i really am speechless

Um, although the headline is sensationalist and wrong, if you RTFA you'll notice that the views expressed are not nearly all that abhorrent. The article's author goes on to say that rapists bear the sole responsibility for their crimes and that he supports the restoration of compensation to the victims.

Um, although the headline is sensationalist and wrong, if you RTFA you'll notice that the views expressed are not nearly all that abhorrent. The article's author goes on to say that rapists bear the sole responsibility for their crimes and that he supports the restoration of compensation to the victims.

Yes in that one sentence he is supportive however throughout the entirety of the article he infers just the opposite. If women get drunk then what happens is their responsibility. If they want to be able to have plausible deniability in court the answer is that they must stay sober at all times because there is always the potential for rape. It smacks as a lesson in what "good girls do" vs "bad girls".

Wow... just wow.

Whatever the article says, the seemingly rhetorical question makes the guy look like an unforgivable jackass. In the soundbite culture, it's better to have some subtlety, some nuance and some common sense. This lacks all three.

And the victim blaming goes on. It seems only men can go out and get smashed without any severe consequences. Women can't go and drink, wear skirts, or be sexy with being subjected it seems. And yet the patriarchal woman but do all these things to please men. Double standards anyone?

It's a horrible headline to an article that actually is not so horrible. The author doesn't excuse rape, but he is being realistic about the judicial system and how rape cases are currently handled. I don't wish rape upon anyone, but we do take responsibility for our actions. A woman that gets drunk to the point of being unconscious, and who does it willingly, needs to understand that there are all kinds of consequences, which may include a car accident, a trip to the hospital from alcohol poisoning, injury, and yes rape. It's a very sad fact that we all live with. This is not a blame-the-victim mentality. I believe men hold sole responsibility for their actions, but until we live in a perfect world where every man is an angel, women need to be vigilant.

Aniri: I was just bringing up the same thing in the comments thread on "The Good the bad News on UK rape case"

How do we recognize this fact - that women can and should take responsiblity for putting themselves in dangerous situations, and in fact can prevent abuse and rape and injury, and yet not blame the victim?

Uugg. Renee got it right. He says that rapists bear full responsibility,

but the whole consent-when-drunk thing is soooooooo confusing

but women choose to get drunk

but women's memories get so blurry, who's to say what really happened

C.R.A.P.

the answer is to focus on those other issues: men, the judicial system, society, etc. and improve them so that women can go freely about their lives. Putting the impetus on women is unfair and they are not the problem.

That said, the article, while somewhat problematic, was nothing like what the headline implies, and I really cannot believe that the author chose or even approved that headline

Journalists often have no say on the headlines; that's important to note because it shows that maybe it's not the writer but the editor- whose job it is to display good judgment- who doesn't have a fucking clue.

The headline takes out the worst sentiment in what is often a strong article, but which, in the end, resorts to victim-blaming as a solution to the huge problem of binge-drinking in the UK.

I go to university in Ireland (at a uni which is basically populated with English people) so I see the 'ladette' culture that he's talking about. Although this culture does result in some of the most pitifully overdressed, over-tanned, overly made-up women getting completely trashed, and stumbling barefoot on Dublin's cobblestones, what Graef is essentially saying is that they're 'asking' for it. Nowhere does he discuss why these girls are doing the completely idiotic things they're doing; a very superficial survey of English and Irish society shows that the mother/whore dichotomy of identity for women is still very strong. They're not doing it because they want to get raped, asshole.

But the most glaring omission in the article, only obliquely alluded to, is the pro-rape lad culture fueled by macho-rampaging men. I think THAT culture, and its promotion of binge-drinking, is the real driving force behind normalizing rapists' predatory behaviour; it's what's "blurring the evidence" by making it okay to be hyper-aggressive towards a girl that can't stand, let alone consent to anything.

The bottom line really is: you can't consent when you're that drunk, and when in doubt, LADS, the rule is: if you're in doubt about your partner's ability to understand what's going on, THERE IS NO FUCKING DOUBT. She can't consent.

Have we not figured this out yet? Newspapers and magazines say the most outlandish thing they can to get us to pick up the damn thing. ("Christian Bale on Bail?" No, he's simply having legal issues. But I've picked up the rag and am now buying it because Katie Holmes has yet another fabulous haircut to take to my stylist.) And I bet, as a result of posting this, we all ran over to read the article and the site was bombarded by hits. Mission accomplished.

I like that: if a woman is that drunk, she CAN"T consent. That is clear direction, leaving no room for fuzziness and blurred memories.

We still advise our daughters against this kind of behavior, we still take personal responsibility for our actions, yet the law must not place responsibility on the victim.

*first sentence should read "....maybe it's not JUST the writer but the editor ALSO". oops.

hey Steph - it would be a lot easier for women to "avoid dangerous situations" (like, for example, their own homes) if sexually abusive men conveniently wore t-shirts that said "I AM A RAPIST."

the majority of rapes are committed by men known to the victims, often men they thought they could trust.

oh, and aniri? rape isn't a consequence of being drunk. it's a consequence of being a woman in the same space as a rapist.

That is a fucking ridiculous headline. But it's probably the fault of an rape-apologist editor, not the journalist. (note: NOT defending it! but, as stated above, reporters generally don't write their own headlines.)

Steph: How do we recognize this fact - that women can and should take responsibility for putting themselves in dangerous situations, and in fact can prevent abuse and rape and injury, and yet not blame the victim?

