Wednesday, April 7, 2010

Doods Who Defend White Het Doods Raping Drunk Women: Summary of what male supremacists believe about this matter: "It's Complicated"



The above image is from here. It depicts the more expensive version of white het men's preferred date rape drug: alcohol.

Okay friends. This is one of them posts that you're gonna want a cup of coffee or afternoon tea to sit beside you while you ingest what's to follow. And plenty of what follows damned infuriating. This is a post with two fairly short  articles, following by a discussion from Tim Wise's Facebook page about the issues in these two articles. The discussion over to Tim's page is long. Long. Long. And the primary reason it's long is because one white het guy--SURPRISE!--takes over the conversation in support of the jerk who is written about in the articles. Tim had thought the fool might be a friend from years ago, and so kind of treated him with more respect than he would have had he realised he was just an unknown white het male supremacist annoyance.

I have serious problems with how this plays out and state as much towards the end. I came into this conversation when you first see my comments, and so had read everything above that before commenting--before having the chance to comment. I think this is a perfect example of something seen on blogs, websites, and Facebook pages, a lot, but far more often in non-virtual social spaces, wherein white het men take over conversations in truly supremacist ways, in ways that are all about exercising entitlements, privileges, and the wrong kind of "rights" that class-privileged WHM marinate in daily.


I want to note a few other things before letting you get on with the business of reading what follows. I was pleased to see the opposition to the fools who think that drunk women are responsible for their own rapes, who oppose guys stating that this is complicated. WHM think every issue which challenges their entitlements is "complex" and must be discussed (in disgust-ing ways)
ad nauseam. You'll see other objections in my own comments and that of several women and a few men who do get what the issues are and are not. 

Oh, and because I have great respect for Tim's work against white supremacy, I include images of his books, below. My own interactions with Tim have shown him to be very responsible and open to hearing critique. After writing what I did, I wrote him privately of some additional concerns I had about WHM supremacist dynamics that played out on his Facebook page discussion. He "got it" completely and utterly without defensiveness.

WATCH: American U Columnist Defends Rape Piece On The Early Show
Huffington Post   |  Leah Finnegan First Posted: 03-31-10 03:42 PM   |   Updated: 04- 3-10 12:32 PM

Alex Knepper

When American University's student paper, The Eagle, published a column arguing that drunk women solicit sexual assault, it sparked a firestorm of controversy on campus -- enough to move 50 students to gather and discuss the column and others to remove hundreds of issues from newspaper stands in protest.
In the column, sophomore Alex Knepper expressed his controversial views on rape and feminism, among other things. Knepper wrote:
For my pro-sex views, I am variously called a misogynist, a rape apologist and -- my personal favorite -- a "pro-date rape protofascist."
Let's get this straight: any woman who heads to an EI party as an anonymous onlooker, drinks five cups of the jungle juice, and walks back to a boy's room with him is indicating that she wants sex, OK?
Knepper clarified his argument to the Washington Post.
In an interview Monday he [Knepper] said that "real rape," which occurs when a stranger "thrusts sex into a non-sexual situation," is a heinous crime and rapists should be severely punished.
"I have a fun time stirring the pot," Knepper said. "I don't mind being hated for my views."
Eagle Editor Jen Calatone told the Washington City Paper that she was upset by campus reaction to the column. She defended her editorial judgment in a letter to readers Tuesday:
By publishing this piece, we were not trying to display our tacit support of Knepper's views. However, as journalists, we are not in the business of censorship. As an editor, I would not feel right to fire or censor a writer who has offended people, because I believe that he has raised questions that warrant discussion.
The Eagle published a letter yesterday from American's provost and vice president of campus life in response to the column. It reads:
Our campus community has been stunned and mobilized by opinions expressed about date rape by an Eagle columnist in this week's paper. The emotion provoked by the column and the seriousness of the subject make this a powerful learning opportunity for our community and a moment for us to affirm our values as an educational institution.

AU is committed to a safe environment for all and does not tolerate rape in any form or under any circumstances.
The letter goes on to state that an enhanced version of the school's sexual misconduct policy will be printed in an upcoming issue of the Eagle.
This morning, Knepper went on CBS's The Early Show to defend his work. "Men cannot know what women do not tell them," he said, adding that "there are so many men out there whose lives have been devastated by false claims of rape."
American student Carmen Ríos appeared on the show as well, and criticized the university's response to sexual assault. "Our institution has taken a very hands-off approach to sexual assault," she said, "And is trying very hard to make it just go away."

