VA - Freshman daughter, mom 'good time drop off' outrages VA university

[jjenny]

What do you think about this man's argument, that the intoxication laws are biased in favor of women?

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/02/11/3275721/taranto-college-rape/


In a Wall Street Journal column published on Monday, conservative commentator James Taranto argued that a “balanced” approach to the college sexual assault crisis involves placing equal blame , if both of them were drinking alcohol. The fact that intoxicated rape victims aren’t held responsible for their assault is “self-evidently unjust,” according to Taranto.


“If two drunk drivers are in a collision, one doesn’t determine fault on the basis of demographic details such as each driver’s sex. But when two drunken college students ‘collide,’ the male one is almost always presumed to be at fault,” Taranto writes. He goes on to conclude that efforts to address sexual violence on college campuses are creating a culture in which “women, but not men, are absolved of responsibility by virtue of having consumed alcohol.

I agree. And if the same woman got into the car, drove and collided with another car, would anybody be saying she is intoxicated therefore not guilty of DUI?

 

[katydid23]

Inebriated counts as unconscious. They are not sober, you're not going to go give them a BAC. So if in doubt, don't sleep with them. The female is under NO obligation to have intercourse with the male, not even if there's been foreplay, or she's crawled in his bed, or wearing nothing. Blue balls is not a valid defense. All of your hypotheticals seem to point back to what happened to your friend's son. It's regrettable, but a rare occurrence compared to the sexual attacks on women.

Inebriated is not the same as unconscious. You can be very 'tipsy' and be totally conscious and seem 'fine' to a sex partner. Especially if he has been drinking too.

It may seem that I am going back to what happened to my sons friend. But actually my hypotheticals are based upon all of the cases I am reading about in the past few days. They all involve drinking by BOTH of the sex partners. And mixed messages being sent by the female. And I do not think that the false accusations are all that rare. Some valid studies have them as high as 20 to 40% of rape claims.

And the 1 in 5 statistic is invalid, IMO. I think it is much lower. I think there are far fewer sexual assaults than is being claimed. If you want to count an unwanted kiss or a body rubbing up against with clothing on as sexual assault, then maybe 1 in 10 is correct. But if you are going with actual RAPE or sexual assault, it is much lower. I posted a few studied upstream already.

 

[Donjeta]

I don't think anyone is talking about 'unconscious' people. They are talking about 'drunk' sex. I think that is pretty much the only sex I had in my college days. Except when I had a steady boyfriend.

There have been some scenarios mentioned here in this thread where a person blacks out or falls asleep in the middle of making out or is too drunk to remember what happened, some of those might have been passed out and unconscious. IDK.

I have had my share of drunk sex too and I wouldn't call any of it rape personally as I thought of myself as able to consent. But I'll confess there have been times that I got so intoxicated that I wouldn't have been able to spell s-e-x for you...

 

[LinasK]

Inebriated is not the same as unconscious. You can be very 'tipsy' and be totally conscious and seem 'fine' to a sex partner. Especially if he has been drinking too.

It may seem that I am going back to what happened to my sons friend. But actually my hypotheticals are based upon all of the cases I am reading about in the past few days. They all involve drinking by BOTH of the sex partners. And mixed messages being sent by the female. And I do not think that the false accusations are all that rare. Some valid studies have them as high as 20 to 40% of rape claims.

And the 1 in 5 statistic is invalid, IMO. I think it is much lower. I think there are far fewer sexual assaults than is being claimed. If you want to count an unwanted kiss or a body rubbing up against with clothing on as sexual assault, then maybe 1 in 10 is correct. But if you are going with actual RAPE or sexual assault, it is much lower. I posted a few studied upstream already.

BBM. Yes this is sexual assault! My uncle, who later molested me when I was 13, did this to me when I was about 4 or 5! He'd rub up against me erect from behind on the pretext of getting my coat out of the closet. Noone else witnessed it, but my parents and aunt were right around the corner!!! I was too little to understand what was going on.

 

[katydid23]

There have been some scenarios mentioned here in this thread where a person blacks out or falls asleep in the middle of making out or is too drunk to remember what happened, some of those might have been passed out and unconscious. IDK.

I have had my share of drunk sex too and I wouldn't call any of it rape personally as I thought of myself as able to consent. But I'll confess there have been times that I got so intoxicated that I wouldn't have been able to spell s-e-x for you...

