrote: »

Women get slutshamed for the exact same reason you think it's bad form for a bloke to take advantage of a drunk girl (it is), but don't mention it happening the other way around.

And yes, it does happen. I know two blokes paying maintenance for children, and they have no recollection of being at the conception.

I didn't mention it because that's not what happened in this instance, you're just engaging in whataboutery now.

But really you have two mates where the women overpowered them, forced them to become erect, knocked the condom out of their hand, forced themselves onto their junk, and held them down while they rode them until they orgasmed? Well I guess that can happen, but the mechanics of the equipment involved and the strength of a man lend itself to sexual assault being far more likely to man on woman.

If they were really that wasted the soldier would no be able to salute. And if they were able to do that and also achieve orgasm, I don't buy the fact that they were unwilling or unwitting participants. And likewise I don't think a girl who gives a BJ is unwilling or unwitting either, most likely. Oral sex is usually something you perform on someone else, hard to make a case for it being assault then, unless the man penetrated the woman's mouth against her will or when she was unconscious.

What I'm talking about with women being too drunk to consent is more like when they are not fully aware of what's happening or passed out and guys do something to them which happens a lot, and often they feel they can't stop what's happening.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Heckler wrote: »

I saw a vlog yesterday about a 17 year old at the time (now 18/19 or) and her experience.

She went to a party, got wasted drunk and ended up blowing a guy. This was caught on camera and passed around.

She reckons this was sexual assault and has a devastating effect a year later.

She blacked out and has no memory of about a 6 hour span.

Her only evidence of assault is her performing oral sex.

Is A drunk woman willing to perform sex acts on me a crime ? If so guilty. Vice versa !

While a woman is not responsible for what happens to her while she is drunk, she is responsible for how much she has to drink.

The bit in bold is a non-consentual act, I'm pretty sure and one that will land most people in trouble.

Heckler

Heckler wrote: »

Is A drunk woman willing to perform sex acts on me a crime ? If so guilty. Vice versa !

Heckler wrote: »

just did

Heckler wrote: »

Is A drunk woman willing to perform sex acts on me a crime ? If so guilty. Vice versa !

Sorry. The last part of my post seemed not to turn up.

I think the response you're fishing for is "oh congratulations and well done, obviously it was so good you rushed to tell everyone on AH".

derfderf

NinetyTwoTeam wrote: »

I didn't mention it because that's not what happened in this instance, you're just engaging in whataboutery now.

But really you have two mates where the women overpowered them, forced them to become erect, knocked the condom out of their hand, forced themselves onto their junk, and held them down while they rode them until they orgasmed? Well I guess that can happen, but the mechanics of the equipment involved and the strength of a man lend itself to sexual assault being far more likely to man on woman.

If they were really that wasted the soldier would no be able to salute. And if they were able to do that and also achieve orgasm, I don't buy the fact that they were unwilling or unwitting participants. And likewise I don't think a girl who gives a BJ is unwilling or unwitting either, most likely. Oral sex is usually something you perform on someone else, hard to make a case for it being assault then, unless the man penetrated the woman's mouth against her will or when she was unconscious.

What I'm talking about with women being too drunk to consent is more like when they are not fully aware of what's happening or passed out and guys do something to them which happens a lot, and often they feel they can't stop what's happening.

I didn't say they were forcibly held down and raped. They were so drunk they don't remember it, and people with them said they were so drunk they couldn't speak.
If you meant taking advantage of a passed out girl that's different.

bucketybuck

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

While a woman is not responsible for what happens to her while she is drunk

Being drunk does not absolve women of all responsibility.

professore

Being drunk does not absolve women of all responsibility

According to the George Hook witch hunt group it does. It's "victim blaming". Women are children who can't be held responsible for their own actions. Unless it's in the workplace, where they should be CEO after a 3 year gender studies degree and if they are not it's the patriarchy. Welcome to modern feminism.

professore

We have a very immature puritanical attitude to sex and alcohol in this country, like the Brits and Americans. Sex is dirty so we only do it when drunk so we can use the beer goggles excuse. And slut shaming, who does that? Other women. Men don't care unless it's for a long term relationship it's kinda nice if she hasn't ****ed everyone in your social circle, several at a time. A few partners? Who cares. Funnily enough women want guys who **** lots of women. So that's the real reason slut shaming is a thing. It's women doing it.

