Do they still make these posters?

Yea, both were drunk but fuck Jake and his rights because he has the penis.

I can understand and appreciate the intentions, but there are few things worse than good intentions without intelligence, flexibility and nuance, as the statements below seem accurate and feel utterly screwed up:

He got drunk and had sex with a woman - HE goes to jail.
She got drunk and had sex with a man - HE goes to jail.

It's almost like what Public Enemy said in "Fear Of A Black Planet":
Black man, black woman - black baby
White man, black woman - black baby
Black man, white woman - black baby
- I feel like there's a saying, something about hell and intentions.
ah, yes.

a simpler time when one is EASILY identified either by penis OR vagina ONLY.

unlike today.

^/j
Rape charges don’t materialize from thin air. If she reported it then yes, fuck Jake not because of his penis, but because he did not obtain consent.

For some reason this thread has become chock full of people who seem to think men can do no wrong and “equality” means charging both people for rape even though only one of them felt they were assaulted. It’s understandable considering the demographics of the internet and social media sites like lemmy in general (often young men, teenagers, etc). But this is what the poster is talking about — you continue to make assumptions about what this woman has decided to do and consent to, when you have no right to those assumptions because she is intoxicated. It’s incredibly simple, but this thread is blinded by “woman bad” rhetoric around rape charges.

If you don’t rape, you won’t be in this situation. No ifs ands or buts about it. You can argue with me all you want, you can call me crazy all you want, it doesn’t change the fact I am right. Whining and crying about the unfairness of the courts when it comes to assault charges is a cringey position to take. Do better.
- So charge the woman with rape charges as well. It's either both were raped or neither were. He was drunk and she took advantage of him.
  
  Did he wake up and think, “oh damn, I didn’t want to have sex last night”? If so, then yes, charge her. If not, then once again, he is in the wrong.
  
  Did you ever to stop to think that you are sexist?
  
  lol you’re sooo close to the point
  
  No, not me, but you’re on the right track!
  
  Look. It’s pretty clear that you’ve had some trauma but that’s nobody’s fault here. We have a right to free discourse without having to suffer your issues. Wish you well.
  
  What is the point of this comment? I have never been raped, if that is what you’re implying. I’m capable of empathizing with victims of rape
  
  You're fucking insane.
  
  Nah, I empathize with victims of rape. I urge them to report it when it happens. If you think that’s insane, well, says more about you than it does me
  
  This isn't empathy it's a weird bit you're trying to pull that's intentionally misunderstanding or misrepresenting made up scenarios in which drunk people had sex.
  
  Sorry you’re perceiving it that way, but no, you’re wrong.
  
  I know you want me to be like “oh no poor guy, men have it so hard in the dating world” but I’m not…. I don’t feel sorry for guys who get charged with rape — it’s a simple concept: don’t rape. Don’t assault.
  
  It’s funny that the people on this post have such a problem with that.
  
  Are you really trying to say women can't be trusted with their actions when drinking? You want men to make all their decisions for them? You can't be a real person.
  
  That’s not at all what I’m saying. Are you saying that intoxicated consent is valid consent?
  
  Moving goalposts now? I'm tired of arguing with trolls like you. Enjoy the block.
  
  Lmao what? You’re insane. Bye!
- It's heavily implied she consented while intoxicated, which is impossible according to the poster, and is therefore considered rape, even though both were under the influence
  
  It's not impossible because of the poster. It's impossible because of the features of contract law.
  
  Legal consent in criminal law and legal consent for contracts are two different things. It's like you haven't even read § 1-201 of the UCC...geeez! (/s on that last part if it wasn't clear)
  
  They both derive from the standard and have been interpreted differently given the different contexts and applications. For the purposes of this conversation about the poster, they're similar enough to make the point. I'm not bringing suit, I'm trying to explain why legal consent and intoxication bear on one another in a court.
  
  And? If either one of them felt as though they were taken advantage of, they should report the rape, no?
- It’s the gross assumption that the man won’t regret his actions. Or that he wouldn’t be shamed and ridiculed just for trying to claim he didn’t want it.
  
  You do better.
  
  lol what? Literally what, a dozen times now? I’ve said if he was raped, he should report it. Stop putting words in my mouth lol
  
  you do better, rape sympathizer.
  
  This thread is full of prepubescent teen boys who seem to think “mens rights” are under attack and that rape is edgy. Y’all are absolutely insane, and I think it’s very telling that you continue to try to make me seem like the bad person here. Make no mistake: it’s y’all lol
  
  I’ve said if he was raped, he should report it. Stop putting words in my mouth lol I think you should stop putting words in your own mouth. Either you're intentionally trolling or a blatant misandrist.
  
  He was drunk, therefore she didn't get consent. So she did rape him. Period.
  
  However, you and I both know if he tried to report it, it is a near certainty that it would go nowhere, and he'd be mocked and ridiculed for it not just enjoying how lucky he was to have had the attentions of a woman on him.
  
  It's a disgusting double standard and you've shown that you're part of the problem.
  