So please, and I am sincerely asking this because I do not understand, why is a male that has been drinking, considered a rapist because the female has been drinking and cannot consent? Why wouldn't the female be a rapist as well, if the male was drunk?

 

[katydid23]

BBM. Yes this is sexual assault! My uncle, who later molested me when I was 13, did this to me when I was about 4 or 5! He'd rub up against me erect from behind on the pretext of getting my coat out of the closet. Noone else witnessed it, but my parents and aunt were right around the corner!!! I was too little to understand what was going on.

Have you ever seen college kids dance? If this is automatically considered a sexual assault then there would be thousands of sexual assaults on campus.

That is horrible that your Uncle did that when you were 5. He was a sick pedophile, like mine. :grouphug:

But I am not going to compare that to a grown up rubbing up against another grown up at a party or on the dance floor or in a crowded bar. JMO

 

[Donjeta]

So please, and I am sincerely asking this because I do not understand, why is a male that has been drinking, considered a rapist because the female has been drinking and cannot consent? Why wouldn't the female be a rapist as well, if the male was drunk?

Well that is not something that I have ever said. As far as I'm concerned both sexes can be guilty of sexual assault or rape. It's not possible to state categorically that the male is always at fault and the female isn't. It always depends on the facts of the case.


JMO if a man sexually assaults a drunk woman, the man is at fault even if the woman was responsible for her own intoxication. If a woman sexually assaults a drunk man, the woman is at fault even if the man was responsible for his own intoxication.

I think it's quite horrid for that quoted man to say that it's unjust that intoxicated rape victims are not held responsible for their assault.


It is a given that you will get drunk if you consume a lot of alcohol so getting drunk is your choice and you're responsible for that. Getting sexually assaulted is not an inevitable consequence of getting drunk. It's not your choice and you're not to blame for being a victim of assault. MOO.


That said, if both were equally drunk, incapable of genuine consent and unable to remember what happened but happened to have sex anyway, then it might end up being pointless for them to sue each other as nothing could be proven anyway. Sometimes it might sometimes be better just to assume it was more or less consensual and chalk it up as a learning experience not to get so drunk next time. Children are unable to consent to sex legally, but in many countries there's an age gap rule and if two children have sex, (being nearly the same age and neither has the power advantage over the other) it's not usually a crime. If two equally incapacitated adults have sex while neither has the edge over the other, maybe it could be thought as similar? Doesn't have to be a man and a woman, it could be two men, or two women, or more than two people.

I guess it depends on what the sexual act consisted of too. Is it two stupidly drunk people doing things mutually to each other or one person doing things to another who might have been unconscious and did not participate much or at all? Was one person more functional than another? Who penetrated whom? It's probably easier for a conscious man to have vaginal intercourse with an unconscious woman than the other way around so that could be partly why you get more of those allegations. Did anyone get hurt, forced or restrained? Was anyone manipulated into getting a more intoxicated state so that they could be more easily taken sexual advantage of?

JMO

 

[DexterMorgan]

Drunk sex is okay as long as you don't start off with one partner. And then pass out. And then wake up and find out that 3 other people had joined in as well.

But my main concern is if the guy is feeding the girl more alcohol than he is feeding himself. There are predatory guys who will act like they are drinking vodka when their bottle is actually filled with water. But then they will make sure they keep pouring the female the strong stuff as to get her comatose and take advantage.

Those types are predators in my mind.

But consensual happy drunk sex should not be considered rape when both consenting parties could barely even remember the night before.

Just get dressed and move on and watch your alcohol consumption the next time.

 

[Goose22]

Does anyone else think the hypothetical "who's raping who?!" issue could be boiled down to who is performing the action...? And by that I mean who is making the motion in the ocean?

A pretty flip way to treat a serious subject, I'm sure. But the drunk sex "who's raping who" hypothetical scenario comes up pretty much any time these conversations happen so I've had to think about it a lot.

Men being seen as the stereotypical abuser is a problem that harms male victims and it needs to be taken seriously and I hope we can begin to think more of the male
victims in this thread. A lot of the arguments that seem to be in support and favor of
men can actually lead to more trouble for male rape victims.

 

[BlueShoe]

What I don't understand is that if these young men are so vulnerable to false accusations by drunk, enticing young women, then why are they hanging banners encouraging these women to party and get drunk? Shouldn't they instead be hanging banners warning these women against drinking as a means of protecting these young men's safety? It would seem like these young men are just setting themselves up for a dangerous situation. MOO

 

[Fairy1]

Does anyone else think the hypothetical "who's raping who?!" issue could be boiled down to who is performing the action...? And by that I mean who is making the motion in the ocean?