MayoAreMagic

NinetyTwoTeam wrote: »

What I'm talking about with women being too drunk to consent is more like when they are not fully aware of what's happening or passed out and guys do something to them which happens a lot, and often they feel they can't stop what's happening.

Why though? That clearly isn't the case as regards this thread..
The only person who could potentially be passed out on this thread is in fact the man..

server down

NinetyTwoTeam wrote: »

I didn't mention it because that's not what happened in this instance, you're just engaging in whataboutery now.

But really you have two mates where the women overpowered them, forced them to become erect, knocked the condom out of their hand, forced themselves onto their junk, and held them down while they rode them until they orgasmed? Well I guess that can happen, but the mechanics of the equipment involved and the strength of a man lend itself to sexual assault being far more likely to man on woman.

If they were really that wasted the soldier would no be able to salute. And if they were able to do that and also achieve orgasm, I don't buy the fact that they were unwilling or unwitting participants. And likewise I don't think a girl who gives a BJ is unwilling or unwitting either, most likely. Oral sex is usually something you perform on someone else, hard to make a case for it being assault then, unless the man penetrated the woman's mouth against her will or when she was unconscious.

What I'm talking about with women being too drunk to consent is more like when they are not fully aware of what's happening or passed out and guys do something to them which happens a lot, and often they feel they can't stop what's happening.

He said they had no recollection. He didn’t say they were passed out. Blacking out != passing out.

lazybones32

No sexual assault from what i can see but i thought the gubbiment brought in legislation to address revenge porn, so if the act was conducted in private, the recorder and disseminator could have to answer.

368100

368100 wrote: »

Without seeing the video and working on the assumption that theres no evidence that she was forced into it then I don't see how her claim stands up.

Since the OP did not link to the video a LOT of things are unclear. But one suggestion I could make is that the "assault" and "devastation a year later" might be related to the self same video evidence?

What I mean is - could it be she consented to oral sex - but did not consent to (or even know she was) being videoed doing it - much less that the video was then distributed freely?

There was a somewhat similar case in the States some time ago:
https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2016/12/16/our-shiny-new-university-of-minnesota-football-scandal/

NinetyTwoTeam wrote: »

That said, without alcohol I dunno would anyone get laid in this country, many women in Ireland still seem very inhibited and prudish when sober

I can not say that my experience - or that of the people I know - supports your experience here. Have you considered the possibility that the common denominator in your experiences - missing in mine - is you?

In other words is it possible that Irish women are not inhibited or prudish when sober - since that is not my experience - but that Irish women (or at least the ones you have met yourself so far) are generally sexually uninterested in you in particular?

I remember that awful term "frigid" that used to go around the kids in my youth. Girls who would not "shift" some guy were being called "frigid". The guys in question never appeared to notice that A) It was generally only with them the girls in question were being "frigid" and in some consistent numbers and They did not appear to be displaying this "frigid" attribute with the guys they actually liked.

I don't know, but whoever recorded it and passed it around is an absolute c*nt.

Though - if you get drunk and you willingly do something, then it is hard to tell if it is sexual assault. Are the people in the room as drunk as her? If so, are they taking advantage then?

Ultimate Seduction

The guy getting head could have been sexually assaulted by her? He was too drunk to consent to the suki suki

Drink seems to remove all responsibility, maybe the person who recored it was also drunk and didn't mean to record it and share it..

Where do you draw the line

RoboRat

It really depends on whether she was a willing participant and performed the act rather than being semi conscious and not a knowingly willing participant.

If there is a video and it validates that she wasn't in a fit state, then she should take it to the Gardai but if she was a willing participant, then I think the issue is not so much about the sexual consent in this instance, but more the fact that it was videoed and shared without consent. This I feel is something that should be prosecuted, unless of course she was willing to have the act videoed and in a fit state to make that decision.

