do you think women should be held accountable while drunk?

[AbbassidEdge]

"Now I have an important question to whomever can answer: Suppose a Women got dead drunk, took a knife and killed a child or better yet got into a car and ran over a family. Do we considre this a murder or let the women go as she was drunk? I know for a fact that the feminists will argue as to let the girl get away scot-free but Im curious of what you think is the right action."

[DevonFolk]

Why the speech marks? Who's question is this?

[Lottiedoubtie]

Eh? Goady much?
Obviously a woman should be held accountable for her own actions. If she picks up a knife she's guilty. What she shouldn't be held accountable for are a mans actions whilst she is drunk- which is presumably what you are actually getting at?

[NormaStanleyFletcher]

Anybody who was drunk and did those things would be held accountable, male or female. I know of no feminists who would argue that would argue that 'thé girl' should get away scot-free.

[icklekid]

Being drunk doesn't excuse you of anything. If a man was abusive when drunk he is still to blame why should it be any different for women? That wouldn't be feminism. ..what an odd question?!

[Butterflywings168]

Erm, like the pps I don't know any feminists who would think that was acceptable and let the girl woman 'get away scot free'? Odd question

[FishWithABicycle]

Of course we are accountable for our actions when drunk if we chose to drink that much. It's not a feminist issue, the same is true for men and women.

It's different if someone's drink is spiked. If they thought they were being sensible and alternating alcoholic drinks with soft drinks to ensure they stay reasonably in control of themselves, but someone else puts a double vodka in each soft drink, I would blame the spiker if something bad happened as a consequence.

I suspect the OP is being goady and is intending to make a point relating to victim-blaming in cases of rape where the woman was too drunk to give consent. Getting so drunk you don't know what you are doing is stupid and immature and you should indeed be held accountable for your actions when drunk. You should not be held accountable for anyone else's actions though. Getting raped is not an inevitable consequence of being stupid and immature, it only happens if you are unlucky enough to be the victim of a rapist, and the rapist is 100% responsible for that whether or not the victim is intoxicated.

[ChunkyPickle]

If it was a girl (ie. a child) then there would be serious questions regarding how she was allowed to get drunk and drive a car, and I would expect her parents or guardians to be the ones to bear the brunt of the punishment while she hopefully got some kind of help.

If it was a woman, then she should be treated the same way as any other adult who breaks the law. Drunkenness is not an out to obeying the law.

Enough feminists for you yet?

[ChunkyPickle]

Yes Fish.

The difference of course being that it's not illegal to have sex while drunk, but it is illegal to rape people (and people who are drunk are not capable of consenting, by law, so you'd better be sure they'd still want to have sex with you sober)

[DownByTheRiverside]

If a woman got dead drunk and was knifed, then she's a victim not a criminal. If a woman gets dead drunk and is raped, likewise.
If she's drunk and attacks someone, then she's rightly done for assault.
See the difference between the scenarios?

[alwaysstaytoolong]

What a ridiculous post.

We let everyone off drink driving because 'they were drunk' and therefore not responsible for their actions do we?.

Fool.

[AbbassidEdge]

"90% of feminist will blindly support the female in any case regardless"

I was making a point to someone who initially made that claim. That's why it was in speech marks. I'll link him to this discussion. Thanks to all those who participated!

[HicDraconis]

Someone gets drunk and kills someone else while in that state - murder or manslaughter.

Someone gets drunk and is either killed (or raped) - is a victim of a murderer or rapist.

Everyone is responsible for their own actions.

[FishWithABicycle]

"90% of feminist will blindly support the female in any case regardless"

What an unbelievably sexist thing to say.
But someone thick enough to assert that is probably too thick to engage in intelligent debate, it's probably better to ignore them. Proving them wrong won't work if their prejudice is that deeply ingrained.

[HexBramble]

Too many myths in our 'civilised and educated' society.

Your friend is being a bit thick really.
The myth that feminists are bra-burning sista's (women-can-do-no-wrong) is a convenient argument for folk who are too dense to engage in debate. I'd be giving them a wide berth.

[PuffinsAreFicticious]

I think the same, Buffy. I have a feeling that this might be linked to that rapist Evans' conviction, in a 'see, she is culpable' weird man in a fedora way.

[YonicScrewdriver]

Oddly, OP, I've googled your quotes, but this thread is the only result.

Did someone say those things to you IRL?

[fuctifino]

My primary school friend got killed by a female drunk driver. She got sent down.

Can't see how it is any different if a man or a woman had killed him. He is dead and the person who killed him should be punished.

[AnyFucker]

Yes, I think this is Ched Evans related

If a woman can be held responsible for knifing someone when she is drunk, she can be held responsible for rape

That kinda bollocks

[AnyFucker]

sorry, for "getting herself" raped

[TooMuchCantBreathe]

Your friend is an idiot. Hth.

Friend, what makes you believe something so patently ridiculous? Feminists do defend women on feminist issues, some more radically than others. I've never seen murder or drink driving cited as feminist issues though.

[Trills]

Human beings should be held accountable for their own actions, drunk or not.

[BeCool]

I'd find some more friends.

[redredread]

In criminal law, being drunk doesn't prevent you having the intent (mens rea) to commit a crime. It might make it harder to convict for murder (as opposed to manslaughter) but it's by no means impossible (eg if part of the murder plan involves getting sufficiently drunk to feel able to do it).

Intent is irrelevant for victims of crime. People can be contributorily negligent in civil law, but NOT in criminal law.

[YonicScrewdriver]

Thanks red.