CampusMedia.jpgAmerican University students are demanding that the campus newspaper fire one of its columnists and issue an apology after publishing a column Monday that called date rape "an incoherent concept."
The column in The Eagle newspaper was written by Alex Knepper, 20, a sophomore political science major. Knepper wrote that a woman who attends a fraternity party, drinks more than five glasses of alcohol and follows a guy to his room is indicating that she is willing to have sex and should not "cry date rape" the next morning.
Knepper, who is openly gay, often writes on topics that infuriate students and hopes to someday be a political commentator. In an interview Monday he said that "real rape," which occurs when a stranger "thrusts sex into a non-sexual situation," is a heinous crime and rapists should be severely punished.
Not surprisingly, the column has already received more than 175 comments and several letters to the editor. Early Monday morning an unknown person or persons collected hundreds of copies of the paper from around campus and piled them in front of the student newspaper office, under a sign reading: "No room for rape apologists."
"I have a fun time stirring the pot," Knepper said in an interview Monday. "I don't mind being hated for my views."
Knepper and his editors are standing behind the column. Editor in chief Jen Calantone said she decided to publish the column because it would "foster an interesting discussion." The Eagle, which publishes twice a week, plans to print numerous letters to the editor and rebuttals to the column in its Thursday paper. Editors are also in the process of organizing a Thursday night forum so students can ask questions and share their opinions.
Calantone also wrote a letter to readers, which was posted on the newspaper's Web site Monday afternoon.
By publishing this piece, we were not trying to display our tacit support of Knepper's views. However, as journalists, we are not in the business of censorship. As an editor, I would not feel right to fire or censor a writer who has offended people, because I believe that he has raised questions that warrant discussion.
Many students say they were appalled by the column and the newspaper's decision to publish it.
"This column promotes the culture of blaming the victim and excusing rape. That sort of speech has no business in the student paper," said Drew Franklin, a senior audio production major who is helping to organize a protest of the column. "The publication itself crossed a line."
Sarah Brown, director of the university's Women's Initiative, wrote in a letter to the editor that it was "irresponsible and shameful" for the The Eagle to publish the column.
As students and as human beings, we have the right to attend a party without being sexually assaulted. We are entitled to wear what we choose to, to have a drink, or to move to a new space with an acquaintance without fearing for our security. We are the only ones who can decide with whom and when we will have sex -- passionate and spontaneous consensual sex. If you don't feel that you gave consent, you have the right to feel violated. You also have the right to talk to someone about what was done to you, even if you don't want to report it to AU or the police or go to counseling.
About 50 students -- including Knepper, Eagle editors and sexual assault survivors -- gathered Monday evening to discuss the column. Some students live-tweeted the event and discussion broke out on Twitter.
@meghanlsweeney Eagle Editors: didn't think piece would have such an impact on commmunity. Meant to do more good than harm Oops. Eagle fail.
@Tehmeg I love Alex Knepper
@jcwalkwithus I have seen people cry today. I have heard stories of rape and sexual assult. I have seen people relive trauma. I do not love Alex Knepper.
On Tuesday a group of students plan to deliver a list of demands to The Eagle staff, asking that editors fire Knepper and publish an apology, among other things. Franklin said they will also distribute fliers, put up signs, stencil the slogan "No room for rape apologists, Take back the Eagle" around campus.

Tim Wise
Political Views:
Leftist
Religious Views:
Yes, but probably not yours

Website:
http://www.timwise.org http://www.redroom.com/author/tim-wise http://www.facebook.com/pages/Tim-Wise/140254320968?ref=mf

Full Bio: Tim's Full Bio

Books Authored: Click the covers below for Amazon.com links

Tim Wise

Tim Wise wonders why it is so hard for men to get it through our skulls: if you have sex with a drunk woman, and especially when she has not given you explicit messages BEFORE she was drunk that she wants to have sex, you are a rapist, period...no excuses. If you don't want to be called a rapist, try getting your freak on sober.... If you can't manage that, well, that's not the woman's fault, so learn to go home alone...it's simple, jackass.

See More
When American University published a column arguing that drunk women solicit sexual assault, it sparked a firestorm of controversy on campus -- enough to move 50 students to gather and discuss the column and others to remove hundreds of issues from Eagle stands in protest. ...


Amber Earnest
DAMN STRAIGHT
Fri at 8:43pm
Maria Jackson
Maria Jackson
YES MEANS YES
Fri at 8:43pm
Michael Wansley
Michael Wansley
Stupid is as stupid does, Mr. Wise
Fri at 8:47pm
Robert Klein
Robert Klein
Exactly, Tim.Masturbation may not be as satisfying,but it won't get you arrested. Not that I am an expert or anything LOL>
Fri at 8:51pm
Theodore Forsyth
Theodore Forsyth
what a shit.
Fri at 8:51pm
Mike Strusz
Mike Strusz
Touche, Tim. Touche.
Fri at 8:51pm
Kevin Shannon
Kevin Shannon
Tim, now hang on just a minute here. I'm going to agree with Maria, who just posted Yes means Yes. Here's the deal. If a man goes and gets drunk and then agrees to something that then hurts himself even (never mind if he agrees to whatever that isn't particularly hurtful but that he may not have done so soon without alcohol), he has to accept consequences for it, because he willingly got drunk. I believe therefore that far from babying women with a double standard (which in this case would *maybe* benefit them) we should begin to treat women as complete and full human beings who can accept responsibility for the consequences of their drunkenness if they get drunk, just like anyone else.

If we don't do that, then we are saying that women are weaker or lessor creature who need special rules. I wouldn't want to go there, and am surprised as hell that you do.
Fri at 8:52pm
Steven Munro
Steven Munro
If a man and women get drunk together and have sex the man is a rapist?
Fri at 8:52pm
Michael Benitez Jr
Michael Benitez Jr
True that bro
Fri at 8:53pm
 

Maria Jackson
Tim, you should check out the post on Fugitivus on "predator theory"
http://fugitivus.wordpress.com/2010/03/27/predator-theory/
Fri at 8:54pm

Laura Rogers
@Steven, only if the woman said no, she didn't want to have sex.
Fri at 8:54pm
Steven Munro
Steven Munro
Well thats obvious Laura. Doesn't seem to be what Tim stated though. At least to me.

@Kevin - Yes, there is a reason people drunk, to lower inhabitions and yes have sex. There are plenty of women at my work who may go out and get very drunk and have a one night stand or whatever. They take responsibility for their actions. Now, if the women is unconcious or semi concious then this is probably a different matter.
Fri at 8:58pm