It's murky waters and this was something that I feel George Hook was alluding too, albeit with zero tact nor consideration. We live in a world with predators; people who take advantage when they can and this is not solely reserved for sexual instances. This is how it is, there is no hiding from this.

If someone goes out and gets plastered, they are increasing the risks of being targeted in the same way as if a jogger elects to run down a dangerous road in favour of something safer. Both are victims, their attackers are not expunged of their crime and the victims are still victims, but both also made the wrong choice and put themselves in danger. Their actions cannot be used as a defence by their attackers but on a personal level, you have a duty of care to yourself to ensure you don't put yourself at risk - if you minimise the risk then you lessen the chances of being a victim.

You can't rely on the law to protect you as they are only able to act after the fact, sure if they catch a rapist and incarcerate them, they may prevent it from happening in future but every sexual predator needs to commit a crime in the first place and then get caught, any many don't or only get caught after committing it many times. This still leaves many victims and the damage is done already.

Personally, I think there is too much of a laissez faire attitude to drink in this country and when someone gets plastered and does something stupid or dangerous, it was the drinks fault. I was party to this attitude when I was younger but I always made sure I had some wits about me. It's only when I got older that I seen in more clarity how it really is.

I don't know how to change that attitude but I just think that people have to be more proactive about their own welfare and never forget that we live in a world with some horrible people.

lazybones32

Ultimate Seduction wrote: »

Where do you draw the line

On breakingnews.ie last wednesday (9d ago), they had an article on sexual harrassment in the workplace. The solicitor who was giving the interview said that if telling a sex-related joke makes a person uncomfortable, then that is entering the realm of sexual harrassment.

server down

lazybones32 wrote: »

On breakingnews.ie last wednesday (9d ago), they had an article on sexual harrassment in the workplace. The solicitor who was giving the interview said that if telling a sex-related joke makes a person uncomfortable, then that is entering the realm of sexual harrassment.

I would agree with that, although a warning should be given.

server down

Deleted User wrote: »

Since the OP did not link to the video a LOT of things are unclear. But one suggestion I could make is that the "assault" and "devastation a year later" might be related to the self same video evidence?

What I mean is - could it be she consented to oral sex - but did not consent to (or even know she was) being videoed doing it - much less that the video was then distributed freely?

There was a somewhat similar case in the States some time ago:
https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2016/12/16/our-shiny-new-university-of-minnesota-football-scandal/



I can not say that my experience - or that of the people I know - supports your experience here. Have you considered the possibility that the common denominator in your experiences - missing in mine - is you?

In other words is it possible that Irish women are not inhibited or prudish when sober - since that is not my experience - but that Irish women (or at least the ones you have met yourself so far) are generally sexually uninterested in you in particular?

I remember that awful term "frigid" that used to go around the kids in my youth. Girls who would not "shift" some guy were being called "frigid". The guys in question never appeared to notice that A) It was generally only with them the girls in question were being "frigid" and in some consistent numbers and They did not appear to be displaying this "frigid" attribute with the guys they actually liked.

This is a thinly veiled I'm hot, you're not.

sbsquarepants

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't know, but whoever recorded it and passed it around is an absolute c*nt.

Though - if you get drunk and you willingly do something, then it is hard to tell if it is sexual assault. Are the people in the room as drunk as her? If so, are they taking advantage then?

Jaysus, surely it is common sense to say if you go out and get hammered and then blow some fella in front of a room full of people - you kind of are the architect of your own misery. It's not like this was some hidden camera thing.

You got drunk, you done something you now regret, we've all been there - it's just unfortunate now, with the technology available to every tom, dick and harry, that you can't scratch your arse without some fúcker uploading it to the internet.

Whatever this was - it certainly is not sexual assault. Whatever you do in public, you can't really complain about the public seeing.

