You have the order, and thus logical structure, of things wrong in your quotes. You start from "Now, actually, the way the law works" as if that was the general issue he was discussing, and then give "So if both Alice and Bob were drunk" as if that was a general statement about the consequences of law. But that's wrong. "So if both Alice and Bob were drunk" is not where that case is introduced; the sentences before mentioning law are clearly already about the symmetric case ("Or did Alice and Bob rape each other?").
The correct order is 1) the symmetric case with Alice and Bob is brought up FIRST 2) talk about how he thinks real law would handle this case ("Now, actually, the way the law works", in contrast to the alternatives like "rape each other" mentioned just before). 3) the "So if both Alice and Bob were drunk" you quoted is just a reference back to 1, not a general statement about every possible case where both partners are drunk.
The rest has already been addressed in my previous comments.
Power management, mobile and firmware developer on Linux. Security developer at Aurora. Ex-biologist. mjg59 on Twitter. Content here should not be interpreted as the opinion of my employer. Also on Mastodon.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: My overall take on the discussion
Date: 2012-11-09 12:18 am (UTC)The correct order is
1) the symmetric case with Alice and Bob is brought up FIRST
2) talk about how he thinks real law would handle this case ("Now, actually, the way the law works", in contrast to the alternatives like "rape each other" mentioned just before).
3) the "So if both Alice and Bob were drunk" you quoted is just a reference back to 1, not a general statement about every possible case where both partners are drunk.
The rest has already been addressed in my previous comments.