"If one of the parties is drunk to the point of incapacitation"
It is well known that people can be so drunk as to be walking talking automatons, i.e. mentally incapacitated while still not being physically incapacitated. 
So if both are extremely drunk - beyond the point of being able to give consent - then it would seem both are guilty.
The section (2) you have quoted then seems to force the conclusion that both are guilty of sexual assault on the other. Unless "bodily integrity" is a gender specific concept. So which unpalatable interpretation are you saying the courts will make in that circumstance?