Can a drunk woman give consent?

That's partly why I only mentioned the drunkenness aspect - getting drunk is not a signal of 'availability' although provocative dressing might be seen as such.

Why is being "dressed provocatively" not seen as an 'up for it' signal? I really don't understand how we can talk of dressing sexily or provocatively and then say no one is allowed to be sexually 'provoked' (I don't mean provoked in an aggressive sense). People seem to be saying that women in particular can be as sexually provocative as they like with regard to their 'get up' without consequences. Would we, do we say the same about men? If not, why not? I would very much like to agree that women should be able to dress how they like, even deliberately sexily, without it mattering, but how we present ourselves usually does matter very much indeed. That mattering is not just the case with sexy dressing; it applies in all sorts of situations, including completely formal ones.

When other female animals give out sexual signals, it does mean they are 'up for it'? Why shouldn't this apply to human females (males too), especially as we are in control of the sexual signals (and their 'strength') that we send out, whereas other animals are not (not to our knowledge anyway).

I realise my post may not seem altogether straightforward. That's because my thoughts about sexual signals and sexual behaviour are not altogether straightforward.

I admit "trying on" this -by now-despicable practice of using alcohol to "soften up" susceptible "candidates" fortunately-things did not go far enough or that far. I would therefore sympathise a great deal with those innocent parties suffering from the terrible consequences of drug + alcohol induced actions these days

Looking smart/attractive/feminine is one thing, but if a girl goes out looking oven-ready she is asking for trouble.

I don't see how a woman drinking herself senseless sends out a signal that she's 'up for it', whatever she's wearing. Women don't over-drink because they're gagging for it...

No a drunk women can't give consent and too many men take advantage of women they meet under the influence of booze. The Government does not even prosecute those any more who have sex with girls below the age of consent if a similar age and Doctors give them contraceptives without their parents being informed. The only time I suppose you can assume consent if the women brings home some wine to share with you and you are in a relationship and it is not your first time of sleeping together.

Message deleted by Gransnet for breaking our forum guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

Obviously, dressing provocatively will be seen as an open invitation for sex. Get real!

And that's wrong. Wearing sexy or revealing clothing does not invite sex or rape.

I know this is gransnet, but come on people. This is not cavemannet.

"A woman should be allowed to wear whatever she chooses without it being seen as an open invitation to sex."

Obviously, dressing provocatively will be seen as an open invitation for sex. Get real!

There is still (and always will be) a need to teach our youngsters to be responsible for themselves.

Decency is a part of that, it's a pity it's so unfashionable.

If a woman gets drunk and goes home , or gets into a car with someone she has just met in club, she is either very naive or stupid, but that doesn't give a man the right to rape her , if she suddenly becomes aware and refuses full sex. As someone else said, if the man is also so drunk that he doesn't understand , how can he perform? the problem is in knowing who to believe isn't it? It can ruin a mans life too,if he is wrongly accused. I don't agree with the clothing issue. A woman should be allowed to wear whateverbshe chooses without it being seen as an open invitation to sex.

So my question remains Roxburghrose if you are intoxicated through no fault of your own is it still your responsiblity? "If either a man or woman is too drunk or drugged to remember there must be a presumption of consent" That is basically a sign of approval of rohypnol- the date rape drug. Presumably the women and men who are subjected to this have brought it on themselves by choosing to visit a bar/have a drink? (And this is sometimes men raping other men) but as they are drugged they must have consented-what nonsense!!

False accusations of rape are unacceptable I agree but there are fewer cases of this than rapes that are not followed through.
What society needs to get clearly sorted is that sex is only acceptable when it takes place between consenting adults who are both in a position to give/refuse consent.

There seems to be a presupposition that men are always the predators and that the responsibility for interpreting confused and alcohol riddled signals rests entirely with them - as does the outcome, all the regrets and recriminations the next day and the ensuing prosecution. Both men and women have to accept responsibility for the outcome of their actions - you are not exonerated from the effects of being drunk because you took the decision to get drunk. If either man or woman is too drunk or drugged to remember there must be a presumption of consent. Rape has a major impact on the life of anyone and that includes men wrongly accused by women who regret their actions in the cold light of day.

Rape is always the responsibility of the perpetrator. Rape is more about power not sex.

I do think boys and girls, young men and young women need to be taught far more effectively about sex and relationships in school. We are, as a nation, prudish about talking to kids about their bodies & its functions and their individual rights and responsibilities over it.

We were discussing safeguarding in a school today and one teacher raised the issue of parents being unwilling to accept the use of the terms: penis, vulva, vagina, scrotum etc with primary children.

My view is we need to start supporting children from an early age to be in charge of and comfortable with their own bodies and to respect each others' right to not be touched and their own right to say no to anyone who they do not want to touch them...in any way!

There are excellent ways to teach children about 'inappropriate' touching / bad secrets etc. as well as positive relationships, caring and loving relationships and the place sex has in those relationships. In countries where there is a more robust, rather than UK prim, approach to sex and relationship education attitudes appear to be better and there are fewer teen pregnancies.

If children grow up with strong knowledge they are always aware of their responsibilities and the consequences of their choices. Unfortunately this does not appear a priority for DfE who are more focussed on phonics and academic 'standards' than these 'softer' but equally vital aspects of a child's development.

I agree with what ffinn has said about boys being taught. The trouble is, some of them are taught but don't learn. This is ever a problem with teaching. Society can only try harder but I don't think the wickedness of rape will never be totally eliminated, just as the wickedness of murder and blackmail won't be.

