It's a difficult issue with a lot of gray area.
I can't really add much, aside from a few personal observations and anecdotes.
Anecdote:
I know a girl who, when she was in her late teens and early 20s, would castigate men in general, using the number of times she'd been "raped" (something that apparently happened to her quite frequently) as a reason. I put raped in quotes, because the actual situation is not quite the standard definition of the term. See, she liked to drink. A lot. She was quite the flirt when she was sober, she liked winding guys up just so that she could reject them (yes, she was and is somewhat psychotic that way). It was an ego trip that she liked taking quite often.
The problem she had was that when she got drunk, she became much more aggressive, would glom onto anything with a penis, and never got around to saying no, even if she had earlier in the night. (I've had to peel her off me a couple times when she was hammered; and anyone who's actually met me will know just how drunk someone has to get to glom onto me.)
So imagine you're a guy, with this really cute girl coming on to you, then telling you no; then coming back a couple hours later and doing just about everything short of screwing you right there on the dance floor. Imagine that you've had a few as well.
Part of her problem was that she also couldn't handle her alcohol. She couldn't just take one or two drinks and leave it at that, she inevitably drank excessively, and typically got puking drunk at some point.
So it ended up with her describing any sexual encounter she had when drunk, and later regretted, as "rape", despite the fact that she initiated pretty much all of it.
I've known a few others who had a similar attitude. Any sexual encounter had under the influence of alcohol (or any other drug, as many of them use quite a number of recreational substances) and later regretted was termed "rape", regardless of who initiated it, or how consenting they were at the time.
Other comments:
Yes, I realize that
Some regions have either proposed or implemented (I'm not sure about the latter, though I am sure about the former) laws which would define any sexual intercourse with a female who has been drinking as rape. I know a few learning institutions which have implemented private polices of this nature; although I don't know if any of their students have been disciplined because of it. They do not have similar policies regarding males, and consider males to invariably be the aggressor in any sexual encounter.
I know that there are quite a number of males -- some of which I am personally aquainted with, unfortunately -- who do "prey" on intoxicated females. It's reprehensible, but I'm not sure I'd necessarily consider it rape; since there is typically no force involved. The problem is that the effects of alcohol are well-understood, and anyone who drinks should know, unless they've been living under a rock for their entire lives previously, that alcohol, and indeed any other drug, will remove inhibitions, and impair judgement and ability to resist. Becoming intoxicated in an environment with a significant potential for this sort of incident is simply irresposible, and negates any claim to "rape" unless there was actual force involved. That applies regardless of the gender of the "victim". There is also definitely a double standard here. When it happens to a female, the inevitable response is a backlash against the male, and accusations of rape. When it happens to a male, the inevitable response ranges from comments about poor judgement, to simply laughing it off.
The problem is that it can sometimes be very difficult to distinguish that sort of situation, from a true "date rape" or predatory behaviour. The later invariably involves some sort of coercion, or at least trickery. For example, a person who spikes someone else's drink, so that the victim is consuming far more alcohol than they intend to and are aware of at the time. The victim might think they are drinking responsibly, and many only have one or two actual drinks; or may not be intending to drink alcohol at all, and are not aware that they are, in fact, consuming it. And yes, it is possible to make drinks that contain substantial amounts of undetectable alcohol. These typically also contain substantial amounts of sugar, and often dairly products as well, both of which mask the presence of alcohol. Drinks of this sort are typically referred to as "panty droppers", because their purpose behind their creation is just that, to enable someone to drink enough to become irresponsibly intoxicated, without noticing how much they're drinking. (And this is not always predatory, I've known several young females who deliberately drink those concotions because they "want to get drunk, but can't stand the taste of alcohol".)
Then there is the issue that someone else pointed out. Those who say "no", yet act "yes". Most common among young religious types who believe it's wrong, but want to do it anyway. They put themselves in situations where it's quite clear that sex is the desired end, but try to weasel out of responsibility by saying "only to this point and no farther"; despite the fact that that point is where the hormones kick in and judgement turns off, and they put up no resistance when it does go past that point, aside from a weak "We shouldn't be doing this" (or some variant thereof). By saying no initially, yet allowing themselves to be "subjected to" intercourse, without resisting; and they can rationalize that they're not responsible for anything that happens. They're the "victims", not active participants; and therefore havent committed any "sin". Again, something I've seen too often (and I actually have come pretty close to playing the victim, myself, on one occasion).
There is way too much emotional blather around this issue; and any attempt at discussion invariably results in the sort of pointless and obfuscatory personal attacks and double standards that this thread has already devolved into.
what the hell, man? did you actually think about this before posting? 
