It is possible for two people to rape each other simultaneously.

RamFel said:

Oh, you mean a situation where both parties involve have both given their consent! I change my answer. No. They can't both commit rape against each other simultaneously.

Click to expand...

Do you subscribe to the idea that a woman drunk cannot give consent, at least in the legal sense. Naturally, just like a child can verbally give consent, we are talking about the idea that the individual is not capable of fully understanding what they are consenting to and thus it is not true consent.

maquiscat said:

Do you subscribe to the idea that a woman drunk cannot give consent, at least in the legal sense. Naturally, just like a child can verbally give consent, we are talking about the idea that the individual is not capable of fully understanding what they are consenting to and thus it is not true consent.

Click to expand...

That's a tough one. She would have to be extremely drunk and not remember what happened to her. But my feeling is that most couples who find themselves in the "gee, I don't remember that" situation would probably consent, unless maybe she were a religious person and a virgin. Maybe.

RamFel said:

Oh, you mean a situation where both parties involve have both given their consent!

Click to expand...

...no, I mean a situation where two 14 year olds engage in sex aren't raping each other in all states, I don't believe.

Did you actually read before you replied? Because your reply doesn't seem to address my response.

Slyfox696 said:

...no, I mean a situation where two 14 year olds engage in sex aren't raping each other in all states, I don't believe.

Did you actually read before you replied? Because your reply doesn't seem to address my response.

Click to expand...

Sorry, I thought I was responding to Maquiscat.

maquiscat said:

So something set me off towards this statement. I want to hold off on presenting it, so as not to influence others' thinking.

Do you this the title is a true statement? Please be prepared to support your answer one way or the other.

Click to expand...

:lol: This is the most awesome question ever. I should pose this question on a philosophy board.

I don't know a proper conclusion without thinking on it hard. Off the top of my head I would say--as with two prison combatants trying to murder each other--two people in opposition to each other could attempt to rape the other one--simultaneously. But off the top of my head it would seem only one would prevail. Of course, like a boxing or MMA match, one could suppose each could dominate or win "rounds."

RamFel said:

Sorry, I thought I was responding to Maquiscat.

Click to expand...

Okay, that makes more sense because I was awfully confused. Thanks!

FastPace said:

:lol: This is the most awesome question ever. I should pose this question on a philosophy board.

I don't know a proper conclusion without thinking on it hard. Off the top of my head I would say--as with two prison combatants trying to murder each other--two people in opposition to each other could attempt to rape the other one--simultaneously. But off the top of my head it would seem only one would prevail. Of course, like a boxing or MMA match, one could suppose each could dominate or win "rounds."

Click to expand...

The situation I was thinking about, and was wanting to see if others put it together, is two people both drunk engaging in sex. A common cry is that having sex with a woman while she is drunk is rape, because she is unable to consent. That is to say, despite any words she might say, any consent would be invalid, as she would not be able to make proper judgement, similar to how a child cannot not validly consent due to inexperience. So logically, anyone having sex with a man while he is drunk, is also committing rape, as he too cannot consent. Furthering that logic, two drunk people, of any gender combination, could neither one consent and thus both are raping the other while being raped by the other.

maquiscat said:

The situation I was thinking about, and was wanting to see if others put it together, is two people both drunk engaging in sex. A common cry is that having sex with a woman while she is drunk is rape, because she is unable to consent. That is to say, despite any words she might say, any consent would be invalid, as she would not be able to make proper judgement, similar to how a child cannot not validly consent due to inexperience. So logically, anyone having sex with a man while he is drunk, is also committing rape, as he too cannot consent. Furthering that logic, two drunk people, of any gender combination, could neither one consent and thus both are raping the other while being raped by the other.

Click to expand...

My hats off. I like it when people actually think for themselves and try to figure out how reasonable or how logical dogmatically pronounced statements are in society.

Well done.

Although, contemporary American beliefs and laws are born from and defended from pure emotions, and the require zero of the logical coherency that fields of inquiry like philosophy and the natural sciences ask its professionals to at least try to string together.

Feminism is about female superiority and its goals seem to be to erode all personal responsibility among females (not males). Employers need to buy rich women condoms, not condoms for poor working men. Women are equal to men an therefore women a woman gets drunk she is not responsible for her sexual activity--men are while drunk. So, you are not going to change many if any minds in America (the men are conditioned to think with emotions too) by pointing out the dilemma you did.

Thread: It is possible for two people to rape each other simultaneously.

Click to expand...

Yes, that's called a fun night with the missus.