On the face of it this would seem to be pure common sense and yet a lot of people, mainly women, accused her of fostering “rape denialism” and enabling rapists by even intimating there was something women could do to prevent becoming vulnerable to getting raped. Why does this have to be a binary scenario? Why can’t it be acknowledged that rape is wrong and should be prosecuted and, at the same time, tell women to moderate behaviors that make them vulnerable?
Her advice seems common-sensical why the extreme reactions?
The same reason your own “common-sensical” advice met with the same response: it’s taking a real problem in society and blaming the victim instead of the people actually causing the problems.
ETA: It’s condescending as hell, too. “If you’d just behave like proper young women, none of this would have happened!” :rolleyes:
And I should be able to walk down a dark alley in Hunt’s Point at night with a diamond pinky ring and fifties sticking out of my pocket with no fear of being robbed.
But there’s nothing but idiocy in saying that the ideological “I should” should yield to the obvious truth about the world: I cannot.
The victims live in a world in which it’s simply not true that women are able to drink to the point of insensate coma and expect to be free from sexual assault. That’s not a celebration of sexual assault, or an excuse of it. It’s an accurate observation.
Don’t wander in the jungle if you don’t want to get eaten by a tiger. That advice is never seen as blaming the victim. Why is this?
I think advice to be very careful about getting blotto is soundly given for a range of reasons, including a heightened risk of sexual assault, but also being robbed, humiliated, getting arrested after doing something that seemed like a good idea at the time, etc.
I consider this to be of the same manufactured outrage as someone saying, “You should avoid eating too much junk food so you won’t get fat.” “How dare you!” say those who (very fairly) criticize the poor treatment of overweight people. However, eating less junk food is also good advice to avoiding heart disease, etc.
You can find plenty of examples of people responding to what Yoffe wrote. The problem isn’t that it’s bad advice, it’s that it’s incomplete and doesn’t address the whole problem. And it should be emphasized that women get this advice all the time. Yoffe wasn’t exactly breaking new ground in advising college girls not to drink too much at parties. The response is, ‘OK, that might protect individual women, but what about encouraging guys not to rape drunk girls?’
Same question that Jimmy Chitwood asked Bricker. Do we have a history of refusing to believe people really had their cars broken into? Our history of ignoring rapes, or sweeping them under the rug, or just trying to make the cases go away is a real thing. It’s not some relic of a bygone era - it’s something that’s still going on today, and the “advice” like the linked article in the OP does more to continue that tradition than it does to prevent future rapes.
I’m very familiar with this argument from years of sociology and women’s studies classes. I have to admit that I just don’t really get it either. It’s overly idealistic. OF COURSE people should be able to act as they please and not worry about crime. But that’s not reality, and denying that isn’t helping anyone.
Rape is awful, rapists should be prosecuted, and rape prevention should be a policy concern. And obviously, victims are not to blame. Period. HOWEVER, there are criminals out there, just a fact of human nature. People, therefore, should consider this and possibly take steps to protect themselves. If they do or don’t take such steps and end up as a victim, it is in no way their fault. Fault lies with the rapist. But there is nothing wrong with taking reasonable steps to protect oneself, and advocating others to be proactive in this way.
Not drinking to the point of passing out is one possible step. Some steps are unreasonable (I could move to a fortress and never leave the house or interact with people and be pretty much 100% safe), some steps are reasonable safety measures (avoid walking alone while drunk in dark alleys with strange guys lurking in them at 2AM). What constitutes reasonable precaution may differ by person and circumstance.
I find it strange that people stand up for the right to drink yourself to unconsciousness.
Nothing ever good happened to anyone who was that drunk. What if she dies of alcohol poisoning? Or choking on her own vomit? Even if no falling-down drunk or unconscious woman was ever raped, it’s still a dangerous thing to do, for both male and females.
Neither women nor men should get so drunk they lose control, yet that is the goal. I’m seeing people saying that “It was a really great party!” and not remember a thing about it.
The point that you shouldn’t blame the woman for being raped is true, but that’s a separate issue with the idea that you shouldn’t get wasted to have a “good” time.