The problem arises only because we're trying to reconcile two completely different areas of thought. Yes, it may be true that, no matter what anyone else did ever, the rapist bears all moral blame for a rape, but that has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not consuming crippling doses of alchohal in a world known to contain potential rapists violates self-preserving good sense.

It's the classic confusion between "should" and "is." Is it morally desirable that the world would be such that a person can temporarily cripple their own brain without someone taking advantage of that fact? Yes. Is that the way the world actually is? Hell no, so don't do that!

Yeah... there's a reason the Daily Mail is known around these parts as the "Daily Hate Mail." Sensationalist headlines, misogyny, homophobia... I can't say that I know how the headline came about (not that the article itself is spotless) but I don't not suspect the editors.

I can say that the drinking culture here in the UK is more intense than anything I've seen at home in Canada. There just seem to be more people getting blind drunk on a regular basis, hobbling around on the cobblestones like Bambi taking those first few steps. Combined with the "lad culture" of bar brawls and machismo that kasia mentions above, it does seem to be a recipe for disaster.

Don't get me wrong. I am absolutely unequivocal on the issue of rape -- there is never anyone to blame but the rapist. I'll also be writing to the Daily Hate Mail to complain about this article. But just like I won't drive without a seatbelt, I wouldn't put myself in the line of fire by doing anything that would put me at a disadvantage with some of these losers. Women shouldn't have to worry about what will happen after their memory blanks, but given that we do, I'm not taking any risks.

Excellent- so lets' get some succinct language around it so we can argue the points clearly in a court of law and advise our daughters.

Let's be able to quickly and clearly differentiate so we don't get muddy thinking from the patriarchy and end up blamed.

And what about women who are raped while completely sober? Are their rapes somehow more wrong, or more valuable than the rape of an intoxicated woman?

One must keep in mind that writers are not in complete control of the headline that goes with their story, though in this case, the headline may have originated with the writer's rhetorical question, "Don't women who get plastered beyond control have any responsibility for what happens to them?" I don't know how much control he had over those photos and captions, either.

As a matter of fact, the article is largely in support of rape victims and the explicit right of women to consent in all situations, (as well as "enjoy themselves") with the realistic recognition that a "blurred" memory may not hold up in court, true of many other crimes. The writer's claimed body of work appears to be anti-rape and supportive of rape victims, particularly regarding treatment by police. His statement that "date rape" drugs are rarely detected in blood tests on rape victims (2%, in one UK study) is also accurate, even if they are widely used, because they are difficult to detect and rapidly metabolized. Particularly when alcohol itself may be considered a "date rape" drug, one answer to a "blurred" memory may indeed be underestimating one's consumption or one's tolerance for it, as has been proposed, and studied. The writer explicitly recognizes there is still no excuse for rape, even in "ladette" culture.

"How do we recognize this fact - that women can and should take responsiblity for putting themselves in dangerous situations, and in fact can prevent abuse and rape and injury, and yet not blame the victim?"

When 70-80% of women are assaulted by partners, former partners, relatives, friends and other acquaintances, and 90% of victims under 12 are assaulted by someone they know, a full 34% by family members, according to research cited by the Sex Abuse Treatment Center of Hawaii:

http://satchawaii.com/statistics.html

one questions how "responsible" one can be to prevent themselves as a child ("Of all sexual assault victimizations reported to law enforcement agencies, 67 percent of victims were under 18 years of age, 34 percent were under 12 and 14 percent were six years old or younger") or a woman ("67 percent of women who were raped and/or physically assaulted since age 18 were assaulted by a current or former husband, cohabiting partner or date") from being sexually assaulted.

A woman being raped is different from the sometimes argued scenario of a man "stupidly" walking down a dark alley with money hanging out of his pockets and being robbed. It is not a comparable kind of "responsibility" because women aren't stupid for being raped, particularly when about 70% of it is committed by people they have chosen to or should be able to trust, "a current or former husband, cohabiting partner or date", impaired or not. If I can't trust my wife (or a blood relative or friend) NOT to abuse me, even if I am physically or mentally incapacitated, whom am I supposed to trust? A doctor? A priest? Someone in uniform? Ha.

I feel a little bit bad for the journalist in this case - it's never the journalist who pens the headline in the UK, it's the sub-editors. It's still a shitty article, but that headline makes it seem infinitely worse than it ends up being.

Also, the writer is explicitly against reducing compensation for rape if a woman was drinking, despite his one liner about women taking responsibility for drinking (as opposed to responsibility for being raped).

I feel a little bit bad for the journalist in this case - it's never the journalist who pens the headline in the UK, it's the sub-editors. It's still a shitty article, but that headline makes it seem infinitely worse than it ends up being.

I feel a little bit bad for the journalist in this case - it's never the journalist who pens the headline in the UK, it's the sub-editors. It's still a shitty article, but that headline makes it seem infinitely worse than it ends up being.

My favorite comment on the original article: "When you?'re intoxicated you?'re venerable".

I think I'll start calling myself "Sot Christine the Venerable" next time I go out. :P

"Hey Steph - it would be a lot easier for women to "avoid dangerous situations" (like, for example, their own homes) if sexually abusive men conveniently wore t-shirts that said "I AM A RAPIST."

the majority of rapes are committed by men known to the victims, often men they thought they could trust."

