College Women: Stop Getting Drunk(81 Posts)
I'm afraid to say, this is the exact title of an article on Slate.
College Women: Stop Getting Drunk
Emily Yoffe basically says, in her article, that college women who get drunk become sitting ducks to these sexual predators. (While the article is focusing on the issue of young women in college (university), I take the view an attitude such as Yoffe's can be applied to all women).
She does say, "Lets be totally clear: Perpetrators are the ones responsible for committing their crimes, and they should be brought to justice. But we are failing to let women know that when they render themselves defenceless, terrible things can be done to them."
So what Yoffe is really trying to say there is...
I'm not a rape apologist, I do think rapists are bad, but if you stupid drunken girls didn't make it so easy for them do it, well you may not have been raped in the first place*.
* Because of course, sober women don't get raped.
Oh yes, you're not rape apologist Yoffe, not at all.
I'm off to find a brick wall to bang my head against.
Oh god, this old chesnut! The "I'm not victim-blaming, but..." Hmmm, let's see, what else is associated with sexual assault? Being in a relationship. So don't do that either, ever. Ugh!
Wow, what a revolutionary, new view that will stop all the rapes...wish someone had thought of it earlier! FFS!
Given that there's no correlation between being drunk and being raped, but there is one between drinking and raping, it's surprising that more energy isn't directed at telling young men not to get drunk in case they rape someone as a result of their alcohol consumption.
FYI Emily,I have the right to be as drunk as a very drunk thing without anyone thinking they can do anything to me or anyone thinking I contributed to how a rapist preys on people.
Yep. The consequence from being drunk that women ought to bear in mind is a hangover.
But once again, women are being encouraged to change our behaviour because some men prefer not to regulate theirs.
Yeah, its pretty amazing she thinks women will have never heard this line and that she's doing the kind thing by warning women not to drink.
I'd love to see a nation wide campaign dedicated to warning men that if they get drunk and pass out that they are at risk of rape. Wouldn't that just be enough to make men think? If you're too drunk to say no, surely it is just as likely for men to be raped? They can't fight either.
I have three sons, and I have talked to them about the dangers of being drunkenly incapable - it sounds as if this article has focused on only one risk and one gender, and I agree this is wrong, BUT I see nothing wrong with telling all our young people that drinking to excess is a bad idea because it can lead you to end up in dangerous situations or doing stupid things - like having drunken sex that you or the other person might regret later, or driving whilst drunk, or getting into fights. Not to mention the damage that binge drinking can do to your health.
I have told my dses that being drunk lowers their inhibitions, impairs their judgement and could lead them to making one stupid decision with repercussions they'd regret all of their lives, and is it really worth the risks?
Am I wrong to say this to them?
As men are more likely to be victims of street crime, I think they should, for their own good of course, stay in at night.
Or if they have to go out, they should at least stop getting drunk as this lowers their judgement of tricky situations and makes them a target for other men out looking for a fight.
Of course I'm not victim blaming but it's well known that men are more likely to victims of street violence so they should take every precaution they can.
I'm just trying to protect them.
What SDTG say's getting stupidly drunk, is bloody stupid and dangerous regardless if gender.
It is especially stupid at freshers in a strange city with no friends to make sure you get home safely.
I have two DDs and if one of them consents to sex while too pissed to realise what they are doing with a boy who's also totally rat arsed, it's not rape just because they regret it in the morning.
So are you saying that we should never warn young people about the risks of being very drunk?
Am I wrong to say this to them?
Not at all. It is wrong to single out women for this advice though, and it's wrong to imply that foolishly drinking too much makes women responsible for crimes against their person.
I agree - my question was directed at Kasey - I should have made that clear - sorry.
" if one of them consents to sex while too pissed to realise what they are doing with a boy who's also totally rat arsed, it's not rape just because they regret it in the morning"
Well done on the rape myth propagation.
If somebody is too pissed to realise what they are doing, then they are not capable of giving consent and therefore if someone penetrates them, that is rape.
That is what the law says.
You should stop misinforming your DD's on what the law is Starballbunny and stop telling them that being raped is just sex they regret. That is a rape myth and is guaranteed to ensure that if either of them are ever raped, they will never tell you about it because they know you will blame them.
Another great rebuttal of the article, this time from Jezebel
Emily Yoffe is actually a good writer and I regularly read her 'Dear Prudie' advice column so I'm a little let-down to see her spouting the usual stereotypes about girls getting drunk.
Anyone getting so rat-arsed that they piss themselves or puke or pass out and have no memory of what has happened should be embarrassed, regardless of gender. It's definitely good that Yoffe is highlighting the link between excess alcohol consumption and college sexual assault but her message that it's something only women need to worry about is too simplistic.
