Speaking of sexual assault. . . why is it that when two people are drunk and have sex that, when legally viewed, the female is considered unable to consent because she was drunk. . . but he WAS able to consent and even commit a heinous crime even though he was drunk, too?
How is it that she can't consent - but he can? And that the male is always considered to having raped the female but she never rapes him? Aren't they then raping each other?
What's the logic? I know - it doesn't belong in this thread but someone's comment made me think of it.