Laura Rogers
@ Kevin, the situation this American U writer has contrived states that if a woman gets drunk and follows a man to a room at a party For ANY REASON she is CONSENTING TO SEX. That's just not true. She might going to that room to have a conversation. Or to take her top off and do a little making out. Is she capable of consenting to sex while drunk. Of course. Might it me sex she regrets. Yes. But to say that because she was drunk the is incapable of getting to that room and at that time saying NO, she deserves to have sex forced upon her anyway for being in that room, in that state and that situation - is uncalled for. That situation is rape. When a woman doesn't give her consent it is rape.
Fri at 8:58pm
Steven Munro
Steven Munro
I don't drink that often anymore. When I did and often I was getting totally pissed I'd do stupid stuff and regret it the next day. However no amount of alcohol (I am Scottish and live in Glasgow so I know drunkeness) I have ever consumed has so warped my moral framework that I would rape a girl. Forced sex or unconsenting sex. Even drunk I think you know that is totally wrong. At least in my experience.
Fri at 9:02pm
Kevin Shannon
Kevin Shannon
Laura (and TIM!!), if a man gets taken to a party by friends, drinks a lot and is " not able to say no" to then going for a joyride in a car doing the driving himself, and kills people....who is it that did the drunk driving??
Fri at 9:02pm
Steven Munro
Steven Munro
Having drank so much in the past that I have actually blacked out and had totally memory lapses from the previous night I know what that is like Kevin. Being a bit older and wiser now though I think you have to take some responsiblity for your actions. You choose to get that drunk(the majority of the time). People so often don't think on or examine the possible consequences of the actions they take.
Fri at 9:06pm
Kevin Shannon
Kevin Shannon
..continuing on. The point is, as adults we do have to be responsible for the behaviors and actions we undertake when drunk, or we have to "give up the keys" (put on the chastity belt?) before we get tht incapacitated by our own chosing. If someone gets behind the wheel of a car when drunk or if someone acts as a participant in the sexual intercourse realm, same rules should apply.
Fri at 9:07pm
Kevin Shannon
Kevin Shannon
OF COURSE if a woman, drunk or not, is saying No then that is a different case....hell, if man is saying NO it's a different case too, though admittedly rare.
Fri at 9:10pm

Maria Jackson
Kevin, I think you'd benefit from reading the post on "predator theory" as well.
Fri at 9:12pm
Michele Morgen
Michele Morgen
Rape is so ingrained as acceptable in cultures across the globe. It has nothing to do with sex and everything to do with having power over another human being. In the majority of cases, it's men over women. That's just the facts. It certainly doesn't mean all men are rapists or all men are out to exploit women. BUT iIn this country, there are a whole laundry list of things that women shouldn't do or they're "asking for it." Men don't have those kind of restrictions on their behavior. So what happens when women say "I'm going to do this (behavior) anyway because I'm a free and equal adult" and they end up getting raped, especially in situations where alcohol is involved? The cultural assumption is "they asked for it." THAT is the disease that must be eradicated. Please give up this idea that sex is associated with rape. It's taking advantage of a situation and commiting an act of violence against another.
Fri at 9:13pm
Kevin Shannon
Kevin Shannon
Maria, I haven't read it yet, but my guess is I won't be surprised by the content (I will read it after this). It's not a friendly world, completely,
out there in the public jungle. We know this before we go incapacitate ourselves drinking. There are thieves too - predators, I would guess we
could call them - and we know that a certain number of them exist out in public. If we are drunk and say NO, or try to resist the thief from taking
the money out of our hand, then that is on the predator, of course. But if
we are drunk and actually make friends with the predator-thief and tease her/him with our wallet, maybe even offering first (!)to share money and eventually say Yes, I agree, I'm going to give you some cash here and in
fact I want to give you something because it gives me pleasure too (both parties consenting even though inebriated, and both parties gaining pleasure
or satisfaction of some sort)....well then the ethics are more cloudy at
least. Ok I'll go read it now.
Fri at 9:23pm 
Kevin Shannon
Kevin Shannon
@Michele I agree with you 100%, 150% even, if the woman is taqken advantage of OVER her objections. If she is out looking for sex, or even saying what the hell, I'm sexually active so I'm going to get drunk and not care (more passively but intentionally permitting), then it is not anyone elses fault. Adults are Adults are Adults....and must take ADULT responsibility for their choices. Quit asking the world to baby you because you have a vagina.
Fri at 9:28pm

Maria Jackson
" Quit asking the world to baby you because you have a vagina"
Are you for real?
Fri at 9:34pm
Kevin Shannon
Kevin Shannon
OK Maria, I read it, wasn't quite as academic as I was assuming it would be. I also read the linked Predator Theory article behind that. The "rape" that these articles is talking about involves non-consent. It has to. If you are talking about rape as "consenting" acts, then even though the consent is influenced by alcohol (see above posts on taking responsibility for your own drinking!!!), one person's evil predator, is another person's amorous socialite (and that could be either male or female). They aren't very strong (intellectually) articles - strong in feminist anger but not strong academically
Fri at 9:38pm
Kevin Shannon
Kevin Shannon
If you are asking the world to give you a specil set of rules for your benefit that don't apply to all adults, because of your gender, then yes 1) that is asking the world to baby you because you have a vagina and 2) it PERPETUATES the idea that women are somehow weaker and not equal (and therefore needful of special consideration). Do you really want to do that??
Fri at 9:41pm
Michele Morgen
Michele Morgen
"Quit asking the world to baby you because you have a vagina"??? You are rather defensive, Kevin. I'm just saying you can't dismiss the greater picture of male priviledge when it comes to rape and the expectations that are placed on women's behavior because of it. Nice.
Fri at 9:42pm

Maria Jackson
not meeting your standard for academic strength (as if your comments here have been?), despite being based on academic studies, doesn't make them any less true.

Rape ALWAYS involves the lack of consent. That's what makes it rape.
Fri at 9:42pm

Maria Jackson
Kevin, who besides you, has said ANYTHING about a "special set of rules"?
Fri at 9:43pm
Robert Monroe
Robert Monroe
Kevin, I agree with what you are saying. When I was in college a friend of mine was at a bar getting drunk, met a woman who was at the bar getting drunk, went home with her and the next morning had second thoughts, called the police and cried rape. My friend was arrested on rape charges and deported. Never once was she held responsible for her behavior when drinking...but, my friend was supposed to be totally responsible for his...a serious double standard which does nothing to protect women.
Fri at 9:45pm
Kevin Shannon
Kevin Shannon
Maria we agree on consent then. But the post here is about drunkenness and sex, and someone said the situation when a person is so drunk they are "unable to say no," so the discussion where we may disagree is on the instances where consesnt or not is "fuzzy" at best.

Where there is clearly non-consent, I agree that the power-person who overrides or takes advantage of the weaker person (could be female on male, as in the case of a teacher or therapist on student or client) shoulders all the blame and responsibility.