I know - I was abused as a child and have been raped many times - by "friends". However, since I have stopped drinking, I have not been abused or raped by close acquaintances.

I don't think it was my fault I was abused or raped. But that's cold comfort.

I am interested in guiding my daughter - teaching safe and self-respectful behaviors while at the same time, not blaming her for the actions of another party.

I kind of see where he's coming from.

He's not saying it's our fault if we are raped.

We cannot really call him an asshole for saying that we should be aware of a very real possibility that someone might take advantage of our weakened state when we go out to drink.
When we tell each other all the time not to go to a party, have a drink, go off somewhere and come back to that same drink, for fear someone might've slipped something in it. Or that we shouldn't let people make our drinks when we aren't looking.

We can't call him a jerk for saying be careful when people are constantly telling us to avoid empty parking lots or to walk home with keys in our hands and always look alert and aware of our surroundings when we are alone.

Are they blaming us for what might happen if we don't implement these precautions? Of course not but they are saying to look out for potentially dangerous situations.

I know it's nice to say that women should be able to get drunk whenever and they should be able to (if men can why can't we?) but it is irresponsible to act like men don't take of advantage of drunk women and that we shouldn't think about this before getting shitfaced.

Once again I am an 18 y.o. woman and I think that rape is one of the worse things someone could possibly do to a woman and it is in no way her fault if it does happen but I'm not for not informing women that being sober and in control of their bodies would lessen the chances of them getting raped at a party.

Women have the right to drink as much as we want but we also have the right to know that some men are on the prowl for drunk women.

It's so hard not to sound accusatory when discussing precautions.

Let's say, I get drunk pass out in the street. Woman or man this probably is not a very responsible act but that doesn't mean someone should steal from me or rape me.

He's just saying that we should be responsible enough to know that not everyone is a trustworthy person to be around when alcohol enters the equation.

And for people who blame "promiscuously" dressed women or women with a "history" fuck that. Idc if I walk into a room naked if a guy tries to so much as touch me all hell will break loose. It doesn't matter what a woman wears or how many people she has sex with she still has a right to decide what goes on with her body but drinking makes it hard for us to register what's going on enough for us to coherently articulate our feelings and we need to be aware of that.

"In so many of today's cases, alcohol has become the element that literally blurs the evidence. "

Ummm.. hate to be a grammar nerd.. but unless alcohol spills onto some documents so that the text blurs, then alcohol does not LITERALLY blur the evidence. Geesh.

"I certainly defend women's right to enjoy themselves and, in all cultures, men must always take responsibility for their behaviour.

There is never an excuse.

But so must women - and brewers and publicans who ply them with cheap drink.

Women always retain the right to say no whatever condition they are in.

But if they have been drinking, they may not be able to make that clear to someone stronger than them who doesn't wish to hear it. "

It seems like he doesn't know WHAT he believes.. one line is anti-rapist, the next line is anti-women.. he keeps changing his mind. From what I know of rape victims, more often than not they do not just shutup and "take it", it is quite clear when a woman is saying no and meaning yes, and when a woman is just plain saying no. And if a guy really respects women, and this idea confuses him, then he should play it safe and not sleep with her until she says yes. It's that simple. Women have as much right to get blind drunk as any man does, and to say that they SHOULD NOT be able to (or not be LET do it by the presumably male "brewers and publicans who ply them with cheap drink" - do I hear the body control squad coming?) is to adhere to a form of rape apologist ideology. PARTICULARLY in saying that a "woman must take responsibility for her actions" and yet "there's no excuse" for rape. What?? I agree that people need to take responsibility for their actions, be they male or female, but in this case it definitely sounds like he's alluding to a woman taking responsibility for her actions should a man rape her while she's drunk.

Frustrating, this writer is (yoda voice plz)

I'm sorry to hear it, Steph, and you're a brave person for coming out, but that's still your life. Children, women and men (like I was) are sexually assaulted while sober, in perfectly "safe" situations. I don't take myself for a typical victim or survivor, either.

I'll teach my children as well, while being careful of judging others. I won't fault them if victimized while impaired (or naive like I was, or my wife is) either. I will be pissed if they inflict damage like crashing my car while drunk, or being the aggressor, however.

"Women always retain the right to say no whatever condition they are in.

But if they have been drinking, they may not be able to make that clear to someone stronger than them who doesn't wish to hear it."

it's just like gladiating, only with wishes and rape! ladies, it's not your fault if you get raped--it's your fault you weren't strong enough to fight him off. by losing that fight, he wins the right to rape you!

I don't understand what's so hard about not having sex with someone who can't give you a clear answer as to whether they want to have sex with you or not. If they can't give you a good answer they probably aren't in any condition to be having sex.

Goanna: But so must women - and brewers and publicans who ply them with cheap drink.

Uh, NO! Don't infantalize women by saying they're helpless against an affordable drink with a clever commercial. If we can't expect that much, how can we hold someone accountable for anything?

"oh, and aniri? rape isn't a consequence of being drunk. it's a consequence of being a woman in the same space as a rapist."

Cedar, you totally took what I said out of context. I did not imply that rape is a consequence of getting drunk, but that it can be a very tragic consequence of being extremely drunk...and, as you said, "being a woman in the same space as a rapist." In my whole post not once did I blame victims of rape. As a matter of fact, I have been in situations where I barely escaped rape and I was completely sober. It wasn't my fault. And I don't blame drunk women either. But I do stand by what I wrote in my original post: drinking to the point of being unconscious can have horrible, tragic consequences. Please, take my post in the context of the article.

