It was pointed out that while a women is given a rape drug she passes out and the perpetrator has his way with her that it is rape, whereas in the case of a man such a drug does not exist or he cannot perform.
I am going to analyze it from what was shown. JW's alcohol was laced with a drug. This drug might not have knocked him out but lowered his defenses as such aprodishiacs do and render him not in his right senses. If JW had taken that drug of his free will than any action after that he is liable for. If JW was given that drug in the sly and it has sideffects like lowering of his control on his senses or his defenses I would still call it rape as his state of being was not dictated by him own free will. These drugs can be perfromance enhancer with aprodishiacs and and totally play havoc with a persons system. To call such a victim a willling participant is gross injusticce and almost like raping the person all over again.
Also this is Ektaland if she can show million dollar properties changing hands with a single signature, why do we question when her creative team show that drugs were slipped in JW's drink and he was not in his senses and does not remember what happened. In any which way you look at it, action was taken without JW's knowledge that put him in a position where gross advantage was taken. I really feel as a society we should be able to achkowledge male rape and treat it as a equally heinous crime as we do female rape, and not make the victim defend his actions.