Jump to content

Are drunken women partly responsible for being raped?


Argus

Recommended Posts

An article in toda's Globe quotes a number of feminist icons tired of the 'rape culture' argument, especially on campuses, and tell women to start taking a little responsibility for their own behaviour. Getting passed out drunk is stupid, and leave you entirely vulnerable to whomever comes across you, they say.  They also seem to feel all these 'feminists' going to college administrators and demanding they do more is like little girls going to daddy for protection. And they need to grow up and take care of themselves.

Certainly the law is paternalistic in that 'mutually drunken sex' can generally get the male charged with rape, but never the female. Being completely drunk is explicitly declared to be not a defense for rape in the criminal code, and a women who is too drunk to give consent is therefore being raped even if she gives consent. That the male might be just as drunk is irrelevent to the law. It's still his fault, even if he didn't initiate it.

 

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/relationships/when-will-feminism-stop-enabling-stupidity-feminist-generation-gap/article34481903/

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Argus said:

Getting passed out drunk is stupid, and leave you entirely vulnerable to whomever comes across you, they say.

Just as you, Argus, wouldn't expect to be robbed or murdered or sodomized or assaulted or anything else we don't expect to happen, so too should women expect the same thing when it comes to not being raped.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Men have been using drunkeness as a defense to rape for a very ling time; no reason why that shouldn't continue.

From the article:  

women who wear high heels “entice” rapists 

Every woman must take personal responsibility for her sexuality, which is nature’s red flame

She must be prudent and cautious about where she goes and with whom. 

Perhaps putting women in burkas and insisting they only leave their home in the presence of male relatives would help keep men safe from rape.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hot enough said:

Just as you, Argus, wouldn't expect to be robbed or murdered or sodomized or assaulted or anything else we don't expect to happen, so too should women expect the same thing when it comes to not being raped.

I wouldn't go out and get totally drunk without someone trustworthy nearby who would remain sober. And if I wore my best suit and went out somewhere and got totally drunk alone it would certainly not surprise me if I wound up in an alley with no wallet. 

Which is why I wouldn't do it.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

Men have been using drunkeness as a defense to rape for a very ling time; no reason why that shouldn't continue.

People have been using drunkenness and drugs as a defense for every manner of crime for a long time. The criminal code even recognizes that defense in that if you're that drunk or drugged you can't legally form the intent to kill someone, for example, so they likely won't charge you with murder. But it still strikes me as paternalistic that if a drunken man and a drunken woman have consensual sex she can then have him arrested as a rapist the next day. And it doesn't matter to the law if she initiated it and it doesn't mater if he was drunker than her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, dialamah said:

And you'd excuse your attackers no doubt.

Nope. But then, nobody is saying 'attackers' should be excused. On the other hand, if two drunks have mutually consensual sex I don't think one should be able to change their mind when sober and have the other put in prison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Argus said:

Nope. But then, nobody is saying 'attackers' should be excused. On the other hand, if two drunks have mutually consensual sex I don't think one should be able to change their mind when sober and have the other put in prison.

If a female wakes up with little or no memory of what transpired, and the guy claims she consented, how do we know?  Men have been known to drug women before assaulting them; a rapist is not likely to say "yeah I drugged her but then she consented".

Its true that some women will falsely accuse men, but men will also take advantage of women.  Instead of telling women they must be careful of how they behave and how they dress, how about we teach men not to rape?

At the very least, if women must be warned not to drink for fear of getting raped, perhaps men ought to be warned not to drink for fear of being falsely accused of rape. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, dialamah said:

If a female wakes up with little or no memory of what transpired, and the guy claims she consented, how do we know?

It's rare that women in such circumstances don't remember drinking themselves into oblivion. In fact, their claim that they got too drunk to consent is rarely predicated on the man having forced alcohol down their throat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is, drunk isn't an absolute.  There are varying stages of drunkenness, so where is the point at which one can state no consent is valid?  I would bet the point would vary so much with the individual that any notion of consent is reduced to a matter of opinion.  The courts can give it a shot, but it has been shown to be difficult.