I think the personal responsibility crowd always forgets that personal responsibility applies fully to the rapist. They always pontificate about how the woman should take the personal responsibility to "act and behave respectably", but where are the sermons about how men should take the personal responsibility to prevent rape? Where are the self-righteous rants about how men should take full responsibility for their actions? Why does it seem that this crowd is excusing the rapist for his despicable actions?

I'm not really talking about those who say that women should be careful, but rather those who blame the victim right off the bat...

You know, men go and get smashed and nothing happens to them. If we want gender equality, women should be able to go and get smashed without fear or being taken advantage of. And I read that article. It was the most wishy-washy piece of work. If you're going to have an opinion, then write it. If not, don't waste space on the internet.

Goanna,

"It seems like he doesn't know WHAT he believes.. one line is anti-rapist, the next line is anti-women.. he keeps changing his mind."

Anti-women? I'm having a really hard time seeing that in the bit you quoted.

I also really don't see any contradiction between saying that a only a rapist at fault for the rape and saying that a woman who is massively intoxicated will likely have a harder time defending herself against a rapist than a sober one.

I guess I'm just saying that I think it's hard to have an honest discussion about this when simply pointing out the fact that people who are drinking heavily are typically more vulnerable than those who aren't is considered "anti-woman."

And this from ariel: "You know, men go and get smashed and nothing happens to them."

Again, I think this statement is completely off-base and patently false. Recognizing misogyny and the unique effects it has on women's daily lives (drunk and sober) does not mean we have to act like nothing bad ever happens to men ever.

(forgive me if you were being sarcastic. Sometimes it's hard to tell.)

Steph and Aniri,

Of course, on an individual basis, we've got to be careful.

But when the /legal system/ takes any credance away from the victim, whatsoever, b/c of their actions (like getting drunk, etc.) that's a serious problem. And it does. It's a really big problem.

In no way should a woman be considered a less credible victim b/c she was drinking.

And I think jurors, judges, etc. that live in this culture hearing people talking about all the things women are "supposed" to do to be safer, wind up thinking that somehow makes a difference legally. So = problem.

"And this from ariel: "You know, men go and get smashed and nothing happens to them."

Again, I think this statement is completely off-base and patently false. Recognizing misogyny and the unique effects it has on women's daily lives (drunk and sober) does not mean we have to act like nothing bad ever happens to men ever."

Let's rephrase that for you then, 'k? Men go and get drunk and are not victimized by other human beings /nearly as often as women in their situation are/. K, happy now?

a.k.a. Ninapendamaish: "Let's rephrase that for you then, 'k? Men go and get drunk and are not victimized by other human beings /nearly as often as women in their situation are/. K, happy now?"

Well, you are re-phrasing someone else's comment, but if that's that way Ariel had phrased it in the first place I would not have said anything. If that's what she meant, that is how it should have been phrased.

I'm sure most feminists, of all people, can recognize that language is important, and that sweeping generalizations have the effect of marginalizing and alienating people.

I guess I just find it offensive (and counter-productive) to flippantly dismiss any men who are victimized while drunk.

"I guess I just find it offensive (and counter-productive) to flippantly dismiss any men who are victimized while drunk."

I've talked about how I was put off drinking for years, because of a series of blackouts I had from drinking at the age of 17/18, my first year at university, freed from my conservative upbringing. In one, a friend (really, a friend) sitting next to me on the floor suddenly turned to me and declared that he would kill me, wrapping his both hands around my throat. I was too inebriated to react, or indeed, remember. After three or more former athlete friends tore his fingers from my throat, I choked and coughed on the floor, drunkenly accusing another friend. Or so the story goes.

That was just the first time I realized I could have literally died, without realizing what was happening. In another, I was about ten feet away from being attacked by an advancing hostile group of young men, because I drunkenly manually banged on their dorm's fire alarm to hear the noise it made. Only the quick, clear headed thinking of the people I was with saved my skin (they made me escape with them). I remember that - I was just in no position to realize what was happening or do anything about it.

There was another time, where it is completely possible I was orally raped (don't ask me how I know) and taken back to my room, where I awakened sober later, face down on the carpet, with absolutely no recollection of what happened, but surrounded by multiple forms of possible physical DNA "evidence", after a night of joining some friends for binge drinking of sale priced rum. I did not feel physically violated, but the fear for my personal safety is what is what got me off drinking for a number of years.

I consider these part of the adventure, 22 years later. Drinking stories. Many other young men are not so fortunate. Like my dead cousin and many others who might be alive and well, if they had not been drunk or in a drinking situation. It doesn't mean I blame them for being victims, or dead.

"I think the personal responsibility crowd always forgets that personal responsibility applies fully to the rapist. They always pontificate about how the woman should take the personal responsibility to "act and behave respectably", but where are the sermons about how men should take the personal responsibility to prevent rape? Where are the self-righteous rants about how men should take full responsibility for their actions? Why does it seem that this crowd is excusing the rapist for his despicable actions?"

This needed to be repeated for its high level of truth! And I'm not quoting it just for those automatic victim-blamers that exist, oh no, I'm quoting it for all of those poor, confused souls out there who seem to find the time to preach rape-avoidance ideas/techniques to women, but can't seem to spare one SECOND to teach boys about consent and remind men not to rape.

