Many charges of "rape" are NOT real rape cases, just some drunken slapper who gives it up then changes her mind the next morning. The lives and reputations of too many men have been ruined by women who get themselves drunk, engage in sex, then change rape the next day to assuage their conscience.
If woman decides to have sex while drunk, it should not be charged as rape. (of course, if she is slipped a roofie that's a different story, and IS rape). Why should she be allowed to change her mind afterwards and not be held accountable for her actions just because she was drunk?
If she were in a car wreck and killed someone whilst drunk, should she be held unaccountable just because she was drunk? She knowingly drank and is still responsible for her subsequent actions. The same line of reasoning should be applied to cases where she changes her mind the next morning and retroactively withdraws her consent. Nonsense.
It is patronising and paternalistic to claim that a woman is not responsible for her actions while drunk.
And in addition, the man she has sex with while she is drunk is probably drunk himself. I'd LOVE to see a man charge a woman with sexual assault because she had sex with him while HE was drunk.
REAL rape is one of the most henious of crimes, and must not be excused. But we must redefine rape so as to not dilute its seriousness when applied legitimately.
Now, unfortunately, cries of "Rape" as as ignored as cries of "Racism". Both terms have been bandied about so often, and falsely, that they are largely ignored or not taken seriously because they are so often misused the public have been innured to such charges.
It is a prime example of "The Boy Who Cried Wolf".
So by your reasoning "so maybe men who are falsely accused can learn a thing or two in the process" it would be justified to say similarly that "a black man falsely accused of a crime could maybe learn a thing or two in the process"...
Exuse me, my dear lady, but your rabid misandry is showing.
Good on you, Anon. Wonderful posting.