The question is, does a person at the same party who just may happen to not be AS drunk, assume those therapist-style power responsibilities??? This is fuzzy, I think.
Fri at 9:48pm

Maria Jackson
the one who does the raping bears all the responsibility. I'm not sure how/why this confuses you.
Fri at 9:49pm
Kevin Shannon
Kevin Shannon
I'm not claiming to be an academic, or published....nothing more than a person opnionating on facebook! As I read the articles, the studies were surveys...ok, research sorta, but "soft" research given all the bisases and un-regulated variables that can be present
Fri at 9:50pm
Eddie Blue-Eyes
Eddie Blue-Eyes
Oh Please! ANY man who has sex with an unconscious woman, or a woman so inebriated she doesn't know what's going on, is more than cowardice, it IS freakin rape. You have to have a warped sense of moral reasoning to justify crap like that.
Fri at 9:50pm
Kevin Shannon
Kevin Shannon
Maria, "the one who does the raping bears all the responsibility" - I said I agree, when there is non consent and we agree that it is rape. It's in the area of what is rape that there is discussion. When there is consent, or perhaps knowing self-inflicted loss of ability to give consent (drunkenness) that the ethics are not as automatic. I agree and have said that if there is any objection, then it is rape. But a guy (we'll use the stereotypical gender roles for the moment) who is interested in a woman, both have been drinking, and she is less inhibited because she has been drinking, but still appearing to be (to him since he is also a bit buzzed) conscious about her choices, has a sexual encounter with her and then two days later is charged with rape? that's where this is a slippery slope. Tim's original post seems to allow for this situation, where fairness can go out the window after the fact!
Fri at 9:57pm

Maria Jackson
Like I said, Kevin, "Yes Means Yes". If there is doubt, go with out.
Fri at 10:00pm
Kevin Shannon
Kevin Shannon
Robert's post answers the question about a special set of rules.....
Fri at 10:04pm
Javier Gutierrez
Javier Gutierrez
How can anyone consent to sex after drinking, when the first thing that alcohol affects is your judgment. No person can consent when alcohol is involved. We need to educate men on our responsibility to end rape. Any person, particularly men need to stop other men from taking advantage of anyone who is drunk.
Fri at 10:08pm

Laura Rogers
Kevin you're taking about where there IS CONSENT and lack of consent makes it rape. The young man who wrote the article Tim is referencing, and your reference to "Knowing self-inflicted loss of ability to give consent" ( i.e. unconscious or semi-conscious) is RAPE. I don't agree with the idea that rape is any sex a woman regrets, but (I'm not peaking for Tim) what I got from the article is men don't have the right to take advantage of women just because they are drunk. And regarding an earlier question you have posed I will give you a similar situation YES, a man can get away with stealing a car and driving around it in while drunk because he was 'too drunk to know what he was doing" because my brother got out of felony auto theft charges because his blood alcohol content was so high. Had he crashed and killed someone that might not have been the case, but think about the burden of proof that she didn't consent is still on the woman after-the-fact and especially if alcohol was involved. It's even worse if you knew the man - and god forbid he's an ex-lover. How can you PROVE you didn't consent to relations if you were drunk, even if you didn't consent? There are also cases of women who were date-raped drugged who were kicked out of hospitals for 'acting drunk' and their stories not believed because guess what drugs do? They make you act drunk!
Fri at 10:10pm
Kevin Shannon
Kevin Shannon
obviously if someone is drugged without their consent, and then there is consensual sex
by someone taking advantage of that situation that is rape. My point simply
is that in the case of the driver, or the sexual participant, if alcohol has impaired your judgment, and you knew it would before you started drinking,
and you drank anyway, then at least some portion of the responsibility is on your own decision to lose your ability to use judgment.
Tim's post said it is ALWAYS rape, and I am just raising the point that there could be a debate on his contention (seemingly) that "consent while drunk is always non-consent" and therefore rape. No, if someone chooses to drink, and gives their consent for something they may not have, they still have to accept some responsibility for having given that consent because they also freely chose to do the drinking.
Fri at 10:22pm

Maria Jackson
Absolutely NOT, Kevin. You're attempting to blame the victim for having the gall to drink. No. That's not right, nor fair. The RAPIST IS ALWAYS TO BLAME
Fri at 10:22pm
Michele Morgen
Michele Morgen
@Javier - WORD. Exactly.
Fri at 10:24pm
Bobby Danforth
Bobby Danforth
I think you're doing this Thing men do where we try to nail down a situation where we might be unfairly Brung Low by a Woman. The thing about this hypothetical situation - drinking, having sex, baselessly accusing a partner of rape later - is that it's actually almost never an issue and insisting on talking about it is a reflection of one's own neuroses rather than what's a big priority. It's not about hating women or loving rape as far as I know.

Kevin, man, I think it might be a good idea to consider the difference between inebriation and "being drunk." A drunk person, by my understanding, is someone with difficulty walking who would be denied service at a 7/11. It is unethical to have sex with someone if you meet them in this state and they seem down with it. I'm not going to split hairs with you about "whether it's rape" or not.
Fri at 10:36pm
Bobby Danforth
Bobby Danforth
It occurs to me that you should think about why you have such a strong mental picture w.r.t. rape of a woman getting really drunk, having context-free sex all over the place, and accusing folks of rape later. That's one hell of a caricature to carry around!
Fri at 10:38pm
Kevin Shannon
Kevin Shannon
Maria, once again. I agree - if we agree that it is rape. The question is on whether consenting with lowered inhibitions is a case of rape. Robert's post above where two adults both went drinking in the bar and both acted to become sexually involved as adults, but only one got made into a criminal for it THAT is where the question is. THAT was not fair AT ALL and the way that Tim stated his original post (always rape), there would be no defense for the man wrongly or at least badly charged.