I find it strange that anyone believes women are honestly encouraged by authority figures to go out and get completely wasted, to the point where we have to suggest doing the opposite for a change.
I mean, seriously? There’s MADD and SADD and DARE and lots of dire warnings from parents and teachers and all the other PSAs. So I’m flabbergasted that anyone thinks that authority figures need to step up the warnings with an extra dose of “you’re gonna go out and get yourself raped, missy, and that’s your fault.”
In other words? I don’t think putting the “dudes are gonna rape you” warning into the message is anything new or productive. Meanwhile, I do think warning young dudes about how rape isn’t just strangers in back alleys and sometimes it’s a guy getting kissed by a girl but she passes out and he doesn’t stop what he’s planning on doing.
Ever notice how men are never told to moderate their drinking so as to reduce their chances of committing rape against someone? I have no data to support this, but I’m willing to bet alcohol is responsible for both sides of the “rape” equation.
I ain’t got a problem with women being lectured to as long as men get their fair share of finger-waggling.
Has to be at least partly because certain communities encourage getting women drunk in order to get what you want out of them. The recent frat letter Luring Your Rapebait is a good example, as are the messages put out by pick up communities.
You’re entirely correct. Emily Yoffe is entirely correct. Neither her, nor you, nor any other serious person is in any way suggesting that any victim of rape is to blamed. Her, and you, and many other people are giving good advice that, if followed, would reduce instances of rape. And yet many people claim that Yoffe is “blaming the victim”, which is flatly false, and oppose her advice. Why?
Here’s why. Because there’s a subset of feminists–not consisting of all feminists, much less all women–who are completely dedicated to the idea that women must be victims and only victims. This belief in women as victims is central to their identity and they won’t let it go for any reason. Central to their justification of their viewpoint is the claim that society promotes rape and blames the victim. Of course, in reality, no one does so. Hence to justify their justification, they resort to lies and distortions aimed at people such as Yoffe.
As others have said in this thread already, the argument would be absurd if used to deal with any crime other than rape. For other crimes, there’s universal agreement among intelligent people that we all should do things in such a way as to minimize our chance of becoming a victim. Saying this is common sense, and is not “blaming the victim”. Yet when the topic is rape, a subset of people start screaming their fool heads off whenever someone makes the sensible point that Yoffe made. One has to conclude that the feminists who are attacking her are at best indifferent to the question of whether rates of on-campus rape are going up or down. They just want something to be outraged about, and will clutch at straws because they don’t have anything else to clutch at.
This stuff is so commonplace that I remember warning one of my own female friends before college that she shouldn’t take drinks from strangers at parties. And since I’m a guy nobody had ever even given me that advice. I’d just heard it so much I knew it was something you told people. The response to Yoffe here isn’t “Shut up, women have the right to get wasted.” It’s “We know this already. How about addressing the potential rapists instead?”
No, it’s more along the lines of “If you don’t want your buddies to shave your eyebrows off or draw penises on your cheeks in sharpie marker, don’t get so drunk that you pass out.” Yes, it’s a jerk thing when people draw stuff on passed-out drunk people, but if you’re serious about not having it happen, the first, best step is simply not to get that drunk to begin with. Nobody’s really claiming that the guy who woke up with one eyebrow and a giant scrotum drawn on his forehead caused it to happen or that it’s his own fault, but it’s equally true that there are things he could have done to prevent it entirely, or at least mitigate the chances of that occurring.
It’s pragmatic, not patronizing. The only difference between the scenarios is the gravity of the actual offense.
I didn’t say that it wasn’t a real thing. I just don’t see why one can’t maintain both that “rapists are 100% responsible for their crimes” and “one should reduce the risk by not drinking to excess.” You seem to be saying that any risk-reduction factor that doesn’t also address the cultural issue of the lax treatment of rape isn’t worth considering.
I absolutely agree that you should be able to drink, pass out, and not worry about being assaulted. I also think that you should be able to keep all your doors unlocked without worrying about theft. But given the very real risk, I also don’t think urging people to take those precautions constitutes blaming the victim.
However my husband did mention back in middle school how his gym teacher had a class where he essentially told everyone not to drink to excess and not to touch people without their permission. So that guy was doing it right.