Why? Because in a patriarchal society it's always easier to tell the *woman* what to do. Telling a man not to rape!? What an offensive idea! He might never be a rapist! How dare you tell a man to limit his freedom! But telling ALL women to limit their freedom in order to avoid rape, including those women who will never be raped (since women are all in a constant state of danger and there's no way to know who will or won't find themselves in the presence of a rapist)? Perfectly acceptable.

I mean, even on the short list of "things not to do/to do so you don't get raped", it basically amounts to "stay in your house, cover yourself from neck to knee, never go anywhere alone, never fraternize". I can't imagine any man would actually want to live in a world where women obeyed all of the rape-avoidance advice fed to them.

Start teaching boys and men about CONSENT and RAPE.

Tofu

It really is unfortunate how rape has been accepted by some people as a "women's issue"- in the sense that it's something you teach girls to avoid, but don't do exactly what you're talking about (teach your sons about consent etc.) It's a way to get off the hook for that responsibility- another way of making women "gatekeepers" of sexual purity.

(oops, was that a Ghostbusters joke?)

Ucsbclassics53 put it beautifully.

Also, a.k.a. Ninapendamaishi made an excellent point:

"I think jurors, judges, etc. that live in this culture hearing people talking about all the things women are "supposed" to do to be safer, wind up thinking that somehow makes a difference legally."

Since you can do everything you're "supposed" to do and still be raped, the whole "you should do this, you shouldn't do that" business is a game in which, while individual women might come out ahead, women as a whole can only lose.

Therefore we have to make sure that the onus is not on women to keep themselves from being raped, but on men not to commit rape.

This counts in the case of drinking, also: as was pointed out here, there's a better chance that it's the rapist who's been drinking rather than his victim. So while everyone should be told the dangers of getting absolutely blotto, the emphasis should be more on teaching men.

What the hell is this crap--
*click*
Ah, DailyFail.com. The British version of TMZ.

Not worth giving these wankers the web traffic.

"I mean, even on the short list of "things not to do/to do so you don't get raped", it basically amounts to "stay in your house, cover yourself from neck to knee, never go anywhere alone, never fraternize"."

And that won't help against marital or intrafamilial rape, nor against a rape-minded burglar.

"Why does it seem that this crowd is excusing the rapist for his despicable actions?"

Because that is what you want to see. Nobody is talking about the rapist because that is not up for debate. Everyone agrees that the rapist is at fault and that's it.

The argument is on how not to be careless. I want to live in a utopia too. It's just that reality bites.

"Telling a man not to rape!?"

Who told him to Rape?

"Why does it seem that this crowd is excusing the rapist for his despicable actions?"

Because that is what you want to see. Nobody is talking about the rapist because that is not up for debate. Everyone agrees that the rapist is at fault and that's it.

The argument is on how not to be careless. I want to live in a utopia too. It's just that reality bites.

"Telling a man not to rape!?"

Who told him to Rape?

""Telling a man not to rape!?"

Who told him to Rape?"

Culture, frankly. Studies have been done that show that men who are raised with more conservative/traditionalist views of gender, are more likely to rape.

The whole "we can't do anything about the men who are rapists" line of thinking is crap. At least 1 in 10 men has been a rapist. They are not like a different species from the rest of the men who /haven't/ raped or something...

Also studies have been done that show that while some percentage of men are actually especially turned on by the act of raping itself, that's only a small percentage of total rapists. In other words, for most rapists it's /not/ their way to have "sex".

Also, I know the "we care about the women's well-being more than the rapists, so of course we're going to tell women how to be careful" line of thinking makes sense, to an extent... But you know what? You keep telling women what they should do, and you don't focus heavily on the rapists, and all you're going to have is just as many women continuing to get raped.

A woman get's drunk and someone rapes her. Does that mean that guy wanted to rape a drunk woman and otherwise nothing would have happened? No, it means he thought it was acceptable to rape/wanted to rape, and a drunk woman was his easiest target.

Racism is another set of thoughts/behaviors that is very bad, and very deeply ingrained in certain peoples' psychologies. But do you hear hoards of reasonably intelligent Americans saying "we shouldn't try to eradicate racism. We can't do anything about that. We should just tell blacks/latinos/Native Americans etc. how they should act in order to avoid being beaten..." Hellz NO you tend not to hear that, as it should be.

"Culture, frankly. Studies have been done that show that men who are raised with more conservative/traditionalist views of gender, are more likely to rape."

That is a little contradicting with reality. Conservative/traditionalists tend to marry much earlier. Traditionalists are more "conservative" and less outgoing. Less likely to be out at night wondering the streets, clubbing and using date rape drugs. I wonder how they got to their "opinionated study". Traditionalists view their mate as a potential wife not a piece of meat. I don't know who's line of thinking is crap here.

"The whole "we can't do anything about the men who are rapists" line of thinking is crap."

Yeah, what are you going to do exactly? Set more laws? They have already been set. That doesn't mean they won't be broken. You want to teach the kids? Oh wait, the whole family structure is in shambles. So, tell me how are you going to stop the next rape?

"Everyone agrees that the rapist is at fault and that's it."

If that's the case, why are so many (alleged) rapists acquitted, or given a lesser sentence, because of the victim's underwear or sexual history or alcohol consumption? Why are questions about these things even treated as legitimate in a courtroom? Nobody tells robbery victims that they were "partially responsible" by leaving a window open or their curtains drawn back.