Where it becomes easy is when one person is passed out, as with the recent Halifax? taxi driver.  No question there.  Unless consent is given before one person passes out.  As long as the act is terminated as soon as the awake person becomes aware their partner is now asleep.  I don't know why one would want to continue in that case anyway.

Drugs secretly administered for the purpose of are right out, of course.  But that's beyond the scope of this argument, I think.  I doubt there is anyone who would argue differently in that case.

To argue that sex while drunk is rape really downplays the experience of those who have been raped. 

Edited by bcsapper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

The problem is, drunk isn't an absolute.  There are varying stages of drunkenness, so where is the point at which one can state no consent is valid?  I would bet the point would vary so much with the individual that any notion of consent is reduced to a matter of opinion.  The courts can give it a shot, but it has been shown to be difficult.

Where it becomes easy is when one person is passed out, as with the recent Halifax? taxi driver.  No question there.  Unless consent is given before one person passes out.  As long as the act is terminated as soon as the awake person becomes aware their partner is now asleep.  I don't know why one would want to continue in that case anyway.

Drugs secretly administered for the purpose of are right out, of course.  But that's beyond the scope of this argument, I think.  I doubt there is anyone who would argue differently in that case.

To argue that sex while drunk is rape really downplays the experience of those who have been raped. 

You make good points and I don't entirely disagree with you.  

At the same time, men who take advantage of women aren't as rare as you might like to think.  Just as some don't think a Muslim immigrant or a refugee should be trusted because of the behavior of other Muslims, I'm not inclined to trust men about whether they got consent, because too many men just don't.

Too bad for all the innocent guys, but if they can't control all the rapists then I see no reason to trust any of them.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dialamah said:

You make good points and I don't entirely disagree with you.  

At the same time, men who take advantage of women aren't as rare as you might like to think.  Just as some don't think a Muslim immigrant or a refugee should be trusted because of the behavior of other Muslims, I'm not inclined to trust men about whether they got consent, because too many men just don't.

Too bad for all the innocent guys, but if they can't control all the rapists then I see no reason to trust any of them.  

But what's the definition of taking advantage?  It can't be something that is decided on after the fact.  You can't have consensual sex, and then, the next day, decide it wasn't consensual.  And why just men?  I don't think I've ever been raped, but I sure as hell have been talked into sex while drunk by someone who wasn't.  I just didn't have a problem with it when I woke up, is all.  What if I decided I did?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bcsapper said:

But what's the definition of taking advantage?  It can't be something that is decided on after the fact.  You can't have consensual sex, and then, the next day, decide it wasn't consensual.  And why just men?  I don't think I've ever been raped, but I sure as hell have been talked into sex while drunk by someone who wasn't.  I just didn't have a problem with it when I woke up, is all.  What if I decided I did?

Then I guess you could have made a complaint and used your drunkeness to demonstrate your inability to give consent.  I'm fine with that; women shouldn't take advantage either.

Take a look at my first post, where I quoted from the OPs article.  This isn't about two kinda drunk people with morning-after regrets. This is about telling women they are responsible for men's sexual misconduct if they wear heels, go with the wrong people or drink.

You and most men really have no idea how often women are forced into sex against their will, even 100% sober.  Few women say anything because they know they'll be judged for what they wear, who they were with and if they were drinking.  Among women who make a complaint, about 2% are determined to be false.  http://web.stanford.edu/group/maan/cgi-bin/?page_id=297

So how about men start really teaching their sons and friends what consent means rather than looking for ways to protect men at women's expense.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Then I guess you could have made a complaint and used your drunkeness to demonstrate your inability to give consent.  I'm fine with that; women shouldn't take advantage either.

Take a look at my first post, where I quoted from the OPs article.  This isn't about two kinda drunk people with morning-after regrets. This is about telling women they are responsible for men's sexual misconduct if they wear heels, go with the wrong people or drink.

You and most men really have no idea how often women are forced into sex against their will, even 100% sober.  Few women say anything because they know they'll be judged for what they wear, who they were with and if they were drinking.  Among women who make a complaint, about 2% are determined to be false.  http://web.stanford.edu/group/maan/cgi-bin/?page_id=297

So how about men start really teaching their sons and friends what consent means rather than looking for ways to protect men at women's expense.  

