Is the typical rapist of a drunk woman also drunk or are they waiting for their prey to pass out?
I think both sexes drink to excess to engage in behavior they wouldn’t otherwise engage in, then use the alcohol as an excuse. Obviously rape is a crime and should be prosecuted, but I think everyone should drink in moderation and not be out of control.
I don’t know.
Is the typical rapist a predator who is constantly on the prowl for their next “prey”? Or is the typical rapist a horny dude with a penchant for misreading body language even when he’s sober, who has been taught that women say no when they really mean yes?
Seems to me there’s a whole lot more of the latter than the former. Especially in the peer pressure cooker known as a college frat party.
I don’t have a link at hand (on a phone right now), but I have seen surveys of high school/college guys where significant percentages of them believe that sexual activity with girls in no/limited consent situations involving drinking and passing out or nearly so was OK if she had kissed them before passing out, if she barely complained (weak no’s instead of yelling), etc.
Ever notice how a man getting drunk and having sex is a rapist but a woman getting drunk and having sex is a victim?
I would be flabbergasted by that, too. But who’s saying it?
I’m male and when I was in school we had plenty of finger-wagging directed at us, from freshman orientation on. I currently work with the military and there’s plenty of focus on men and their behavior in this community, too, considering what an issue sexual assault in the armed forces has become. I don’t think it’s at all fair to say that men and their behavior doesn’t get any attention.
Most people who get drunk and have sex are neither. But if you’re talking about drunk past the point of being able to consent, most men can’t have sex in that condition. I know I can’t.
If a man in that condition is penetrated, he’s certainly a victim.
I think there is a difference between blaming an actual victim of rape and issuing a warning to potential victims. That said, and as another poster mentioned upthread, it’s not like this article broke new ground and I’m sure college women are bombarded with this message. I also think there needs to be a bigger effort put forth toward the male side of the equation and the author missed an opportunity to do that.
Great point. Maybe we should stop analogizing men to apex predators and women to unwary jungle-wanderers.
A more detailed response to Yoffe and to this issue in general. I think this stuff is pretty understandable and instructive if you’re willing to listen to it.
Coupla problems I have with it:
-
So? Is this news? Does she think that women do not already, with every move they make, take into account the risks they run? Sometimes you just make the informed decision to get shit-faced. And then if you do, and you get raped, then what? Nothing, because it still wasn’t your fault. Only it’ll still feel that way for the rest of your life. Great help there, Yoffe.
-
Her article says 80% of students will answer, when asked, that they have been assaulted while drunk. Yet very few report it. That’s a little hint, there. Why aren’t they reporting it? Because they already bloody know this! They shouldn’t have been drinking, because you could get raped, and they shouldn’t have been wearing that, and they shouldn’t have been out after dark, and they shouldn’t have done a thousand things and it’s all their own fault.
So what is this article for?! Women know this. And they decide that life is not worth living if you can’t do certain things because you might get raped. Well you might still be raped if you don’t do those things, and life is guaranteed to be more boring if you don’t do any of those things. So how about we just let women make those decisions for themselves and stop patronising and victim blaming.
She literally says in the article “I’m not saying a woman is responsible for being sexually victimized, but". Sounds remarkably like “I’m not racist, but”.
I’ve never noticed this.
I’ve also never noticed men being warned not to drink to excess to ward off attacks from women. But they need to be told this, right?
We should offer classes on how to drink responsibly. Teach kids how to handle their high in a controlled environment, then send them off with certificates.
We do. It’s called college.
No, it doesn’t. The advice in the article does absolutely nothing to continue that tradition.
That would be, and is, horribly insulting to most men and totally ineffectual on actual rapists.
Alcohol is bad. It causes violent crimes. Those under the influence are more likely to be both perptrator and victim of all manner of crimes against the person.
I’ve certainly heard of men raped whil unconscious from the effects of alcohol, and of men accused of rape just because their partner was drunk, even if they were too. But no warnings are issued for that because no-one care.
Someone’s never reported a theft.
We already do that. Why do you think the government says “If you rape anyone, we will put you in prison”?
I find two things interesting about this argument:
- We might say the feller with the diamond pinky ring is a moron, but that doesn’t deter the authorities from vigorously prosecuting the thief.
- The feller with the diamond pinky ring is putting himself in a dangerous situation, so this argument implies that parties are dangerous situations for girls (full of potential rapists!) and they should not get drunk because they might not be able to fight off the boys.
Whatever happened to the days when you’d see a friend get drunk and bring her home/get her out of there before anything happened? Why don’t we tell our boys that if they see a girl (or anyone, really) in trouble they should step in and stop a crime from happening?
(btw, I’m a parent of both boys and girls, and advise both to not act like morons.)
Conversely men should not drink themselves too drunk as it tends to cloud their judgement and make them think it is ok to rape women.