Irish Times Article on Consent.

RayCun wrote: »

The conversation in the OP is counsellors talking to a room full of boys, talking about what their responsibilities are.

People in this thread are saying they are all for personal responsibility, except when it comes to men being responsible for where they put their dicks.

I know. I read it. And when the room full of boys pointed out the asymmetry in the law, the presenters changed tack.

Plopsu wrote: »

I know. I read it. And when the room full of boys pointed out the asymmetry in the law, the presenters changed tack.

As the presenters pointed out, that isn't what the law says.

The problem is that the presenters were talking to boys about what their responsibilities are, and the boys wanted to change the subject.

Richie wrote:

Richie: Lads, men can be raped too. This isn’t a man/woman thing. The law is there to protect everyone.

Under Irish law a man can't actually be raped by a woman. Protecting everyone my arse.

SoundsRight wrote: »

I honestly think a lot of girls don't actually know what constitutes rape. If they did, they wouldn't take so many risks.

I honestly think a lot of boys don't actually know what constitutes rape. If they did, they wouldn't rape so many girls.

hmmm

Dravokivich

Why is the only female in that dialogue the one explaining consent? Do women not get confused by it?

RayCun wrote: »

As the presenters pointed out, that isn't what the law says.

The problem is that the presenters were talking to boys about what their responsibilities are, and the boys wanted to change the subject.

No, it's not what the law says but it is how it's presented and applied. Unless you're seriously trying to say that a man's intoxication would exonerate him if he and an equally drunk woman had sex and she said she hadn't consented. Is that what you're saying?
And the boys weren't changing the subject, they were exploring the topic.

Dravokivich wrote: »

Why is the only female in that dialogue the one explaining consent? Do women not get confused by it?

It was an all-male school

Diceicle

Vincent van Gogh wrote: »

Under Irish law a man can't actually be raped by a woman. Protecting everyone my arse.

How so?

dusty bin

RayCun wrote: »

As the presenters pointed out, that isn't what the law says.

The problem is that the presenters were talking to boys about what their responsibilities are, and the boys wanted to change the subject.

thats not how i read that at all. In fact, it was the presenters changing the subject.

Teenage boy wants to know if he is drunk and girl is drunk and they both consent (whilst drunk) then how is all the responsibility left to the boy. Its a genuine question that wasnt answered.

Diceicle wrote: »

How so?

In Republic of Ireland law, there are two separate offences of rape:

"rape [at common law]", restricted to vaginal penetration by penis
"rape under section 4 [of the Criminal Law (Rape) (Amendment) Act 1990 as amended]", for anal or oral penetration by penis, or vaginal penetration by inanimate object.

Plopsu wrote: »

No, it's not what the law says but it is how it's presented and applied. Unless you're seriously trying to say that a man's intoxication would exonerate him if he and an equally drunk woman had sex and she said she hadn't consented. Is that what you're saying?
And the boys weren't changing the subject, they were exploring the topic.

They were trying to move away from the question of their own responsibilities.

The presenters were saying "this is what YOU have to consider", and they were saying "why is it about ME?"

Personal responsibility is always about ME. What do I do.

If I am in a room with a drunk woman and I am thinking, "yeah, she's too drunk to consent - but that's on her, not me", I am the problem.

[Deleted User]

think its a worthwhile effort and ritchie is a very good presence

but yeah look they are avoiding the questions that they dont want to answer and theres no actual two ways about it

To take an example that isn't about sex, or gender -

Bunch of teenagers have been drinking, someone suggests they drive somewhere.

Teaching a class about that, you would emphasise that if you were one of the teenagers, it is your responsibility to not drive, and not get in the car.

It doesn't matter if the other people are equally drunk.

You decide what you are going to do.

[Deleted User]

RayCun wrote: »

To take an example that isn't about sex, or gender -

Bunch of teenagers have been drinking, someone suggests they drive somewhere.

Teaching a class about that, you would emphasise that if you were one of the teenagers, it is your responsibility to not drive, and not get in the car.

It doesn't matter if the other people are equally drunk.

You decide what you are going to do.

yep but

only the driver is breaking the law

why, when we transpose to the matter at hand, is the male seen as the driver

RayCun wrote: »

They were trying to move away from the question of their own responsibilities.

The presenters were saying "this is what YOU have to consider", and they were saying "why is it about ME?"

Personal responsibility is always about ME. What do I do.

If I am in a room with a drunk woman and I am thinking, "yeah, she's too drunk to consent - but that's on her, not me", I am the problem.

If you are equally drunk, you are equally unable to consent.

Deleted User wrote: »

yep but

only the driver is breaking the law

why, when we transpose to the matter at hand, is the male seen as the driver

It was a class of males.

The people in the class were being told to take responsibility for their own actions.

RayCun wrote: »

It was a class of males.

Of course it was, because females cannot rape males under Irish law.

It would be redundant to have a class of females discussing it.

RayCun wrote: »

It was a class of males.

The people in the class were being told to take responsibility for their own actions.