I presume most of you have seen the recent comments by Chrissie Hynde. Her argument seems to be that if you deliberately give a sexual 'come on' signal, then you are at least in part to blame if someone responds to your signal and does 'come on'.

I think young women in particular can be forgiven for naivety in this regard, not knowing how strong their signals are, so to speak. Getting very drunk does make one more vulnerable to an evening-long 'situation' full of sexual signals both ways turning into something more sinister, I would have thought.

However, I don't know what proportion of rapes come into that category. It seems that there are a lot of instances (the majority?) where drunkenness of the woman has nothing to do with it.

I like lily's post of 0831. I think there is a grey area and it centres around sensible safety measures given that some men are savages with regard to sex. Yes, women should be safe out alone in the middle of the night or when drunk but the simple fact is that sometimes they are not. Accepting that and acting accordingly is not victim blaming, it's just acceptance of reality.

I think the point here is that you never seem to hear of women being charged with rape because the bloke was too drunk to consent - although clearly this is likely to happen. Alcohol "provokes the desire, but it takes away the performance" according to WS. In my experience being drunk doesn't stop men or woman trying to perform sex acts, it just makes it difficult to achieve orgasm.

Anyone, of either sex, who is sexually active and enjoys a drink is likely at some stage to wake up with someone and think, that was a mistake... In most such cases both parties were drunk and let their desires overcome their inhibitions. But how to distinguish such incidents from genuine abuses where one party remains reasonably sober but sets out to take advantage of the other's drunkenness?

Quite simply, a man should be taught from early teens onwards to keep his dick well and truly zipped until he is certain that both he and whomever he wishes to have sex with are compos mentis.

Actually the question about diabetes is not so off the wall as would first appear. With more and more people developing type 2, and at progressively younger ages, it could well be a serious question. Especially if drink is added to the mix.

Sadly I know one young diabetics who, despite medical advice re kidney damage, does binge drink.

If she hasn't said "yes" it is the man's fault. Any idea that men should be allowed to do as they want because a woman is drunk/skimpily dressed is left over from when it was widely held that men couldn't help themselves. If the man is so drunk he probably couldn't perform anyway.

I agree with the examples above, but the problem seems to be - is it ok for a woman to get deliberately hammered and lie in the gutter in what looks like her bra and pants, which is a nightly scenario in many city centres and holiday spots. if she then seemingly willingly goes with an inebrietated young man is it always all his fault? Or should we warn girls of the dangers of the above? or is that blaming the victim as well?

If a diabetic woman has become disorientated and/or semi-conscious because she has, for some reason, not injected her insulin and is raped, is it her fault for being negligent with her insulin?

If a woman takes a new medication and becomes confused/semi-conscious as a side affect, is it her fault that she is raped because she didn't read the warnings?

If a woman wears skimpy clothes, is it her fault that she is raped?

If a nun goes into an area where it is known that women are attacked and is raped, is it her fault for going to a place that she knew wasn't safe?

A young woman in India was gang raped on a bus. She knew that some men frown on woman travelling on buses but did it anyway. Was she responsible for the gang rape, her appalling injuries and subsequent death?

I'm not sure but are some posters suggesting that some women bring rape on themselves. In effect they, and not the perpetrator, are responsible for the crime.

So let's say the woman has not been drinking excessively by choice but has been slipped something in her drink that she didn't know about as a joke. Is she then just an open invitation to any man who decides to take advantage of this? The fact is that "No" means "No" but also that all men should be taught that they need to ensure that consent has been given and continues to be given. If a woman should decide to say "No" at any point then he has to stop and if a woman is incapable of making a judgement because of any impediment (self-inflicted or not) he should not proceed. The idea that "she was asking for it" because of the way she dressed or was drinking is just the traditional excuse that has always been trotted out. I thought we had moved on. When I was growing up there was a widely promoted view (by men) that once a man had reached a certain point it was impossible/painful for him to stop. Pure rubbish of course. Just another excuse used to justify non-consensual sex (rape really).

There is also the fact that even if a woman said yes that doesn't mean a thing because unless you go from sublime to ridiculous and get a written agreement she could change her mind later and simply say she didn't agree. What will a couple need to do to prove it wear hidden video cameras to prove what happened.

Perhaps they could be sold in Anne Summers shops, 'Get your pre sex pith helmet including batteries here'.

The fact is rape is a heinous crime, rape is sometimes a very difficult crime to prove. Rape claims are sometimes false and that has to be factored into the equation too.

As for women having to be responsible for their own safety and care, to me that is
self evident. Chrissy Hind from the Proclaimers has just been castigated for her view but I understood what she was saying, if you dress provocatively and get blind drunk or so doped up you have lost the ability to protect yourself from harm. Now she has a valid point . She got it in the neck for daring to say so, Why?

Some will say it doesn't matter how the woman has behaved rape is rape and there is no excuse. That is also true to say. Therefore it is a waste of time falling into one side of the argument because they are both right. Women should take responsibility. No man has the right to rape there should be no excuse Nada, zilch, zero tolerance.

There are also two sides to accusations of rape. There are cases of women who feel guilty the day after, women who have filed faulse accusations for example. Perhaps men should take more responsibility for what could happen before they engage in casual sex their life could be destroyed too.

Sadly you only have to look at the behaviour of holiday makers abroad or any inner city late at night and you will see it is an uphill battle to tell both sexes for goodness sake be careful , it could be you.

There is nobody in their right mind who cannot find rape a heinous crime and I am not excusing anybody male or female who is a rapist. I am only giving a personal view on the question of a woman saying 'yes' prior to having sex. It is impossible to prove whether she/he said yes or no .

Totally agree with merlotgran.