  The end all be all here is — don’t rape. Idk why you’ve got such a problem with that, most reasonable people don’t. If you can’t understand that then I don’t think you have any right to say who is a problem at all 😂
  
  lol who is spouting the double standards?? “If he tried to report it it wouldn’t go anywhere” ummm not true? Kinda sounds like you’re speaking from experience lol
  
  It’s okay one day your frontal lobe will be fully formed and you’ll understand the basics of how the world works.
  
  Keep labeling me whatever you want, the only one who is in the wrong is you lol

I mean, it is more than a bit sexist but... that is probably the demographic who need to understand this in a college environment.

Consent is incredibly important and a LOT of media for the past few decades shat on it. No, I don't (just) mean how basically every movie in the 80s was about raping people. I mean even "Okay, what if we got you/her drunk?" and so forth. I want to say even Friends and Seinfeld played the idea of one of the guys getting their girlfriend drunk for laughs (well, I think Jerry used turkey?).

Reminding people "that is a crime and you can go to jail" is important... even if people rapidly learn that rich white guys never go to jail.

I know two males who were raped by women when unconscious in college, and neither of them were okay with it.
- People always picture a huge unattractive woman when this gets brought up.
  
  But one of my college roommates got raped by a girl who was at least "an 8".
  
  They had hooked when he was blackout and she was just tipsy. He wanted nothing to do with her tho, and told her that repeatedly. She was just hot, young, and had never been turned down before.
  
  So like a week later we have a party he's not at. She showed up early, had two beers, then went to "wait" in his bed. Even though everyone was telling her not to do that.
  
  When he shows up, still wants nothing to do with her, so just gets blacked out at the party instead of kicking her out of his bed asap. I guess trying to wait her out and hoping she'd eventually give up.
  
  By the time he finally goes to bed, he's blacked out and she's been in there line 6-8 hours and completely sober.
  
  Next morning she teased him about how they had sex again but he kept falling asleep during it.
  
  If he was a chick, no one would argue that the second time was rape. Hell, we'd have probably fought a guy if he kept insisting he was going to "wait" in a drunk girls bed who was clear she didn't want anything to do with him.
  
  Yes, it happens, and it can be very emotionally damaging for men too. One of the guys I was talking about was a virgin, and wanted to wait until he was married to have sex. He passed out in a bedroom at a party, and one of the women there stripped him naked, got him hard, and had sex with him. He was only vaguely conscious when this was happening. He had a very difficult time accepting that his years worth of discipline and sacrifice were stolen from him.
  
  But if he didn't want to have sex he had no business drinking! He should have known she wanted to bone down, and his drinking is an implicit yes! I'm being sarcastic, yes, but I only think to post this because while reading your comment, I had a bit of a knee jerk "he shouldn't do that" to him getting drunk again.
  
  This is part of why this rhetoric is damaging. People who CAN reason past those immediate reactions even start to get tripped up. I can't imagine being a teen and how confusing all of this mess must be.
Yep, the Seinfeld episode, he fed her enough to make her fall asleep so he could play with her collectable toys
- Seinfeld raped those toys because she ate turkey
  
  BrandNewSentence
Yeah I don't get the hate. Drunk people can't consent. It is pretty simple.
- Then why wouldn't she be charged with rape?
  
  They both went straight to prison. For the crime of being cool people that got laid while they were partying.
  
  What legally constitutes rape varies by jurisdiction. Some places still define rape as "they put their penis inside someone who didn't want it inside them". This is a much more narrow definition than what is generally accepted by the public today, but legal definitions are often dated. Those jurisdictions usually have separate, wider definitions for sexual assault or other acts of harm, though, so it's not a free for all.
  
  Yes, if she was the instigator.
  
  That's not what the poster sez.
  
  Because rape means penetration of someone without consent. Assuming Josie probably doesn’t have a penis, it’d be incredibly hard to charge her with rape.
  
  Not making someone penetrate you without their consent?
  
  Listening not trying to get all Jordan Peterson “WHATS HAPPENING TO MEN” here, but if it doesn’t cut both ways what are we really doing?
  
  I think for women, it’ll count as sexual assault. I think legally it can be as bad as rape, considering jail time and such. Both are felonies.
- Drunk people can't consent, not just drunk women. That's the point of contention.
  
  Edit: it's worth mentioning that there are definitely limits to this statement. If two people at the nightclub have had several drinks and decide to hook up, that's probably okay. They're two consenting adults, even though they're legally drunk. The issue is when one of the people is significantly impaired, to the point where they can't really think clearly and consent or object. Just having a few beers and fucking isn't a crime, and anyone who thinks it is is a prude.
  
  It is nuanced for sure. A married couple can get drunk and have sex and it can be consensual, but it also could not be. And I purposefully didn't mention gender at all.
  
  It is a big problem and each instance has its own facts.
  
