Consensual stupidity SHOULD be criminal IMHO, but it isn't a high volume factor in the majority of rape cases nationally.
Jurisprudence is not an exact science. It is a finite set of rules for an infinite set of variations and circumstances.
Despite the best of intentions, sometimes the innocent(sic) are swept up with the same broom as the guilty.
Raising the threshold of guilt in the case of rape allegations has no bearing on that except to create an environment even more conducive to abuse.
The court system has an obligation to make an effort to take into consideration any and all extenuating circumstance that may apply, and adjudicate the case accordingly.
If the conditions that you describe were not taken fully into account, the Judge should be stubble drug.
But the rapist should do 90 days just for stupidity.
I disagree with that bolded part, no matter how stupid someone is, that is a separate matter than an actual rape. A rapist bears the full responsibility for their crime, no matter how stupid, careless, irresponsible the victim was - that has no bearing on a crime having occured.
Then there is the matter of what is called rape, actually being rape, just because its called that sometimes doesnt mean it was- those were the situations i was adressing. (and in the particular instance i responded to, that you quoted me on here, was about a situation i wouldnt call rape to begin with - because her actions crossed into implied consent imo)