If a female student has sex with a passed out drunk male student, should he be expelled for sexual assault?
(Since she was penetrated, she is the one raped by definition.) Dartmouth is being sued for allegedly doing just that.
- 1 month ago
Yes, she should definitely be expelled.
And you do not have to be penetrated to be raped. If a woman stimulate a man's genitals without his consent, she is raping him.
- JackLv 71 month ago
No, but I also don't think that he should be expelled for sexual assault if he was conscious, and they had sex while both were inebriated.
Feminism corrupts everything it touches...and our legal system has been corrupted by it for decades.
- Common SenseLv 71 month ago
It's amazing how many colleges are getting sued for railroading male students, yet they continue to do so. While there are many issues involved in this case the real issue is colleges should not be handing cases of rape or sexual assault. Actions that constitute felony crime should be handled by our judicial system, not our education system.
One answer here refers to how the DOJ defines rape, but that's irrelevant. What matters is how the college in question defines it. Many colleges do in fact define it by who penetrates who. There are a few organizations that complain about the lack of proper due process colleges provide, but their biased definitions are a problem as well.
While it bothers me we live in such a litigious society, I think the only way this is going to change is by more and more wrongfully treated students suing.
- JASONLv 52 months ago
She must've been horny.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- Anonymous2 months ago
Absolutely not. If anything, it's the perp. who should be convicted for RAPE. **** kinda nonsense is that?
- BillLv 72 months ago
That link is confusing as hell. First she claims he abused her and he responds by saying he didn't remember anything from that night. Then he turns around and claims she raped him when passed out. The article mentions some evidence and yet never says what the evidence is. I don't know what the purpose of that link is supposed to be, but it sure as hell does a poor job of explaining the case.
In any event, if someone was raped here, which I have no idea who it was, then the offending party should be punished.
Also Elana, the definition of rape was expanded a good eight years ago to include this kind of thing.
- ElanaLv 72 months ago
There are TWO VERY IMPORTANT PARTS of the definition of rape. One is the action (penetration of what and by what) and the other in consensuality.
If she consents to have sex with a male student (assuming she is legally competent to consent, i.e. not stoned out of her mind, underage or mentally ill etc), he did not rape or assault her REGARDLESS of his state of inebriation.
Now, you could argue that she might have raped him, though part of the definition of rape, as mentioned before, may deem that differently than you might expect. By the US FBI's definition of rape, she could have raped him by penetrating HIS ANUS, but since your question specifies her being penetrated and (by your own stipulation) she consented, there was no rape.
As for your source, you've just shown just how complex this issue is and what happens when you've got a bunch of anti-male biases in a pseudo court room setting.
That doesn't mean the law is wrong. It probably means that colleges shouldn't be handling this issue.
Certainly, both parties were arguing over the facts of this case and jud courts are NOTORIOUSLY biased towards female complaintants.
Personally, I think the FBI's definition of rape is over-narrow (i.e. they don't consider hopping on a guy's erection - even when he is asleep and cannot legally consent - isn't considered rape - at worst, it is sexual assault)
Your probably is jud-court bias, and with that, I heartily agree.
- oldprofLv 72 months ago
As of 2012, the DOJ definition of rape is: "“The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.” " [https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/blog/updated-...
NOTE: The definition indicates that the person who does not give consent is the victim. In other words the male did not give his consent for her to use his penis for penetration; so the male is the victim. It's not about who is penetrated, it's about who did not give consent for that penetration.
- Anonymous2 months ago
Man, I wish I went to parties like that. Assuming she wasn't 400 lbs
- ?Lv 62 months ago
No, SHE should be. Rape is not about who is penetrated, it is about who forces sex on someone else.