Prior to the 1970s, it was considered a disgrace if women got drunk and respectable women generally didn't go to pubs or drink much in public. That didn't stop sexual assaults and rapes from happening back then and, in fact, rape was legal within marriage then so a woman could have been clean and sober in the 'safety' of her own home and still been raped. The fault is with the rapist and the sense of entitlement that some men have towards the bodies of women.
Surely the best advice is to limit your drinking so as not to cause irreparable damage to your major organs?
On the subject of victim blaming, please help me with this. I support a well known football team. I don't wear club colours to away fixtures, because there will doubtless be some grade A weapon who wants to make an issue of it. I run the risk of being assaulted. I should be able to wear whatever I want, wherever I want, but there are times and places where frankly it isn't worth the hassle. So, do I modify my behaviour slightly to minimise risk, or do I exercise my right to wear whatever I like? What would people tell their son or husband to do in this situation?
I would not tell you what to wear or blame you if something happened.. but I think where football hooligans are involved.. you know there is a potential thereat. It isn't the same as say a drunk woman walking home because at that point you are saying that men are going out looking to rape as a general rule. Which isn't really the case.. you're more likely to be raped by a known person
You aren't more likely to be attacked for your choice of football club by a known person.
Myth vs reality
Have I made any sense just now?
Sorry, I'm assuming the boy and many first year students are still tall little boys is to pissed himself to have any judgement of whether the girl is in a fit state to consent.
If both parties are too drunk to know what they are doing, they are both fucking stupid. I do not see why someone's son should end up in court with his career in ruins because my DD wasn't sober enough to recognise a drunk twat and walk the other way.
I know it's not PC, but if no force is involved, young men and young women can both be equally to blame for the messes they get into.
Sorry, but I knew when I'd had enough to drink and when to walk away, long before I was 18 and always considered keeping out of trouble my responsibility.
Don't just aim this at women. Nobody should get so pissed as to lose all control. You could trip over a paving stone, or fall down a well, or step in front of a car....I would guess that the risk of self-inflicted damage far outweighs the risk of being mugged or assaulted.
I have had sexual encounters when I was drunk. I have regretted some of them in the morning. Had I been sober, they would not have occurred. I did not feel violated, just a bit sheepish. Is drunken consent on my part still consent?
". I do not see why someone's son should end up in court with his career in ruins because my DD wasn't sober enough to recognise a drunk twat and walk the other way."
I have a son. I've told him that even if he is drunk, he has to ensure that any girl he has any sort of sexual activity with, is consenting to that. If he murdered someone, the fact that he was drunk would not be a mitigating factor. If he got into a car thinking he could drive it, the fact that his judgement was impaired by alcohol would not be a mitigating factor. He understands that if he chooses to rape someone, being drunk is not a mitigating factor. He understands that women and girls are not responsible for stopping him raping them, he is responsible for not raping them.
You are putting the onus on a girl to recognise a drunk twat and walk away from him.
People who aren't rape apologists, put the onus on a male to not rape.
That's the difference in emphasis.
As for the football fan analogy, that only works if you think all men are rapists.
If you deliberately go into what you know to be a hostile environment, where there are violent people who are prepared to attack you and you wear colours or costumes or whatever which are a marker for them to attack you, then it is not your fault if they do, but it might be considered unwise.
If you believe that all men or most men are violent rapists who may attack women at any time and all they need to do that, is for her to be wearing the wrong clothes, or be drunk or whatever, then the analogy works - men are so violent and so rapey, that women need to make sure they don't get drunk if they're round them, because it will trigger the men's rape response. If feminists argued this, they would be called man-haters.
Rape apologists argue this all the time because deep down, they believe all men are rapists and because that is inherent in masculinity, men aren't responsible for the rape they perpetrate so therefore the only thing women can do about it, is to take responsibility for it and stave it off by what really amounts to a series of superstitious lucky charms. Not getting drunk around men, not wearing mini-skirts, not sending the wrong signals, is the equivalent of a charm warding off the evil eye. It works if there isn't a rapist in the room. But in that case, you have no need of the lucky charm anyway, because there's no evil to ward off.
God, I've had sex while drunk and once or twice I've regretted it in the morning.
Oddly the way I dealt with it was not to put my hand up and volunteer for an upsetting, endless and invasive police investigation into the man I'd had sex with, but to have a fried breakfast and think "aargh, I'm an idiot".
The reason I could do this was that I had consented to sex, then regretted it. I had not been raped. The fact that many people including starball bring this subject into a discussion of rape is just bizarre - they are two completely different circumstances. It's like bringing a discussion of people who get pissed at a charity auction and spend thousands they can't afford into a discussion on violent muggings.
Join the discussion
Please login first.