A pretty flip way to treat a serious subject, I'm sure. But the drunk sex "who's raping who" hypothetical scenario comes up pretty much any time these conversations happen so I've had to think about it a lot.

Men being seen as the stereotypical abuser is a problem that harms male victims and it needs to be taken seriously and I hope we can begin to think more of the male
victims in this thread. A lot of the arguments that seem to be in support and favor of
men can actually lead to more trouble for male rape victims.

If a woman is passed out cold, she's not making any motion. In the ocean or anywhere else.

 

[Goose22]

If a woman is passed out cold, she's not making any motion. In the ocean or anywhere else.

For sure, that's very true. I mean the hypothetical "okay, so two
people are drunk having sex and then they both feel violated, who's the rapist?!?!?!" then it seems the logical answer would be whoever is performing the main action.

In a scenario where someone is unconscious it's very clear cut IMO, even if the other person is drunk.

 

[DexterMorgan]

If I'm not mistaken. Someone was told to get the condoms ready because it's about to hit the fan.

So a juror may not see this as being a non participant unless the rape is caught on tape. Jmo.

 

[Fairy1]

Seems we're getting waaaaaay away from the topic of this thread. Which was a bunch of frat boys, at a frat house off campus putting up banners inviting parents to drop off their female freshman students there (and their moms, too!).

IMO, the implication is pretty clear. To others, not so much. I should hope that by the time our boys and girls go off to college, we have taught them ALL how to behave responsibly. Of course, we know that's not always going to stick, but NO ONE should become a victim of rape or false accusations due to a lapse in judgement.

 

[Fairy1]

If I'm not mistaken. Someone was told to get the condoms ready because it's about to hit the fan.

So a juror may not see this as being a non participant unless the rape is caught on tape. Jmo.

If I was a prosecutor - and I'm not - it would take me about 2 seconds to destroy this attempt at a "defense."

 

[Fairy1]

For sure, that's very true. I mean the hypothetical "okay, so two
people are drunk having sex and then they both feel violated, who's the rapist?!?!?!" then it seems the logical answer would be whoever is performing the main action.

In a scenario where someone is unconscious it's very clear cut IMO, even if the other person is drunk.

If the guy is unconscious, that's pretty much the end of the story. There isn't going to be any action. If the girl passes out, the guy can still do the deed. That's the difference.

And honestly, if the guy wants to do the deed with a girl that is passed out cold, that's a problem. He's a problem. That's Bill Cosby kind of $**t.

 

[bluesneakers]

If the guy is unconscious, that's pretty much the end of the story. There isn't going to be any action. If the girl passes out, the guy can still do the deed. That's the difference.

And honestly, if the guy wants to do the deed with a girl that is passed out cold, that's a problem. He's a problem. That's Bill Cosby kind of $**t.

It's also Vanderbilt $**t.

JMO.

 

[DexterMorgan]

Vanderbilt was a gang rape with an already unconscious female. And Bill drugged his dates without them knowing.

 

[flourish]

What do you think about this man's argument, that the intoxication laws are biased in favor of women?

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/02/11/3275721/taranto-college-rape/


In a Wall Street Journal column published on Monday, conservative commentator James Taranto argued that a “balanced” approach to the college sexual assault crisis involves placing equal blame , if both of them were drinking alcohol. The fact that intoxicated rape victims aren’t held responsible for their assault is “self-evidently unjust,” according to Taranto.


“If two drunk drivers are in a collision, one doesn’t determine fault on the basis of demographic details such as each driver’s sex. But when two drunken college students ‘collide,’ the male one is almost always presumed to be at fault,” Taranto writes. He goes on to conclude that efforts to address sexual violence on college campuses are creating a culture in which “women, but not men, are absolved of responsibility by virtue of having consumed alcohol.

Men have the anatomical "bias" in that they can force, using an erogenous body part, vaginal, oral, and anal sex on an unwilling woman. It's stupid to act as though that's not true in order to be "fair."

Sent from my LG-D321 using Tapatalk

 

[Fairy1]

Vanderbilt was a gang rape with an already unconscious female. And Bill drugged his dates without them knowing.

What difference does it make? Having sex with an unconscious woman is what? Satisfying? Memorable? Hot?

Nope. Just gross and creepy.