[Mick]

Obviously, the extreme of this is that consent made conditional on payment of money, which is illegal in most states.

That being said, I'm not sure that's the case here.  It doesn't sound like the woman said, "OK, fine we can have sex, but only if later you are my boyfriend".  It sounds more like the woman first gave consent (if not initiated).  Then she insinuated that they would be in a relationship by talking about their future life as a couple.  He makes it clear he is not interested in life as a couple.  At that point, the woman could a) nonetheless consent to having sex b) withdraw consent or c) be too intoxicated to consent.  We don't hear what happened in the story other than the fact that they did have sex.  If she said that if they weren't going to be a couple that she didn't want to continue, then he was guilty of committing rape.  If she was too intoxicated to consent, he also was guilty of committing rape, though there would probably be extenuating circumstances (her behavior the entire rest of the evening).  If she said yes and was capable of saying yes, then it's not rape.  It's possible though that she wasn't hearing him when he said he was not interested in a relationship.  That's on her, but creates a very messy situation for both of them.  That's why my one conclusion is that it's a situation that I wouldn't have wanted to touch with a 10-foot pole.

BC

I agree with you, BC.  And he didn't disclose whether she said "In that case, No" or "I don't care, let's have sex anyway" hoping for the future relationship anyways, or was too intoxicated to respond...although the fact that she was coherent enough to discuss future plans makes me wonder.

And I wonder, looking ahead to the future when college students where strap-on blood-alcohol measuring devices that flash green for "Good to go" or red for "too intoxicated"...what is too intoxicated?  .06?  .10?  .15 or more?  And if these devices get developed, would colleges mandate their distribution at parties?  Would they deliver a non-lethal jolt of electricity to a persistent suitor who tries to override the red warning?  Just curious as to the various future permutations.

[Mick]

Obviously, the extreme of this is that consent made conditional on payment of money, which is illegal in most states.

That being said, I'm not sure that's the case here.  It doesn't sound like the woman said, "OK, fine we can have sex, but only if later you are my boyfriend".  It sounds more like the woman first gave consent (if not initiated).  Then she insinuated that they would be in a relationship by talking about their future life as a couple.  He makes it clear he is not interested in life as a couple.  At that point, the woman could a) nonetheless consent to having sex b) withdraw consent or c) be too intoxicated to consent.  We don't hear what happened in the story other than the fact that they did have sex.  If she said that if they weren't going to be a couple that she didn't want to continue, then he was guilty of committing rape.  If she was too intoxicated to consent, he also was guilty of committing rape, though there would probably be extenuating circumstances (her behavior the entire rest of the evening).  If she said yes and was capable of saying yes, then it's not rape.  It's possible though that she wasn't hearing him when he said he was not interested in a relationship.  That's on her, but creates a very messy situation for both of them.  That's why my one conclusion is that it's a situation that I wouldn't have wanted to touch with a 10-foot pole.

BC

I agree with you, BC.  And he didn't disclose whether she said "In that case, No" or "I don't care, let's have sex anyway" hoping for the future relationship anyways, or was too intoxicated to respond...although the fact that she was coherent enough to discuss future plans makes me wonder.

And I wonder, looking ahead to the future when college students where strap-on blood-alcohol measuring devices that flash green for "Good to go" or red for "too intoxicated"...what is too intoxicated?  .06?  .10?  .15 or more?  And if these devices get developed, would colleges mandate their distribution at parties?  Would they deliver a non-lethal jolt of electricity to a persistent suitor who tries to override the red warning?  Just curious as to the various future permutations.