And folks, I'm older - I've lived long enough to see that kind of case ruin a LOT of men's lives. It is NOT fair or ethical. It happens, way too much.
Fri at 10:39pm
Kevin Shannon
Kevin Shannon
Bobby, that is a fair point about the distinction between inebriated (buzzed, lower inhibitions) and drunk-on-ur-ass. Clearly the latter requires some ethical restraint on the part of a potential sexual partner. Problem is, that is a continuum, and where is one and where is the other? As far as charging rape, that becomes a necessary, and very difficult, decision.

As I said, I've seen a number of cases where the man got charged with rape, or lessor degree of sexual assault, where both adults entered into the situation pretty equally...no power imbalance issues. I live in a northern upper midwest progressive state (I generally support the progressive politics) where the courts DO seem to give special consideration to women. However, I think women and men both have to be adults who share adult responsiobility the same regardless of gender. This is one area of society and law where it hasn't happened yet, and men have lives ruined by it.
Fri at 10:47pm
Michele Morgen
Michele Morgen
@Kevin - I'm sure the statistical evidence from hospitals, clinics, rape crisis hotlines, etc. would point to many more womens' lives being ruined from being raped than mens' from being falsely accused. You are reacting from an emotional standpoint, not from a factual one. Perhaps you know a man whose life was ruined by a false accusation and you think this is the norm. Yes, false accusations are horrible for the person falsely accused, but not being believed after a rape is a common, everyday occurrence for women, much more common, and believe me, not all states are "progressive" when handling rape cases. The woman is treated as a criminal by attorneys and has the burden of proving a difficult to prove situation. Plus, your age has nothing to do with anything. You have no idea the age or life experience of any of the posters. That is pointless.
Fri at 10:54pm
Kevin Shannon
Kevin Shannon
RE: age. ok whatever. I just meant that I've had enough years to see enough cases (plural! VERY plural) in my own community and with people I knew or knew of. I agree that not all states (I'd be tempted to get regional on you here but I won't) have courts that have successfully been sensitized to the dangers of real rape and abuse, or other "women's issues." I live in one where they take pride in being a leader in being sensitized thusly about gender issues or whatever else - and most of the time that is great! However, in the course of going to great lengths to avoid some of the problems of bad court systems as you mention them, we've lost the common sense (I believe) about EVERYBODY who is an adult needing to take adult responsibility. And Bobby and Michele, I'm not talking about an isolated case here and there of men having a target on them when they go into a court room...it is *prevalent.* This is why I want so adamantly to find the line where something serious like rape, can be a charge that will protect those who truly are victimized, but I won't create other victims on the other end.

Tim, the way you stated your original post, all-or-nothing, with no recognition of the gray areas....WOW man.....you feed some bad court action in the liberal regions of the country with that!
Fri at 11:06pm
Erik McCabe Anderson
Erik McCabe Anderson
Tim, I agree with you 100%
Fri at 11:13pm
Bobby Danforth
Bobby Danforth
@Kevin, the plural of anecdote is not data. I'm sure you've seen things over the years that have lead you to feel that this is an important situation to consider, legally, and I'm not going to demonize you for that. However, your personal experience is no substitute for the fairly abundant studies that suggest that false accusation in general is vanishingly rare. I don't doubt that some people have wound up in a terrible situation because of this situation, but in the grand scheme of injustices, it's low on the list.
Fri at 11:24pm
Bobby Danforth
Bobby Danforth
*which suggest
Fri at 11:25pm
Robert Monroe
Robert Monroe
Javier, if you really believe that "no person can consent when alcohol is involved" then I think you will have a lot of people disagreeing with you tomorrow morning.
Fri at 11:28pm

Hannah
@Kevin

"we have to "give up the keys" (put on the chastity belt?) before we get tht incapacitated by our own chosing."

"But ifwe are drunk and actually make friends with the predator-thief and tease her/him with our wallet"

"Quit asking the world to baby you because you have a vagina."

"knowing self-inflicted loss of ability to give consent (drunkenness)"

"men have lives ruined by it."

what the hell. these arguments are vile. i can't believe you don't recognize that.
Monday at 12:50am
Kevin Shannon
Kevin Shannon
Thank you Hannah. Sweet of you. And your life experience is....what word
should I put on yours now....hmmm...

I will pray for you to have a better spirit for unsderstanding those with
whom you might have differences...
Monday at 12:57am via Email Reply

Hannah

you're victim blaming. it's hardly even disputable.

"we have to "give up the keys" (put on the chastity belt?) before we get tht incapacitated by our own chosing."
you seem to be implying here that putting oneself in a state in which one is unable to give consent (i.e. a woman getting very drunk) is the thing that causes rape, not the fact that men choose to rape women when they are in this state. i realize your chastity belt comment is perhaps tongue-in-cheek, but you really are implying here that a drunk women has essentially given any man who wants to get some the "keys" to her metaphorical "car" by getting drunk. um, excuse me? in what way do men have a right to women's bodies when women cannot give consent?

"But ifwe are drunk and actually make friends with the predator-thief and tease her/him with our wallet"
so again, if a woman is raped, it is her fault because a) she got drunk! women must never drink unless they want to get raped! b) she "[made] friends" with a rapist! women must never flirt unless they want to get raped, and it's her fault for not being able to tell that this guy was a rapist! c) she "teased" him (and teasing could be anything from showing interest in a man to simply wearing a short skirt)! women must never wear short skirts unless they want to get raped!

"Quit asking the world to baby you because you have a vagina."
i don't even know what to say in response to this. i can certainly tell that you don't give much thought to how this type of comment might be perceived by rape and sexual assault survivors in this thread. seriously, the pure misogyny in this statement is mind-boggling.

"knowing self-inflicted loss of ability to give consent (drunkenness)"
women should be allowed knowingly self-inflict the loss of ability to give consent. you know what's an example of that? going to sleep. women should be allowed to sleep without expecting that men will take it as a license to rape them. and by your argument, that's what'd happen. same with drinking to drunkenness. if a woman drinks so much that she is no longer able to consent to sex, that does not make her responsible for a man then raping her. the mere fact of impaired judgment / inability to resist advances does not entitle a man to sex.

