sure. i was just saying that that seems to me like a separate subject, since afaik the original discussion started out being around whether and how to determine what constitutes rape in grey-area cases like the one the op cited. to me that tangent tendency is interesting in its own right, because it does point back to @bethdeth's idea that rape is so problematical to us, we do have this strong reflex to make the very idea of it 'go away'. to jump right over discussion of a historical fact that cannot be changed, into a 'resolved' problem, somewhere down some theoretical road.The discussions about locking the barn door aren't to stop the theft that already occurred, they're to help prevent another one. In instances of rape, it's obviously not going to make any difference to the crime that has already been committed, but it may help prevent the person being a victim again in the future. Or it can be used as an example to others on how to prevent being victimized in the same way.
sure, but i think it's silly. also not intending insult. maybe it's something that makes natural obvious sense to you, but i'm pretty fond of getting a little bit looped now and then, and i pretty fiercely resent the idea . . . etc etc. but that's a well-worn topic in this thread as well.From my perspective the entire discussion of drunken consent is one of prevention. If you're never in a situation where it could happen, it will never be an issue will it?