You actually think it's justified for an older man to recruit a younger woman, hold his influence in a professional community over her head, suggest that they share a hotel room (making her feel bad for trying to invite a chaperone), suggest that she become intoxicated, and suggest that they have sex? Simply because she accepts this slow erosion of her boundaries and autonomy?
Anyone who seeks to be accommodating and accepting by default, who harbors doubts about the intent of others is "responsible for the consequences"? This exact attitude is why women are choosing to default to assuming malice on the part of men, so they don't fall into traps like this. It's extremely ironic when men hold both positions of "they went along with it so it's not my fault" and "it's not fair that women don't trust men".
What are your boundaries for what constitutes inappropriate behavior here? Merely the law? Do you not understand that people can decide to create consequences in their social communities that go beyond what is prescribed by law? Law provides free speech but doesn't provide consequence-free speech. That you've chosen a throwaway here is telling, knowing your comments here would have consequences if you were to associate them with your public figure.
Consent must be enthusiastic and sober. I'm sorry for men who've never had a woman be excited to have sex with them and who feel that a kind of begrudging intoxicated acceptance is the closest they'll ever get to that. If you're in that category I suggest sex work is significantly more ethical (and less effort).