"men have lives ruined by it."
i think you are grossly overestimating the impact of false rape accusations on men, especially in comparison to the impact of rape on women. false accusations are infrequent. rape charges are taken seriously far less often than they should be. women are actively discouraged from reporting rape on college campuses. when women do choose to report rape, and not just at college, their sexual histories are interrogated (as if it's only "real" rape if the girl was a pure chaste celibate abstinent virgin) and they're blamed for their own rape much in the way you're doing above, by claiming that if a woman "teases" (wears something revealing, dances) or "makes friends with" (hits on, flirts with, shows interest in) a man, or gets drunk, her being raped is her own fault. and apparently this status quo regarding society's view of rape isn't in need of change because that it's unfair to women, but because it /babies/ them and hurts men?

really, now? is this what you're going to try to get away with arguing on tim's facebook?

and oh, don't you dare try to make yourself out to be the "tolerant" one in this thread. ("I will pray for you to have a better spirit for unsderstanding those with
whom you might have differences...") you've got some seriously abhorrent views about rape that you need to reexamine ASAP for the sake of every woman in your life.
Monday at 3:30am

Ashley Renner
@Kevin: This is not about you or your subjective life experiences; this is about the legal definition for rape/sexual assault.
I think we need to begin by establishing a common frame of reference because you seem to be confused about what behaviors constitute rape/sexual assault and consent. Let's kick some knowledge.

In your state of MN, date/acquaintance rape is defined as: "Unwanted, coerced and/or forced sexual penetration that occurs between people who are known to each other. This relationship may be a dating relationship, a blind date or 'hook up.' They may know one another well or only briefly. The issue is not identifying who the perpetrator is; it is rather identifying how force or coercion is manifested."
In cases in which drugs are used to subdue the victim, alcohol remains the most commonly used substance, by far.

On Consent in MN: "Consent is not present if either partner...has differing abilities that prevent the person from making an informed choice; is incapacitated by alcohol or drugs; lacks full knowledge or information of what is happening; is not an active participant in the activity." If you have additional questions about the criteria for consent, coercion, or rape/sexual assault in your state, you can consult the website for The Minnesota Coalition Against Sexual Assault: http://www.mncasa.org/about.html

These criteria apply whether the accuser or perpetrator is gay, straight, lesbian, bisexual, male, female, queer, intersexed, or trans. There is no "double standard." Sex that is non-consensual or forced is rape.

Regarding your demand that adults take responsibility for the "consequences" of severe inebriation, I'd like to remind you that while hangovers, drunk-dialing, DUIs, and fights can be included in the list of behaviors for which one is responsible while severely intoxicated, becoming the victim of a rape or sexual assault are not. If either party is sober enough to have doubts about whether their potential partner is capable of giving consent, then he/she/ze should use the "common sense" you advocate and not engage in sexual relations because, again, non-consensual or forced sex is rape.

(Un)Luckily for us, there are years of statistics on rape/sexual assault have been compiled to inform public policy and these kinds of discussions. I think we should use them to get some perspective on the issues being raised:

1. Although men are less likely than women to report a rape, the data clearly indicates that women are raped in far greater numbers (90% of all rape victims are women; 1 in 6 women will be the victim of an attempted or completed rape during her lifetime).
2. As a consequence of their experiences, rape victims are far more likely to suffer from depression, ptsd, drug and alcohol addiction, and to contemplate suicide.
3. 60% of sexual assaults go unreported each year.
4. The FBI estimates that only 8% of reported rapes are false.
5. Only 6% of rapists will ever spend a day in jail. That means that 94% of rapists never spend a day in jail.
(citation for these stats: http://www.rainn.org/statistics)

Although the media loves to sensationalize allegations of rape that are later proven to be false and those seem to be the cases that stand-out in your mind (for some reason I'm reminded of allegations of "reverse racism," note my sarcasm), the data indicates that the larger problems are institutional and societal: our criminal justice system is incapable of dealing with these cases because it is embedded in a racist, patriarchal, and homophobic society. Thus, a behavioral feedback loop has been created in which victims too often don't report cases of sexual assault because of the way they are treated by the justice system and the dismal conviction rate and because victims aren't coming forward, their cases cannot be prosecuted to improve the conviction rate.

Finally, I can't help but notice as I write my response that 16 of the 53 comments are by you. That's 30% buddy. You've stepped up, now it's time to step back.
Monday at 4:52am
Tim Wise
Tim Wise
@ Kevin - I won't try and go point by point through your arguments and explain why I think they are wrong, or in many cases so disturbing as to boggle my mind. I will just say a few things here. I think others are handling the arguments more than sufficiently.

As for your drunk driving analogy and personal responsibility argument, it is a bit stunning that you can't see the fallacy in this analogy. The person who drinks too much and then chooses to drive, demands to drive, refuses to give up their keys is not being forced to drive, placed behind the wheel, and having someone else step on the gas pedal for them while they hurtle into a tree. The person who is raped is having something done to them. There is another player in the scenario, and that individual has to be responsible for what THEY do. In the case of a man and woman, I am sorry, but the only real scenario that essentially ever happens is that the man takes advantage of the woman and assaults/rapes her. So the man must be held responsible. To deny this is to act as though a man simply cannot say no and control himself if a woman flirts with him, comes on to him, etc. If that is what you are saying, then by your very own logic, you are advocating the babying of men because they have a dick. See how this argument works? Not so well does it?

Fact is, everyone needs to be more responsible before the fact, for sure, and I'm all for making sure women understand the risks of heavy drinking beforehand so they can exercise good judgment and responsibility before going out, etc. But once they choose to drink, unless they have clearly signaled BEFORE drinking that they want to have sex with a guy (like perhaps their boyfriend or something, whom it might be reasonable to expect they would be sleeping with anyway), then I think the only thing a responsible man can/should do is pass on sex for that night and try again another time. And to be honest, even if consent was signaled beforehand, if the woman is seriously shit-faced drunk, I think the guy should pass up the sex even then.

