WTF: Court Says Oral Sex NOT Rape If Victim Is Drunk & Unconscious

Photo: weheartit
Court Rules That Forced Oral Sex Isn't Rape
Buzz

What the actual f*ck?!

Oklahoma's criminal appeal court shocked (and horrified) the nation with a ruling stating that forced oral sex shouldn't be considered rape if the victim is unconscious from drinking.

Wait, WHAT? On what planet is this a rational and just ruling? Because it's very clear to most people that this is victim-blaming and buying into the worst kind of outdated ideas regarding rape. Shame on you, Oklahoma.

The case involved a 17-year-old boy who assaulted a very intoxicated 16-year-old girl to whom he had given a ride home after a night of drinking. The girl was clearly barely conscious and was later brought to a hospital where she underwent a sexual assault exam, during which traces of the boy's DNA were found on the back of her leg and around her mouth.

The boy claimed that she had consented to oral sex, but the girl told investigators that she had no memory of anything that happened after leaving the park. The boy was charged with forcible oral sodomy. 

Instead of justice being served, the case was thrown out by a trial judge and his ruling was upheld by the appeals court, which wrote in its decision: "Forcible sodomy cannot occur where a victim is so intoxicated as to be completely unconscious at the time of the sexual act of oral copulation."

However, legal experts and victims' advocates believe the ruling is actually a sign of something greater: the worrisome gaps that still exist between the nation's patchwork of laws and the evolving ideas about rape and consent.

Michelle Anderson, the dean of the CUNY School of Law and an expert in rape law, called the ruling appropriate but the law archaic.

"This is a call for the legislature to change the statute, which is entirely out of step with what the other states have done in this area and what Oklahoma should do," Anderson said in an interview with The New York Times. "It creates a huge loophole for sexual abuse that makes no sense."

Laws need to be updated and changed quickly before more heinous decisions are made. Hopefully, the outrage that this ruling has caused will encourage the lawmakers to make changes.

"There is a recognition that social morals have changed, that the law should now try to protect sexual autonomy as opposed to sexual morality," Anderson said.