"The argument is on how not to be careless."

The argument is one that cuts the rapist entirely out of the picture. How many articles have you seen saying, "Epidemic of intoxicated college-age women getting raped" vs. articles saying, "Epidemic of college-age men preying on intoxicated female acquaintances"?

"Who told him to Rape?"

If you're hoping that someone can point you to an article stating bluntly, "Lads, go out and commit rape!", then you're out of luck. Even back in the days of the Canaanites, such things were rarely stated directly.

What you can find, though, are arguments stating that male desire is an uncontrollable thing and that once it "gets started" it must proceed to its "inevitable conclusion". Or "seduction advice" instructing boys to ignore their partner's disinterested body language or even protests, because girls often say no when they mean yes. And of course, plenty of the old classic "Well, she was asking for it by doing XYZ".

"That is a little contradicting with reality. Conservative/traditionalists tend to marry much earlier. Traditionalists are more "conservative" and less outgoing. Less likely to be out at night wondering the streets, clubbing and using date rape drugs"

80% of rapes are acquaintance or partner rapes. Which means, going out/not going out clubbing and using drugs doesn't have a lot to do with it.

"Traditionalists view their mate as a potential wife not a piece of meat."

Hah. I grew up in the Bible Belt in a community of Southern Baptists. A lot of them think that it's a wife's duty to "submit" to their husbands, as dictated by the Southern Baptist Convention.

"Yeah, what are you going to do exactly? Set more laws? They have already been set. That doesn't mean they won't be broken. You want to teach the kids? Oh wait, the whole family structure is in shambles. "

Yes I want to teach kids. At schools. In families. "The whole family structure is in shambles?" What does that mean? According to whom? Family structure has been changing constantly throughout history. Kids still learn/pick up plenty of important messages at home. The home environment will always be an important learning setting for kids.

Oh also I should respond to this:

"Conservative/traditionalists tend to marry much earlier"

There are rapists who rape their wives. There are rapists who are married and rape women who are not their wives. Either way, being married does not dictate whether or not someone is capable of rape, in reality.

"80% of rapes are acquaintance or partner rapes. Which means, going out/not going out clubbing and using drugs doesn't have a lot to do with it."

80% of reported rapes? Who collected these statistics and give me method of sampling. Otherwise it's your opinionated view again. 80% of conservative/traditionalists right?

"Hah. I grew up in the Bible Belt in a community of Southern Baptists. A lot of them think that it's a wife's duty to "submit" to their husbands, as dictated by the Southern Baptist Convention.

Aha, now you are using the Bible belt as an excuse. Again, "submitting" is what two people do when they get married or give in to each other. Again, even the bible belt views the woman as a wife and not some meat for the night and a disposable product.

"Yes I want to teach kids. At schools.

Schools are around and I'm sure they are teaching students properly. That hasn't stopped the rape of women.

"80% of rapes are acquaintance or partner rapes. Which means, going out/not going out clubbing and using drugs doesn't have a lot to do with it."

80% of reported rapes? Who collected these statistics and give me method of sampling. Otherwise it's your opinionated view again. 80% of conservative/traditionalists right?

"Hah. I grew up in the Bible Belt in a community of Southern Baptists. A lot of them think that it's a wife's duty to "submit" to their husbands, as dictated by the Southern Baptist Convention.

Aha, now you are using the Bible belt as an excuse. Again, "submitting" is what two people do when they get married or give in to each other. Again, even the bible belt views the woman as a wife and not some meat for the night and a disposable product.

"Yes I want to teach kids. At schools.

Schools are around and I'm sure they are teaching students properly. That hasn't stopped the rape of women.

"There are rapists who rape their wives. There are rapists who are married and rape women who are not their wives. Either way, being married does not dictate whether or not someone is capable of rape, in reality."

In reality this would be like you getting hit by lightning. So, very small amount of husbands rape their wives. I'm guessing because they are forced into marriage. But being married dictates that you have matured more and have made legal and moral obligations.

"Aha, now you are using the Bible belt as an excuse. Again, "submitting" is what two people do when they get married or give in to each other."

In this case, the Southern Baptists mean that women are obligated to "submit" sexually to their husbands, whenever he wants it. That is not what most intelligent and educated Americans intend by marriage, at least in this day and age. And what do you mean "using the Bible Belt as an excuse"? The Bible Belt is where a lot of people live who would fall into this conservative/traditionalist view of gender that we're talking about.

"80% of reported rapes? Who collected these statistics and give me method of sampling. Otherwise it's your opinionated view again"

Just because you've done no research and know nothing about the issue, don't pressume others are equally ignorant.

One source for statistics like that would be, well, our Bureau of Justice: http://www.icasa.org/docs/acquaintance_rape_-_DRAFT_7.doc

"Schools are around and I'm sure they are teaching students properly."

Schools currently do very little to tackle the issue of sexual violence. It's usually not even addressed ins ex ed.

"High school and college-aged women are the most vulnerable to acquaintance rape. Boyfriends, friends and acquaintances of the victim commit the vast majority of sexual assaults on a college campus. "

This is quoted from the Bureau of Justice. So, again it is in a college environment. Where you have drinking at night, house parties etc. Just like I was stating in the previous post about traditionalists/conservatives.

22% of imprisoned rapists are married, according to the US Justice Bureau:

http://www.rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-offenders

And Knight, I realize you're a troll and all, but could you please stop with the ridiculously offensive claims anyway? I really hope you get banned.