If you don't want a video of you sucking cock appearing on the internet, don't suck cock in front a room full of strangers with cameras in their hands. Do we really need to tell people this shít!

tritium

NinetyTwoTeam wrote: »

I didn't mention it because that's not what happened in this instance, you're just engaging in whataboutery now.

But really you have two mates where the women overpowered them, forced them to become erect, knocked the condom out of their hand, forced themselves onto their junk, and held them down while they rode them until they orgasmed? Well I guess that can happen, but the mechanics of the equipment involved and the strength of a man lend itself to sexual assault being far more likely to man on woman.

If they were really that wasted the soldier would no be able to salute. And if they were able to do that and also achieve orgasm, I don't buy the fact that they were unwilling or unwitting participants. And likewise I don't think a girl who gives a BJ is unwilling or unwitting either, most likely. Oral sex is usually something you perform on someone else, hard to make a case for it being assault then, unless the man penetrated the woman's mouth against her will or when she was unconscious.

What I'm talking about with women being too drunk to consent is more like when they are not fully aware of what's happening or passed out and guys do something to them which happens a lot, and often they feel they can't stop what's happening.

This is a really terrible post on so many levels. I'll start with the obvious "couldnt happen to a man ****e that you come up with"- yes it can, and being coherent isnt a prerequisite to getting erect. That before we get into how much drink someone needs to have before their judgement to consent is impaired

You also don't seem to understand the concept ofsexual assault more generally

lazybones32

server down wrote: »

I would agree with that, although a warning should be given.

So sexual harrassment is defined by the individual interpretation?
A woman, feeling body-confident, attractive and feeling good about herself and life hears a sex joke and finds it funny.
Same woman on a bad day hears the same joke but this time it is harrassment.

We can make laws that are based on feelings that change and personal taste.

Wibbs

sbsquarepants wrote: »

If you don't want a video of you sucking cock appearing on the internet, don't suck cock in front a room full of strangers with cameras in their hands. Do we really need to tell people this sh

Yep, perfectly logical, but watch it SB lest you be accused of "victim blaming". Remember, women are always victims with no agency and it's always men's fault. AKA horsesh1t.

server down

server down wrote: »

I would agree with that, although a warning should be given.

I’m not sure - if it was directed at the offended person I’d say yeah a warning/disciplinary action but if it wasn’t- i would percieve it as immature not a fireable/displinary offencr

tritium

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

While a woman person is not responsible for what happens to her them while she is they are drunk, she is they are responsible for how much she has to drink.

A small but important change to your post. I dont think its what you intended here, but theres a tendency to assume "too drunk to consent" only works one way.

server down

lazybones32 wrote: »

So sexual harrassment is defined by the individual interpretation?
A woman, feeling body-confident, attractive and feeling good about herself and life hears a sex joke and finds it funny.
Same woman on a bad day hears the same joke but this time it is harrassment.

We can make laws that are based on feelings that change and personal taste.

well, these are company rules not laws. Easy enough to ban all sexual comments in work I would think.

server down

server down wrote: »

This is a thinly veiled I'm hot, you're not.

Not a bit of it no.

It is a not veiled at all attack on the culture (of some) of deriding women as having some negative attribute (Frigid - prudish - inhibited - or worse) when they do not automatically bend (over?) to the sexual will of the approaching male.

As for me being hot - I invite you to picture the milky bar kid having grown into a near 40 year old someone who has obviously worked in Science and Statistics and IT in sun excluded rooms for the majority of his working life.

The result of your imagination is likely not far off the reality that is the real me.

sbsquarepants

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

While a woman is not responsible for what happens to her while she is drunk, she is responsible for how much she has to drink.

What happens to her, no (but common sense should still apply in my opinion) But what she does herself - she's still fully responsible for.

Try arguing that you have no personal responsibility on the grounds of intoxication in front of a judge if you're caught drink driving.
"I didn't know what I was doing your honour, sure I was hammered, it's not my fault!"

If legally you are held to be competent enough to decide whether you should drive or not, why would you not be competent enough to decide whether or not to have sex, either with someone or in front of them?

server down

Deleted User wrote: »

Not a bit of it no.

