I don't agree with the idea of being too drunk to consent
It seems to be accepted now that if someone is extremely drunk, and then they have sex with someone, that that person apparently raped them because the drunk person couldn't possibly consent to sex in that state. I don't agree with this though. By saying that you can't consent when you're that drunk is basically saying that you can be too drunk to be responsible for your decisions and actions, and that that responsibility should fall on someone else instead. But if that's the case, then you could use the excuse of being too drunk to get away with anything.
Someone could argue that they shouldn't be arrested for assaulting someone, because they couldn't be held responsible for their actions in that state, since they were too drunk at the time to be fully aware of the situation and to consciously make that decision. And they could then argue that it's their friends who should be arrested for it instead, since they were the sober ones, yet they didn't do anything to stop it because they were enjoying watching it.
But of course that would be a ridiculous excuse. This person decided to get that drunk in the first place, and they're responsible for their own actions regardless of how drunk they were. They can't try to pass the blame onto someone else, their own actions aren't anyone else's responsibility. And this is regardless of the situation, whether it's deciding to assault someone or to have sex with someone. Yet people seem to have a double-standard when it comes to sex.
Obviously I'm not saying that it's ok to seek out drunk people to have sex with, and then to have sex with them, fully knowing that they'll regret it the next day. That's obviously disgusting behaviour (likewise letting your drunk friend assault someone because you'd enjoy watching a fight is also disgusting). But it's not rape.