And they were pointing out that they were also being expected to take responsibility for somebody else's actions. The presenters couldn't answer the point so they changed the subject.
I wonder if girls get the same lecture.

jam_mac_jam

Vincent van Gogh wrote: »

In Republic of Ireland law, there are two separate offences of rape:

"rape [at common law]", restricted to vaginal penetration by penis
"rape under section 4 [of the Criminal Law (Rape) (Amendment) Act 1990 as amended]", for anal or oral penetration by penis, or vaginal penetration by inanimate object.

I didn’t know that. Jesus that really needs to be changed. How horrible.

jam_mac_jam

Plopsu wrote: »

And they were pointing out that they were also being expected to take responsibility for somebody else's actions. The presenters couldn't answer the point so they changed the subject.
I wonder if girls get the same lecture.

They are not being asked to take responsibility for somebody else’s actions. They can’t get consent to sex because the girl is too drunk, they don’t have sex. It doesn’t mean that you cannot have sex with somebody who is drunk but if they are in a state that they cannot say yes or no then that is rape.

Grayson

Plopsu wrote: »

And they were pointing out that they were also being expected to take responsibility for somebody else's actions. The presenters couldn't answer the point so they changed the subject.
I wonder if girls get the same lecture.

If the other person is intoxicated then they are expected to be the ones who say "I can't get consent here. Better not stick my penis into the person" That's not taking responsibility for other people. That's taking responsibility for their own.

Why are you so against the idea that they should try to get consent and not sleep with someone if they can't get it.

Plopsu wrote: »

And they were pointing out that they were also being expected to take responsibility for somebody else's actions.

No, they weren't.

They are not responsible for anyone else's decision to have sex.

They are not responsible for anyone else's decision to drink.

They are responsible for making sure that they only have sex with people who want to have sex with them.

Plopsu wrote: »

I wonder if girls get the same lecture.

Let's imagine for a moment that girls do not have any classes on what consent means.

Does that change the responsibility of men in this situation at all?

Of course not.

I am responsible for my actions. I am responsible for making sure that I only have sex with people who want to have sex with me.

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

I didn’t know that. Jesus that really needs to be changed. How horrible.

I know it's very unfortunate and completely sexist.

I'd love to have heard their answer if one of the kids happened to know the law and brought it up.

[Deleted User]

its a very good thing that these discussions and initiatives are going ahead.

everyone should be aware that sex while parties are drunk enough to blur the lines of consent:

- i) leaves a fella open to the question of whether or not there was consent
- ii) leaves a girl open to the question of whether or not there was consent

delivering message (i) is ok.

delivering message (ii) is oppressive patriarchy

RayCun wrote: »

No, they weren't.

They are not responsible for anyone else's decision to have sex.

They are not responsible for anyone else's decision to drink.

They are responsible for making sure that they only have sex with people who want to have sex with them.

Let's imagine for a moment that girls do not have any classes on what consent means.

Does that change the responsibility of men in this situation at all?

Of course not.

I am responsible for my actions. I am responsible for making sure that I only have sex with people who want to have sex with me.

Do you have anything at all to say on the issue that they raised (and I have several times) about two equally drunk people having sex? Anything at all?

If both are equally drunk, both are unable to consent (assuming either is). In that circumstance, responsibility for the actions of one is pushed onto the other.
In reality, the only way be certain that somebody's ability to consent is unimpaired through drink, is for them to be completely sober.

Riskymove

RayCun wrote: »

If I am in a room with a drunk woman and I am thinking, "yeah, she's too drunk to consent - but that's on her, not me", I am the problem.

well here is the bit that is often raised (indeed it is the question the boys asked)

a male, even if drunk, is expected have the ability to recognise that both he and the woman are drunk and that she cannot consent regardless of her actions or words

Grayson

Vincent van Gogh wrote: »

I know it's very unfortunate and completely sexist.

I'd love to have heard their answer if one of the kids happened to know the law and brought it up.

To be fair, there's a hell of a lot that needs to be updated wrt sexual laws and how the cases are prosecuted. Unfortunately this country all too often waits until something goes wrong.

jam_mac_jam

Riskymove wrote: »

well here is the bit that is often raised (indeed it is the question the boys asked)

a male, even if drunk, is expected have the ability to recognise that both he and the woman are drunk and that she cannot consent regardless of her actions or words

No, if her actions or words give consent then she can give consent, just because you are drunk does not mean you cannot give consent. It is not rape to have sex with a drunk person.
If she is too drunk to say yes or no then yes it is rape and he should know that.

Plopsu wrote: »

Do you have anything at all to say on the issue that they raised (and I have several times) about two equally drunk people having sex? Anything at all?

I have no idea what the legal burden of proof is for "I was too drunk to know if the person I was having sex with wanted to have sex with me".

The class wasn't about the law. It was about understanding consent and personal responsibility.

Do you have any problem with the statement

"I am responsible for making sure that I only have sex with people who want to have sex with me."

If you agree with that statement, do you agree that it's a good idea to discuss it in class and make sure everyone understands what it means?