  Edit: it’s worth mentioning that there are definitely limits to this statement. If two people at the nightclub have had several drinks and decide to hook up, that’s probably okay. They’re two consenting adults, even though they’re legally drunk. The issue is when one of the people is significantly impaired, to the point where they can’t really think clearly and consent or object. Just having a few beers and fucking isn’t a crime, and anyone who thinks it is, is a fucking prude.
  
  Jesus fucking christ
  
  No. Drunk people cannot consent. Doesn't matter if both people are drunk. Whether that is a crime or not gets into a grey area. But if the only reason you care about consent is whether you can get in trouble for ignoring it...
  
  No. Drunk people cannot consent. Doesn't matter if both people are drunk. Whether that is a crime or not gets into a grey area. But if the only reason you care about consent is whether you can get in trouble for ignoring it..
  
  The grey area is literally the whole topic of discussion, though. A blanket statement like "drunk people can't consent" fails an examination of even its first order implications. What actually has happened when two equally drunk adults have sex? Did they rape each other? What if both of them insist after the fact that they both gave consent? That wouldn't matter right, since drunk people can't give consent?
  
  Why does this only apply to sex? If drunk can't consent to anything then why is drunk driving a crime? Sure it endangers others but the drunk person didn't consent to getting in the car in the first place because drunk people can't consent. What else can drunk people do and bear no responsibility for?
  
  You gloss over the grey area as if it doesn't matter when it's literally the whole issue. The grey area contains all the hard questions , but instead of even attempting answer any you gloss over it, whine about incels, and hide behind the obviously indefensibly broad statement that "drunk people can't consent".
  
  You'll note I did not dispute your "drunk people, not just drunk women" statement as I do agree with that (I even said as much above).
  
  What I take immense issue with is you deciding that suddenly drunk people CAN consent so long as both parties take a few shots. Which is horrifying. And now you are using drunk driving as a way to further justify what I am increasingly certain are some REALLY fucked up things you have done.
  
  Jesus fucking christ. Get help before you hurt more people.
  
  You haven't realized that you're talking to different people, and now you're accusing all of them of having done horrible things because they recognize that there are degrees of competency when drinking. The law says you're legally drunk at 0.08 ABL, yet there are millions of people who can function just fine at that level. Sure, their reactions are probably slow for the purpose of driving, yet they can still perform advanced mental functions such as debate, mathematics, artistic creation, or programming. Why is sex the magic thing they absolutely cannot do in your eyes?
  
  You'll note I did not dispute your "drunk people, not just drunk women" statement as I do agree with that (I even said as much above).
  
  I'm not the same person. Perhaps you're too drunk to consent to this conversation?
  
  What I take immense issue with is you deciding that suddenly drunk people CAN consent so long as both parties take a few shots.
  
  What you take issue is immaterial. Is it true, or not? Mutual rape doesnt make sense as a concept . Also, what defines "drunk"? A blackout drunk person obviously can't consent to anything but then two blackout drunk people physically can't have sex so that's not really in the grey area at all. And yet surely one sip of beer doesn't do it. Are you even going to address the very basic conversation of what constitutes drunk in terms of being able to consent to sex? Or is that another question to be glossed over?
  
  Which is horrifying.
  
  Why? Explain why. Why are you horrified that two consenting adults can go to a bar, have a few shots, then have sex? This happens millions of times every day - are you just always horrified? Who are you to tell those consenting adults that they actually didn't give consent and were raped?
  
  And now you are using drunk driving as a way to further justify what I am increasingly certain are some REALLY fucked up things you have done.
  
  You're certain of nothing. You're an unserious person who craves moral highground even if it's imagined.
  
  Jesus fucking christ. Get help before you hurt more people.
  
  Lol
  
  And yet surely one sip of beer doesn’t do it.
  
  To throw some more mud into the mix, there are trace amounts of alcohol in ordinary shit like orange juice.
  
  replies to two separate people thinking they're the same person > makes an unhinged claim that both these people (that you still think is one person) must be evil people > tells them to get help
  
  don't change lemmy
  
  You’re avoiding the question.
  
  Unintentionally I hope.
  
  Drunk people absolutely can consent. It depends on how drunk they are. That was the person who you replied to's point
- You're right, drunk people can't consent.
  
  That is not what the poster says.
  
  The poster states, in no unclear terms, that drunk WOMEN cannot consent. This is clearly evident by the scenario being laid out as the same for both parties, but one, the male, was accused of rape.
- I mean, the "#NotAllMen" incels tend to come out of the woodwork any time they see something like this.
  
  Don't agree with somebody? Automatic incel I guess. (Or ist, phobe, bigot etc)
  
  Typical thought process on this platform.
  
  Narrator note: "this platform" refers to "the entire internet"
  
  No it's just Lemmy lol
  
  Go back to reddit then?
  
  Nah
  
  What, you're a man who doesn't want to be raped? Fucking incel
  
  Yep. The irony is the average Lemmy user would think Reddit is horrible for it yet it's seems to be common on Lemmy to.
  
  The good news is that it is really nice to get a blocklist out of all the people who need to talk about how it is totally not rape if you document that you were drunk too.