Bottom line, this isn't about treating women as weaker individuals, morally or ethically. It is to say that in a patriarchal society, where men have been led to believe we have license to women's bodies (and not given this impression by women, btw), women have been placed in a precarious position, regardless of the choices they do or don't make. Men have to take responsibility and be accountable for our role in that social order, by not continuing to bank the male privilege that is both implied, and delivered within that social order. To not expect this, 100%, from men, is to treat us like we are weaker, incapable of controlling our penises, and to coddle us in ways that ultimately will do harm to women and to men...
Monday at 9:08am
Tim Wise
Tim Wise
I wanted to add a few remarks here, to address a few permutations of the situation so far being discussed, that perhaps are not strictly the same/analogous. So, for instance, I think thus far we have all been discussing the man who has sex with the woman, when the woman is drunk, and assuming as part of the example, a hook up situation like that being discussed in the original American U article that started this whole thing. In that kind of situation, the man and woman are not in a relationship, where sex is already a part of that relationship, and where the two might have gone to the party together, planning on coming home together, and planning on (probably or likely) having sex. In the case where the two people are in a sexual relationship, as dating partners, and/or, let's say, spouses, there are certain differences, but also some similarities.

The similarities are clear: if the woman says no, or suggests by her words or body language or any action at all that she does not want sex, then for the man to press the issue to the point of sex is rape..drunk or not actually.

One might ask though: "well Tim, what about a situation where there is no indication the woman doesn't want sex, but she is drunk, and so, by the wording of your status update, wouldn't that mean that a husband who has sex with his drunk wife, or boyfriend who has sex with his drunk girlfriend, perhaps after going out with friends together, is also guilty of rape?"

This is a bit tougher, and I have no idea what the law says on this matter. Generally, I think people in a relationship should signal their intent to each other before getting drunk. That way, a decision/choice has been made at the point of sobriety, rather than waiting until rational decision making is nearly impossible. To wait until the girlfriend/wife is drunk before initiating any move that might signal a desire for sexual activity is dangerously close to taking advantage, and potentially rape, yes. Now, of course, when two people are already in a sexual relationship there is a higher level of implied consent between the two, than in a situation where a guy meets a girl at a bar/party, etc, picks her up and takes her home. There is no prior relationship in the latter, and so there should be NO presumption of implied consent. But even in the married/dating situation, and with the fact that there is some implication that the two people will likely get together after going out, I think it is still incumbent on the part of the man in that situation to find out from his partner before she is drunk (and before he is!) what her desires are for that evening.

I am curious about other people's thoughts on this, especially if you see any differences between how this plays out in hook up versus dating/relationship situations (i.e., there is obviously no difference when a NO is uttered or suggested by the woman of course, but is there any difference in the simple formulation that having sex with a drunk woman is/is not rape in the case of a relationship?) As I explain above, I think there are minor differences, but not very large ones, and that generally even in relationships there is an obligation to discover intent before inebriation. And hell, in a relationship, basic respect for your partner should make getting that indication easy to do, without much difficulty anyway! But like I said, I'm curious as to how others see this...

My only rule for the remainder of this discussion is that I hope we can make arguments - all of us - without using language that diminishes the real horror of rape/sexual assault, and which minimize the extent of male privilege/domination in this society. I think decent people can disagree on some of the specifics of the varying degrees of culpability under intoxication, but let's try and remember the degree to which women are devastated by rape, around the globe, and the extent to which this impact far and away dwarfs whatever injury is caused annually by claims that turn out to be false. I don't doubt that false accusations happen. And when they do, I believe in restitution for the victim, and punishment for the perpetrator of the fraud. But we need to keep in perspective which of these things is not like the other (in scope), and address the matters accordingly, or so it seems to me.
Monday at 11:44am
Kevin Shannon
Kevin Shannon
Thank you Tim, for chiming in and returning sanity to the discussion. Those
who chimed in late last night and accused me of being vile etc etc (good gaaaawwd) hadn't seemed to have even read the MANY times in previous
commentss where I stated that I was only discussing the gray areas, and
agreed that sex without consent at anytime was rape and should be punishable
as such.

Like it or not, whether it fits your particular anger about society, about
men, about women, about criminal justice, whatever you're angry
at.....ALONG with great concern for the obvious victims (in the case of rape we're generally talking women), there are also ALWAYS gray areas. I was responding to an original post that left no room for same.
Monday at 11:57am via Email Reply
Asher Pinto
Asher Pinto
I think that people sometimes miss the point and do women's rights a disservice.

A woman is not a delicate destructable helpless flower that needs society's abject pampering and handling with kids gloves.

She is a smart, intelligent woman completely capable of making her own decisions and controlling the situation she is in, in advance. For e.g. having a friend/family keeping tabs on her through the night, not going to a stranger's home on the first night out, etc. etc.

Treating a woman with respect and allowing her her rightful place in the world is about more than mollycoddling her. It is about treating her by the standards that a man would be treated/judged and perhaps providing a few concessions that are based on *physical* strength-based differences.

Because it follows that if a woman should be seen as "raped" if she doesn't say no, then one should at the very least, allow for the prospect that a drunk man is "raped" if he follows a woman to her dorm, takes sex that is offered (he doesnt say no), and then claims "rape" the next morning...

For the record, rape (forced sex) is abhorrent and the perpetrator needs to be punished or at least rehabilitated in a mental institution (if the rapist is deemed mentally unstable).
Monday at 12:45pm
Tim Wise
Tim Wise
Asher, the fact that we must treat women with respect and allow that they are complete moral agents capable of making decisions and being held accountable is fine. But that doesn't mean that she isn't raped when, inebriated, and unable to give informed consent to sex (both the law and common sense suggest this is logically true), she has sex. A man should know better than to have sex with a drunk woman. Is it stupid to go out and get drunk and take risks that might increase the likelihood of that happening? Well of course. But the punishment for being stupid is not rape. And the fact of a stupid decision to get drunk and put oneself in a bad situation, does not mean men have a green light to take advantage, and that we no longer have to exercise restraint.