It is a not veiled at all attack on the culture (of some) of deriding women as having some negative attribute (Frigid - prudish - inhibited - or worse) when they do not automatically bend (over?) to the sexual will of the approaching male.

As for me being hot - I invite you to picture the milky bar kid having grown into a near 40 year old someone who has obviously worked in Science and Statistics and IT in sun excluded rooms for the majority of his working life.

The result of your imagination is likely not far off the reality that is the real me.

You were responding to a guy who said that most sexual encounters in Ireland involve drink, you responded by saying that may apply to the poster but not to you, because the sober girls liked you. In reality he is right.

The whole "some girls are called frigid" argument you are having with yourself.

sbsquarepants

server down wrote: »

well, these are company rules not laws. Easy enough to ban all sexual comments in work I would think.

Who do you work for - the legion of Mary!

server down

server down wrote: »

You were responding to a guy who said that most sexual encounters in Ireland involve drink

I think you might benefit from going back and re-reading it. That is not at all the part I responded to. Though I would use the word "many" not "most" (unless you have statistics to offer?) I have no disagreement with the statement _you_ are making here.

server down wrote: »

The whole "some girls are called frigid" argument you are having with yourself.

Again a re-read to refresh your memory might benefit you here. To help you along here are the exact words the user used "many women in Ireland still seem very inhibited and prudish when sober"

And I am suggesting that given my experience - and that of people I know - does not match with this that perhaps the common denominator being him is worth consideration.

Heckler

Deleted User wrote: »

I think the response you're fishing for is "oh congratulations and well done, obviously it was so good you rushed to tell everyone on AH".

Not fishing for a bit Conor.

Was trying to open up a debate.

lazybones32

server down wrote: »

well, these are company rules not laws. Easy enough to ban all sexual comments in work I would think.

Why stop there? If speaking about a natural human activity is offensive, we must stop speaking about othrr human activities too.

lazybones32

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Who do you work for - the legion of Mary!

Oi! Leave the Legion alone...they volunteer their time visiting people abandoned in hospitals and the housebound who get no visitors. No need to insult them to make your point.

sbsquarepants

lazybones32 wrote: »

Oi! Leave the Legion alone...they volunteer their time visiting people abandoned in hospitals and the housebound who get no visitors. No need to insult them to make your point.

I bet they don't tell them any good knob jokes though!:D

sbsquarepants

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I bet they don't tell them any good knob jokes though!:D

No need. The "assumption" they make about Mary is itself comedy gold.

wakka12

NinetyTwoTeam wrote: »

When you mature a bit you'll realize that taking advantage of a drunk girl is scummy. I dunno about assault, each situation is different but really you should make sure a girl is sober enough to consent.

That said, without alcohol I dunno would anyone get laid in this country, many women in Ireland still seem very inhibited and prudish when sober and nearly seem to only give themselves permission to act on their desires/accept advances from men when booze is on board. But that doesn't mean that they should be preyed on while drunk, and I can't imagine it feels good to know you've taken advantage of someone like that. I'm glad to see that men who are doing stuff like that are getting called out so that young men will hopefully be aware how unacceptable it is.

And I think filming someone else in a sex act without their consent and distributing it should be an offense. That's an awful thing to do, the man won't get any criticism while the woman is ruthlessly slutshamed.

Theres a bit of give and take here, girls shouldnt get to a point where theyre so drunk that they believe they are not accountable for their actions and that a man shouldnt get with her even if she might be initiating it

sbsquarepants

Deleted User wrote: »

No need. The "assumption" they make about Mary is itself comedy gold.

No camera phones in Marys day - or it could have been a very different story.

3 strange blokes turned up with pressies after the birth didn't they?:)

wakka12

wakka12 wrote: »

Theres a bit of give and take here, girls shouldnt get to a point where theyre so drunk that they believe they are not accountable for their actions and that a man shouldnt get with her even if she might be initiating it

Careful now, you don’t want to be victim blaming now and the 3rd wave feminist/twitter brigade will be after you