"In reality this would be like you getting hit by lightning. So, very small amount of husbands rape their wives. I'm guessing because they are forced into marriage. But being married dictates that you have matured more and have made legal and moral obligations. "

Hey, where's your stats on this claim? Oh, it wouldn't happen to be /just your opinion/ would it??

"High school and college-aged women"

First of all, it says /high school/ and college-age. That means, say 14-22 years old, which is a significant age range, where a lot of those people are not going to college.

Second of all, just b/c someone is raped in college does not mean drinking was involved. And it certainly doesn't mean that someone with traditionalist views on gender was not the perpetrator. Also, having traditionalist views on gender in particular has little or nothing to do with whether one drinks, frankly.

"And Knight, I realize you're a troll and all, but could you please stop with the ridiculously offensive claims anyway? I really hope you get banned."

Offensive? I'm simply asking how are you going to stop the next rape? I know you are not because we cannot predict it. So, taking precautionary measures is offensive to you then live in a utopia. Or just keep blaming the Bible Belt if it makes you feel better.

"I know you are not because we cannot predict it. So, taking precautionary measures is offensive to you then live in a utopia"

Then why are you so against teaching boys at home and in families, eh? Especially when we know that how boys are raised can impact whether or not they rape...

"Hey, where's your stats on this claim? Oh, it wouldn't happen to be /just your opinion/ would it??"

Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one. It's just that I'm right most of the time.

"Then why are you so against teaching boys at home and in families, eh?"

I'm not society is. Plus, the traditional stable families are getting less and less. A lot of time the male is missing a father figure. Which is important in his teenage years. You can try to teach them at school but who's going to listen to the teacher attitude comes out. The respect that you have for your father is just at a whole different level. That's part of the problem.

I think you have sort of a self-centered view of the world then, Knight. You know, maybe like how a 5 yr-old cannot understand that other peoples' experiences can ever be different from their own.

Because I know wonderful men who were raised by women, and have no trouble respecting women either ;)

"I think you have sort of a self-centered view of the world then, Knight. You know, maybe like how a 5 yr-old cannot understand that other peoples' experiences can ever be different from their own."

The conscience is subjective and you are questioning my objective views of matter. The experiences may be different but there are also patterns that certain people see differently. Again, it's your opinion and I'm going to bed. You might be right on this issue. If we are here 20 years from now and still talk about rape then I'll be right. Who knows. I hope you are right. Although, this fight looks like the drug war at the moment. Getting worse with measure of time.

Anyway, see you before I get banned. :P

"If we are here 20 years from now and still talk about rape then I'll be right."

My object is not to create a utopia, b/c I agree that's impossible. The object, as I see it, is to bring us nearer to one. There may always be problems, but I see no reason why we should ever stop trying to continually reduce those problems...

Men who have sex with women who can't say no are **creepazoid rapists*** by ***definition****. Why is this confusing????

I glared at a woman in tescos today for buying the daily misogyny, sorry daily mail.

Just to comment on the DOJ statistics - per the *actual* DOJ website (not the Illinois Coalition Against Sexual Assault website)

From Table 43a. Personal crimes of violence, 2005: Percent distribution of victimizations, by characteristics of victims,
type of crime, and victim/offender relationship
(which can be downloaded from http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/cvus/nonstrangers771.htm)

For Female rape statistics
72.8% of rapes were committed by non-strangers
25.5% were committed by strangers

28.3% of rapes were committed by someone intimate with the victim
6.7 % by another relative
37.7% of all rapes were committed by a friend or acquaintance

While DOJ stats do not state that "80% of rapes are acquaintance or partner rapes" they do state a number very close to it - 73% (if we are rounding up) are committed by a non-stranger, but non-strangers are not divided into partners or acquaintances, but into someone intimate, other family members, and friends/acquaintances. The problem for me is the definition of "intimate" (for DOJ definitions see http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/cvus/definitions.htm#rape_sexual_assault). Intimate could mean someone living with the victim, not just a partner.

When looking at the stats the number of rapes committed by either a strangers or asomeone intimate are pretty close - 25% vs 28% (I wouldn't say that they present equal risks because you would need to run the data through a statistical model for that kind of implication).

What *is* very scary is that *almost* 40% (38%) of rapes reported are by friends or acquaintances.

What don't people get about this? A person passed out drunk isn't hurting anyone else. A person who is drunk isn't necessarily hurting anyone else just by being drunk. On the other hand, if a person causes bodily harm or kills another human being, it doesn't matter if that person is drunk or sober. It doesn't matter if the victim is drunk or sober. The end result is the same. A man (sober or drunk) raping a drunk woman is causing her bodily harm, and that is CRIMINAL. This blaming the victim by saying she shouldn't be drunk, or wear those clothes, or whatever is bullshit. That's just a red herring to get the focus off the man who raped her. His actions were criminal. Her actions weren't. It's as simple as that.

Tofu, I wholeheartedly agree that men and boys need to learn their responsibility when it comes to rape prevention.

Are we so blinded as a society in our outdated and tragically wrong standards of morality that we are reluctant to do anything about this problem? We do an inadequate job in educating our boys and youth that they have responsibility when it comes to stopping rape. The problem is that sexual violence has been framed to the point that it becomes another facet of the just world belief instead of framing it by showing men and boys what is consent and what not and rape avoidance techniques. Rape prevention has often been framed so that the onus of stopping rape is solely on the woman. “Watch your drink” as you mentioned above, don’t drink too much, etc. However, unfortunately for us, it is easier to think that tragedies will never befall good people, because it gives us comfort every time we hear about a rape or murder in the news.

