I agree that it's a very slippery slope to work with. I think most people can agree that if a person is passed-out after drinking that engaging in sex with them is definitely wrong, and is not different really than those cases of doctors or dentists molesting patients while they were under general anaesthetic, or somebody administering the date-rape drug. But yeah, at what stage up until that pass-out point does whatever you say or do not mean anything? You would almost need a 3rd party to verify that consent was not given 100% out of drunken stupor.
Regardless, there seems to be the disconnect between the two poster campaigns in that they're not really comparing the same scenario. One shows the women clearly passed-out, vulnerable, and incapable of indicating or giving consent at all, while the men's campaign is countering with the "she's tipsy and regretted having sex with some ugly dude" sentiment.
Back to the drunk driving comparison, say I met a tipsy person on the street and gave them keys to my car and told them it was okay to drive, wouldn't they still be responsible for the DUI if caught? So are they now the victim in this situation? If not, why this different standard if it happens to be a tipsy person and a sexual encounter? This might not be so different from the bar being responsible for not preventing somebody from drunk driving, but the drunk driver is still responsible as well.
|