On the other side of the coin:

"A judge has reopened a major legal controversy by ruling that accused people can claim they were too drunk to be found culpable of committing crimes.
Presiding over a sexual assault case in Southwestern Ontario, Mr. Justice Terrence Patterson of the Superior Court of Ontario ruled that Parliament violated the Charter of Rights with a 1995 law that prohibits the so-called defence of excessive intoxication.
The ruling opened the door for Carl Frederick Fleming, 62, to argue that he was too drunk to appreciate his actions when he sexually assaulted a St. Thomas, Ont., woman in 2009."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/judge-reinstates-controversial-drunkenness-defence-in-sex-assault-case/article578863/

So, in this case one of the old boys club (aka judges) decided that a man can be too drunk to sexually assault someone..but on the other hand, a woman who is too drunk to control her own bladder can consent to sex.
Something has to change.