"When looking at the stats the number of rapes committed by either a strangers or asomeone intimate are pretty close - 25% vs 28% (I wouldn't say that they present equal risks because you would need to run the data through a statistical model for that kind of implication).

What *is* very scary is that *almost* 40% (38%) of rapes reported are by friends or acquaintances."

I guess I don't really understand the point you're trying to make here. Yes, the number is slightly lower than I'd originally claimed (I was just reciting from memory) BUT I said "partners and acquaintances" b/c I meant that when the numbers for partner rapes and acquaintance rapes were combined, that number was a lot larger than stranger rapes alone. So I think what I said is consistent with the numbers you cite...

"In reality this would be like you getting hit by lightning. So, very small amount of husbands rape their wives. I'm guessing because they are forced into marriage. But being married dictates that you have matured more and have made legal and moral obligations."

Knight, you are soo out of your element. Stop trolling already.

Hm, Trolls13 didn't address a single one of the points I brought up. Figures.

>>I guess I don't really understand the point you're trying to make here. Yes, the number is slightly lower than I'd originally claimed (I was just reciting from memory) BUT I said "partners and acquaintances" b/c I meant that when the numbers for partner rapes and acquaintance rapes were combined, that number was a lot larger than stranger rapes alone. So I think what I said is consistent with the numbers you cite...

It's important because wrong and imprecise statistics are a way to invalidate arguments that individuals are making. Yes, what you said is consistent with what I cited - 66% of all reported rapes are intimate and acquaintance rapes per the DOJ. Given your phrasing, someone could assume you're not counting family members (who are usually not counted as an acquaintance rape) and in that case they could infer that 80% significantly inflates the number of partner and acquaintance rapes occurring.

This kind of "rounding up" (going from 73% to 80%) often leads to the charges that whoever is making the arguments supported by the statistics are inflating the problem or that they are making up the statistics to suite the argument.

I want to add the caveat here that I didn't think you were "making up the stats," just that you were either citing old stats or quoting someone who themselves had been imprecise.

I personally also think it's important to be precise about naming the stats because intimate rape, family rape, and acquaintance rape all work through different mechanisms and take place in different settings, so working towards reducing each type requires differing solutions (for instance my proposal to stop intimate rape would be different than stopping or dealing with acquaintance rape).

Differentiating between partner, acquaintance, and stranger rape in the context of the initial article - which links rape to alcohol use - is also important because alcohol use by the offender is very prevalent in partner violence, as per the DOJ:

"two-thirds of victims who suffered violence by an intimate (a current or former spouse, boyfriend, or girlfriend) reported that alcohol had been a factor. Among spouse victims, 3 out of 4 incidents were reported to have involved an offender who had been drinking"

On the other hand when talking about stranger rape, "offender alcohol use was associated with stranger assaults, night assaults, outdoor locations, and greater victim resistance" (this is per "The Role of Offender Alcohol Use in Rape Attacks An Analysis of National Crime Victimization Survey Data" by BRECKLIN and ULLMAN find that), which is not quite the club setting that the article talks about (we do know the use of alcohol by the victim greatly impairs their judgement and ability to fight back). The point being that the "going out to party and getting raped by a stranger" scenario is, as everyone here is pointing out, pretty rare in the U.S. (I don't know about the U.K. though) but the "partner drinking and getting into an altercation" (which sometimes results in rape) is much more common.

Oh HELL no. Geez, I can't believe these headlines are allowed to exist by any editor!

As a woman, I really didn't find this journalist an asshole. He wasn't debating that a rapist should be responsible for their actions but rather, like so many others listed here, we don't live in a Utopian world, women still need to be aware of their surroundings & actions especially so when alcohol is present. It's the same with men when they get obscenely drunk, it's less likely that they'll get raped but I mean, muggings & theft are still a risk. The point is, when you're so drunk that you're only half conscious, you expose yourself to a higher risk of mugging, theft / rape, that's a choice that you decide to make.

Evilbunnytoo makes an interesting point.

"On the other hand when talking about stranger rape, "offender alcohol use was associated with stranger assaults, night assaults, outdoor locations, and greater victim resistance"".

How many rapes happen because the rapist is too drunk to pay attention to whether his victim is consenting or not? I'd guess that alcohol use plays a role for rapists too, lowering their inhibitions that would in other circumstances prevent them from pushing sex on someone who doesn't want it or isn't capable of consenting.

But nowhere do you read articles that warn men they shouldn't get blind drunk because they might rape someone.

"But nowhere do you read articles that warn men they shouldn't get blind drunk because they might rape someone."

Because in anything other than e.g., drunk driving, where a person gets into/causes an accident because their ability or judgment was impaired, leading to something that would not occur under normal circumstances (who wants to deliberately crash their car and harm/kill someone else, maybe going to jail and having their license taken away and insurance premiums go through the roof); alcohol or drugs are used as an excuse, e.g. "I didn't really mean it." For someone to commit crimes or act offensively while drunk, the intent must have come from within, i.e., the rapist wants to rape, the abuser wants to abuse, the lout would actually like to be able to speak or behave offensively. Before taking anti-"drunken rape" measures, broader anti-rape education must take place.