Lev.
Rather than a hypothetical, perhaps you could go to a disco and see exactly what goes on. The girls will be dressed to the T, and their dress will be designed to attract maximum interest and attention. By at about 11 o’clock, most of the girls will be drunk (of their own accord), and many will be all over the boys (of their own accord).

But the next day, they can wake up hung over, and then think that they should not have done what had occurred, or even think that they have been rapped.

If the girl does claim rape, then the boy can go to jail for doing exactly what the girl had done. That is now the difference.

I have seen this situation occur with a fellow worker in a company I worked in. She claimed rape 3 days afterwards. No physical evidence was provided at the trial. A doctor’s report found no evidence of rape, but he went to jail for a number of years. It completely destroyed his career, and the last time I saw him he was riding around the streets on a push bike. It was all based on what she said only, with no physical evidence provided

Fencepost, thanks for you moving and personal post. I agree with your analysis. The lines in the sand keep shifting - relatively recently, women with intellectual disabilities were given hysterectomies. Now they marry and have children.

I also think, re your old girlfriend, that if you asked her she'd be as curious and ambivalent as you are. But she wouldn't have a clear answer, and more than you do. Life is tricky, after all.

Apowell,

Thank you for the informative post. Clearly, the notions of "free agreement" are essential. 'Under the influence', as your post indicates seems to mean at the same level of restraint as duress, asleep, unconscious etc. In other words, drug or inebriated where an agreement is not reasonable. As JamesH pointed out in addition "active consent", could certainly include a great deal of non-verbal gestures and actions which concurs that "quiet" and "shy" is actually a lack of consent.

HRS,

I think you must have missed the bit where I wrote: "No person without the ability to engage is consent is capable of doing so regardless of the power accrued, and no person with that ability should deny themselves that responsibility". I was referring to exactly the sort of situation that your post suggested (I'm not commenting on the specifics of the case however); a person who makes a bad sexual decision in hindsight should not cry wolf, as it were.

(As for nighclubs, I still go once in a blue moon and although sensual the company is civilised).

I guess overall we all seem to be in "furious agreement"; none reject the validity of consent in principle but recognise elements of it as complex. This is, of course, a far cry from rejecting it altogether as some have done.

Lev,
I would agree with what you have said. I also think there are 2 society type issues that are heavily impacting on the rape laws and also the age of consent.

One is that girls are being compelled or coerced by the media mainly (including magazines, films, TV shows etc) to have sex at a younger age. I understand the average age for a girl to have first sex in the US has dropped from about 19 in the 1970’s to about 15 now. If it is similar here, then that age cannot keep declining indefinitely.

The second issue is that males are being portrayed as an abuser, and there have been quite intensive advertising campaigns on TV and elsewhere (including schools) that do portray males as an abuser.

When the 2 issues are combined, then it is a very dangerous mixture, particularly for the males.

However instead of changing the laws, the issues should be addressed, and girls should not be coerced into having sex at such a young age, or in one night stands, and the boys should not be portrayed as an abuser.

There would have to be campaigns for more permanent relationships, and at an older age.

This would then involve more attention to what is coming from the media (mainly), and trying to improve the media, rather than changing the rape laws or consent laws.

Having an ABC children’s TV channel would be a good start in that area, as the programs could be better controlled.

"gestures and actions which concurs that "quiet" and "shy" is actually a lack of consent."

Lev on this point I have to disagree, in some legal matters by not objecting it is seen as consent, silent consent.

I have known people who have looked after the disabled, some carers themselves have been propositioned by their disabled cleints. Also I understand that it can be horrendous trying to keep the boys and girls separated and under supervision at all times, and even then they manage to sneak off with each other.

I have heard a lot of encouragement for women to say NO, and I don't have a problem with that, but what puzzles me is why are not women encouraged to say YES, when they want too? or perhaps more correctly ask for what they want.

Sadly there is far too much game playing and gay people I know of both genders tend too it seems to have a lot less trouble with that.

Whilst in theory the disabled and not mature enough to consent to sex, how then does one then deal with their sexual activity?

Psychologist Toby Green wrote about some women who see themselves as the key/power to male desire and are shocked when they realise that they are not the key to male desire.(that doesn't sound quite right, I have to find the article.)

Hi everyone

Our society is very contradictory when it comes to sex, and there is so much that could be discussed. We seem to be pairing an increasingly neurotic and litigious society, with the continuing omnipresence of sex and innuendo. We can't really sustain both at once!

I don't know much detail about what was said or done in the indiginous communities. But in the relatively privileged white communities, where the circumstances are quite different, I have begun to see a worrying neuroticism and overly punitive attitude towards children experimenting.

While it may make you squirm a bit, the reality is that children do experiment. I have heard of cases where suburban mothers have accused boys of about 6, of being abusers in the schoolyard. It seems like they just can't handle what goes on, in a mature way - the mothers, that is.

Again, I think the context in an indiginous community is quite different, but perhaps the magistrates or judges were railing against this idiocy we are seeing in the metropolitan areas.

There is an inherently innocent aspect to children that makes it different from an adult doing it. Not that children are always innocent all the time - but I don't think they should be tried just the same as adults.

For the indigenous communities it would be good to see an in-depth investigation of what happened - done by people outside the legal system, like researchers or social workers. The legal system is not designed to do the social work for us.

Cheers.