Not having sons, I can't imagine any man would teach his son anything other than that.  Nor can I imagine any sane adult needing telling, either.  Anyone who is forced into sex against their will is the victim of a crime and should report it.  If it is not reported, it can't very well be dealt with.

The issue is whether or not a drunk can consent to sex.  Man or woman.  I would say that if you can be held responsible for driving while drunk, you can take responsibility for consenting to sex while drunk.  Man or woman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Argus said:

It's rare that women in such circumstances don't remember drinking themselves into oblivion. In fact, their claim that they got too drunk to consent is rarely predicated on the man having forced alcohol down their throat.

Listen to you taking a generic, with nothing at all authoritative other than an Argus, suggesting that "It's rare", again with nothing at all authoritative other than an Argus, and attempting to make it into a commonality. 

This from a guy who is frightened to death by science.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

...The issue is whether or not a drunk can consent to sex.  Man or woman.  I would say that if you can be held responsible for driving while drunk, you can take responsibility for consenting to sex while drunk.  Man or woman.

 

Agreed, and this was demonstrated recently by a football player sex scandal in my state involving an intoxicated women who claimed "sexual assault" after the fact.   Turns out that young people today love to use their smart phones to record drunken debauchery to share later, and what could have been damning evidence against the players turned out to be proof of the alleged victim's consent to many, many sexual acts.

In the morning, she felt far more virtuous, and claimed rape.   Sorry dear, the law doesn't work that way.

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Margaret Wente's column this morning happens, by coincidence, or not, to be about this very subject.

Alcohol plays a huge role in sex assaults. Unfounded, The Globe and Mail’s deeply reported series, found that alcohol is a factor in close to half of the incidents that are reported to police. The same is true of sexual assaults on campus. In one survey involving U.S. first-year undergrads, 83 per cent of rapes occurred while the woman was incapacitated.

So if alcohol is such a major factor, why don’t we warn young women about the risks of heavy drinking?

Simple. No one wants to blame the victim. Reformers have rightly spent years educating the public and the courts that victims are not responsible for sexual assault – their assailants are. But this taboo has resulted in a mass evasion of certain unpleasant, but essential truths.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/alcohol-and-assault-what-all-young-women-need-to-know/article34520890/

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Argus said:

Margaret Wente's column this morning happens, by coincidence, or not, to be about this very subject.

Alcohol plays a huge role in sex assaults. Unfounded, The Globe and Mail’s deeply reported series, found that alcohol is a factor in close to half of the incidents that are reported to police. The same is true of sexual assaults on campus. In one survey involving U.S. first-year undergrads, 83 per cent of rapes occurred while the woman was incapacitated.

So if alcohol is such a major factor, why don’t we warn young women about the risks of heavy drinking?

Simple. No one wants to blame the victim. Reformers have rightly spent years educating the public and the courts that victims are not responsible for sexual assault – their assailants are. But this taboo has resulted in a mass evasion of certain unpleasant, but essential truths.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/alcohol-and-assault-what-all-young-women-need-to-know/article34520890/

 

Yup.  Women must not do certain things because men rape when given a chance.   It is up to women to prevent men from raping.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dialamah said:

Yup.  Women must not do certain things because men rape when given a chance.   It is up to women to prevent men from raping.

All people must do certain things because some people out there are criminally minded. Do you lock your door at night? Do you feel oppressed by having to do so? If you leave on vacation and you leave your house unlocked and your garage door open would you be outraged when you came back, found you had been robbed, and people questioned why you didn't lock up?  Do you tape your pin number to your debit card to make life easier for you? Do you keep large amounts of cash in your purse? Do you leave the keys in your car? 

Let's get real here.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
On Saturday, April 01, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Argus said:

All people must do certain things because some people out there are criminally minded. Do you lock your door at night? Do you feel oppressed by having to do so? If you leave on vacation and you leave your house unlocked and your garage door open would you be outraged when you came back, found you had been robbed, and people questioned why you didn't lock up?  Do you tape your pin number to your debit card to make life easier for you? Do you keep large amounts of cash in your purse? Do you leave the keys in your car? 

Let's get real here.

Yes.  Then I would expect the police spend every effort to capture the criminals not lecture me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,714
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    wopsas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...