Like this case?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...256a1e-10d3-11e3-bdf6-e4fc677d94a1_story.html
In a nutshell...the victim states she went to a party and got intoxicated. Had consensual sex with one guy that evening and a different guy when she awoke the following morning. She found out later that she had sex/was raped (depending on unknown facts) by three midshipmen in between those contacts.
At issue is her condition at the time and if it was consensual. The common understanding (what most people assume) is that if she didn't remember it than she must have been unconscious and these guys took advantage of an unconscious victim. However....its also possible that she was "conscious"...speaking...and giving these guys the impression this contact was indeed consensual. Alcoholic "blackouts" don't equate to unconsciousness.
What would the legal issues be if both male and female parties were intoxicated enough to not recall the previous nights happenings? Is the male party still guilty of rape?
This is not to condone (by ANY means) those situations where men do indeed know the female is too intoxicated to consent...charge em and convict em. But if a guy is the type of person to do that I highly doubt that a class telling them that was wrong would be much more than a PC waste of time. Women need to protect themselves from people and situations like that. I don't want any of my daughters to be at the mercy of assuming a guy has been "properly trained" not to rape. If he needs that type of explanation in the first place I wouldn't want them associating with him.
I want women to be safe. I don't think that shutting down discussion of personal safety issues by screaming "YOU ARE BLAMING THE VICTIM" advances the issue at all. We ALL make mistakes..thats why in the LE/MIL world we have after action reviews (AAR's) we point out where we made mistakes and hope to learn from it so that we don't repeat them. It's not a matter of assigning blame...