This post has been edited to add context and an additional screenshot.
Below the cut is a screenshot of some reprehensible shit that Dawkins said today on Twitter, saved for posterity in case he deletes them:
I do believe that the whole thing was in response to this excellent article which discusses Michael Shermer's pattern of sexual assault, particularly the time he raped someone who was too intoxicated to consent to sex.
It started with this:
This is not a fluke, or a misstatement. Dawkins doubled down on that point, repeatedly:
Dear Richard Dawkins:
Performing sexual acts on someone "too drunk to remember what happened" is rape.
Testimony that one was "too drunk to remember," combined with evidence (or, in the case of Shermer, open admission) of sexual contact, is indeed evidence of rape.
Also, people should not have to plan for being raped. No one goes out wanting to be "in the position to testify & jail a man".
By your standards, rape-by-intoxication without eyewitnesses or recorded evidence (i.e., almost all rape by intoxication) is literally impossible to prosecute. Your standards would give free rein to rapists who target intoxicated people.
Fuck you very much,