Reply #112: there is no defense for men that says [View All]

[qazplm]

if you were drunk too, you didn't rape anyone.

Voluntary intoxication is only a defense to crimes requiring specific intent.

Rape is a general intent crime, therefore voluntary intoxication is not a defense and when dealing with mistake of fact (a defense to rape that basically says I thought she consented) it requires that the jury consider what a reasonable person would objectively believe who is sober, they cannot factor in that the man was raped.

Rape requires penetration of the vagina, sexual intercourse. Now men can be sexually assaulted, but they cannot be raped. Rape is a legal term of art for a particular kind of sexually assaulted while simultaneously being a word we use colloqiually in a broader sense.

In that situation where the male has intercourse with a woman, he cannot claim rape unless she jumped on top of him or something, but that is not usually the case, let's be realistic here. If it were, then no jury would convict in that scenario.

You could have alleged rape, and if you were judged in the view of the jury to have been too drunk to consent, then the man you had sex with could have been convicted of rape. I suspect some on here would argue you were in fact raped. Technically, you were by a very strict legal definition, although at the end of the day, if you don't feel you were, then it's hard IMO for someone to argue that you were because on some level you are ok with it.