Case (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
case) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
fandomsecrets2014-06-20 07:59 pm
case) wrote in fandomsecrets2014-06-20 07:59 pm
[ SECRET POST #2726 ]
⌈ Secret Post #2726 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
01.
__________________________________________________
02.
[Naruto]
__________________________________________________
03.
[Transformers: Prime]
__________________________________________________
04.
__________________________________________________
05. http://i.imgur.com/dkPX9Ym.gif
[moving .gif, Steven Ogg, Grand Theft Auto V]
__________________________________________________
06.
__________________________________________________
07. [SPOILERS for Murder in the First]
__________________________________________________
08. [SPOILERS for Game of Thrones]
__________________________________________________
09. [WARNING for rape]
__________________________________________________
10. [WARNING for rape]
__________________________________________________
11. [WARNING for rape, abuse, etc]
__________________________________________________
12. [WARNING for rape, abuse, pedophilia, incest, ironically enough none of which OP warned for]
__________________________________________________
13. [WARNING for eating disorders]
__________________________________________________
14. [WARNING for suicide]
__________________________________________________
15. [WARNING for sexual abuse]
__________________________________________________
Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 000 secrets from Secret Submission Post #389.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - ships it ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2014-06-21 02:54 am (UTC)(link)If you assault someone, it's assumed they did not consent to being physically assaulted.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2014-06-21 03:03 am (UTC)(link)But why is the assumption that you couldn't really have wanted it simply because you were drunk? Why is it that if I hit you while drunk, then I'm assumed to have really wanted to hit you; but if I have sex with you, then I'm assumed to have not really wanted to have sex with you?
Yes, the victim of an assault doesn't consent to being assaulted. I don't question that. I also don't question the idea that someone who is confused, disoriented, or passed out can't consent. But I am bothered by the idea that being drunk doesn't absolve you of some actions, but completely absolves you of others.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2014-06-21 03:10 am (UTC)(link)If you're completely drunk, then maybe you do want the sex, maybe you don't. An outsider can't tell. And that's the point. You're not assumed to not have wanted it, they are assumed to not have been able to tell for sure. They couldn't know for sure whether you really wanted it and took the chance and did it anyway. What if you hadn't really wanted it? I mean, if you did want it, great! Everything worked out for you. But if you didn't...
Well, that makes the second person pretty careless and possibly abusive, if they ignore that risk and do whatever they want with you.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2014-06-21 03:20 am (UTC)(link)It seemed like you were making a distinction between someone who is violent while drunk and someone who has sex while drunk. If you weren't, then I mistook you, and I apologize.
I can understand this idea that sometimes, another party might not know the difference. That's why I think that if someone is confused or disoriented, then there's a line to be drawn. But the thing that bothers me is that the ability to choose to assumed in someone who makes any number of careless decisions while drunk, but is not assumed in someone who has sex. Either you can't make decisions while drunk, or you can.
I said it downthread, but I'll say it again here: another reason why I'm bothered is because I don't like the idea that the mere fact of me drinking means that I am no longer capable of knowing my own mind and my own desires. I also don't like the idea that my partner is careless and abusive, when I am making a conscious choice.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2014-06-21 03:26 am (UTC)(link)It's about being responsible for the impact of your actions on others, not simply for your actions.
If someone is sober enough to consent to having sex with you, you don't hurt that person if they have sex with you.
If they don't consent, then you can absolutely sexually assault someone while drunk and be held responsible.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2014-06-21 03:31 am (UTC)(link)I agree with you. My problem is with the idea that, if you've been drinking, then you can't consent.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2014-06-21 03:35 am (UTC)(link)As for your statement there, it's too broad to agree or disagree with. Drinking what, and how much? What state of intoxication are you in?
no subject
(Anonymous) 2014-06-21 03:51 am (UTC)(link)The trouble is that I think the two cases are linked by agency: the violent drunk is considered to have agency; the drunk who has sex is considered not to have agency. There's a disconnect there that bothers me in a way that it seems I'm unable to describe.
But, drinking what and how much -- well, that depends on the person. I myself can usually have about four drinks of hard liquor before I've hit my limit. The state of intoxication where I see this disconnect does not involve confusion, disorientation, or unconsciousness.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2014-06-21 04:07 am (UTC)(link)Where does agency come in?
no subject
(Anonymous) 2014-06-23 11:02 pm (UTC)(link)