Trigger words: CONSENTUALLY consentual consent (2) consentually
Indicator sentences: The basic problem you seem to have is a complete lack of understanding of what "consent" is.
Negotiation parts: It's not the mere act of saying "yes". A child can say "yes" to sex, even enthusiastically, but that's not consent because they *lack the capability to understand what they are consenting to*. A mentally ill person that is incapable of understanding what is happening due to a delusion is similarly not able to consent. If you point a gun at someone and they say "yes", clearly they aren't consenting because they were coerced. But the same goes for a boss insisting their assistant have sex with them or they lose their job. Arguing that they could have said "no" isn't going to fly. So, yes, if a person gets drunk and they *actually* consent, as in the have both the capability to understand why they are doing, and they aren't being coerced, I would agree that it is not rape. The problem is that, voluntarily drunk or not, sufficiently drunk people simply lack the capability to validly consent, because they aren't able to understand what is going on. Them saying "yes" is no more meaningful than a child saying "yes". And one last thing: regardless of the legality or ethics involved, it's incredibly dangerous to have sex with someone that might be "blackout drunk", because they won't remember consenting, whether they did or not, and whether your view is "correct" or not. Imagine the position that you'd be in, having had sex with them that they *genuinely* don't remember consenting to. You're going to have a hell of a time convincing a jury of your story when they are absolutely genuine when they claim not to have consented, and it's your word against theirs, especially if you *do* remember what you were doing and are arguing from the moral low ground of having done the asshole thing of having sex with someone too drunk to understand what was happening. I understand what consent is, I used "say yes" to simplify it and not have to explain every single way consent can happen. But a drunk person can give consent even if they don't understand what's going on. Also, while yes, a child giving consent isn't very meaningful, if a two year old dropped a knife on my head, they shouldn't be punished because they aren't old enough and don't know what they're doing. But if someone's drunk enough and gets pissed off and shoots me, they would be arrested. They are old enough. Sex is more complex than "just don't kill someone", which is why it would be better to wait until they're an adult instead of when you can understand murder. And if someone doesn't remember whether or not they are consenting, and the other one can prove they did consent, then it isn't rape. They consented. If it can't be proven that they did or didn't consent, it'd be like any other crime that there isn't enough evidence for, as it should be. Unfortunately if it was rape, they would be set free, but if a serial killer cannot be proven guilty, they'd be set free, and most people I know consider murder to be more terrible than rape, and I'm sure those who don't at least put it up really damn high on their lists of heinous crimes.
Indicator sentences: In regards to sex specifically, you think that: 1) If you have sex while drunk and change your mind, it shouldn't be rape. 2) If you're forced to have sex, it is still rape. Is that correct?