As for saying a man is raped when he accepts sex offered, without saying no, as a logical conclusion of the original argument, I have no idea how that follows, necessarily. A man literally cannot perform, in almost any instance, unless he wants to. This is especially likely to be true when he's drunk. That's why it's difficult for a man to allege rape. I realize this is not always true, and I suppose a man could be "molested" short of penetration against his will (in which case, BTW, he could charge sexual assault under the law). So in those cases it would be rape/sexual assault, legally and logically, I suppose.
Monday at 1:25pm
Tim Wise
Tim Wise
@ kevin - and I think the folks who were criticizing you were saying that your arguments, as stated, were vile. I'm not so sure they were passing judgment on you, per se. I think the whole thing about the "coddling you because you have a vagina" thing was the line in particular that struck many (myself included) as vile. I know you well enough to know it is beneath you. We all say things and make arguments from time to time in ways that are f'd up--myself included--so I would just ask you to think about the way you were formulating your position here.
Monday at 1:28pm
Kevin Shannon
Kevin Shannon
Tim, yes, I agree. Others have stated the concept I was trying to express there, better. I had had a couple drinks, was inebriated, and apparently had lost the ability to say no to my sarcasm???? LOL
Monday at 1:31pm
Asher Pinto
Asher Pinto
Tim, unfortunately this is a grey area. While everyone agrees that *rape* is wrong. It is not easy to define what rape is. Do we punish the "intention" or the "act." My understanding is that if a guy WHO IS inebriatedl, gets into a situation where he has sex with a woman who is inebriated as well, and the sex is implicitly consentual (no one said "no"), how can we truly identify who is to blame (if anyone)?

Are you willing to allow for the possibility that a guy might truly not mean to take advantage in such a situation? Not all men are monsters.

And I will say again... Many men have similar feelings the morning after (having been taken advantage of), but will not come out and say it because the majority of society will just laugh at them. To me, there is a double standard (again, when physical force has not been used).
Monday at 1:57pm
Snook Chaipornvadee
Snook Chaipornvadee
if men are afraid that they will be accused of fault alarm by women whom they just "rape", then maybe they shouldnt have had sex with them in the first. it's not only women's job to be carefully when they go to the party. Men should always be conscience that they can't have sex with women who they are in relationship with without having her say "YES, i want to have sex with you, and I'm not drunk at all." Just don't have sex when you're drunk it's not good, unhealthy, and it may causes problem afterward so why even risk it? the guy from the video said that "in the real world" people have to becareful of what they do like gay men can't walk down a street holding hand in missisipi (unfortunately you just need to be careful everywhere even in San Francisco), and women should be care not to go to a room with a guy. Well then men should be careful not to take advantage of a woman too, if they should that there is a "risk" that she might accuse him for raping her. When a woman feel like she has been raped, she means it (most of the time). Men's lives have be devastated by fault claim of rapes? well women's live are taken, devastated, and torn apart every minute because of rape.
Monday at 2:57pm

Ashley Renner
Kevin, I'm bothered by your comment in which you credit Tim with "restoring sanity to the discussion," as this implies that it was missing last night and is a backhanded way of labeling women who raised legitimate objections to your position (here I assume you're referring to Hannah and me) as "insane."

Personal attacks make constructive dialogue impossible and, more importantly, do not address the legitimate criticisms we raised. I'd like you to understand that the reason I take issue with this comment is because historically, one of the ways patriarchy has been maintained is through the characterization of women as emotional, irrational, and insane creatures, rendering them unworthy of political and economic rights.
Monday at 2:59pm
Kevin Shannon
Kevin Shannon
Thank you Ashley. I was mostly referring to the use of "vile" which wasn't
you. That I objected to, yes.
Monday at 3:11pm via Email Reply
Tim Wise
Tim Wise
OK Kevin, but Hannah, who used that term, (and again, in reference to your phraseology, not you as a person) is no more irrational or emotional, or whatever, than I am about this. I think Ashley's point is a good one: it seems you may have responded to/viewed Ashley and/or Hannah's comments as being emotional rather than "logical," when in fact they were both. They both explained their positions, and their positions are pretty much similar to mine. Was Hannah pissed. Yeah, I'd say so, but I think that was more than reasonable (not that my opinion on that matters). Women and male allies do get emotional about the subject of rape, but that doesn't mean their/our brains cease to engage, ya know? There is no inherent contradiction between emotion and reason. And not to put too fine a point on it, but one could make the argument that nothing they said was any more emotional/less rational than your comment about being babied because one has a vagina. I mean, that's not the voice of reason speaking is it? That's an emotional remark, not exactly academic journal material, right? So there is plenty of emoting going on, all around...I mean, my retort about being babied because one has a dick, is also not something I'd submit for professional peer-review...

Please know, I am not saying anything here that I haven't had someone else tell me before. I've made mistakes like that too, and will sadly, probably make them again. But the key is learning from them, and realizing that no matter how decent we are as people, we can all fuck up and say some really messed up stuff, which ends up being denigrating towards others, on the basis of sex, race, class, sexuality, etc. None of this means we are suddenly bad people. It just means we need to be more self reflective. I don't think you meant to be dismissive or denigrating to anyone. But as with all of these issues, intent isn't always the key consideration. Without trying to speak for anyone else, I think that is among the things that others on here would like you to hear. I know it's been an important lesson for me, and one I am still learning every day.
Monday at 4:10pm
Kevin Shannon
Kevin Shannon
Thanks Tim. I'm moving on. My original intent was mostly to point out the
grey areas, and that has been done. It's never ALL cut and dried....life
isn't that simple. IMHO
Monday at 4:13pm via Email Reply
מיכה נזירי
מיכה נזירי
If two drunk people have sex, without one party being passed out or objecting in any way, that is call poor judgment. It is quite different than rape, which is an act of violence.
Monday at 5:19pm
Kevin Shannon
Kevin Shannon
All I can say to the above poster is, good luck, buddy.
Monday at 6:10pm

מיכה נזירי
Kevin, let me give an example... i don't drink. i have never recreationally consumed one drop of alcohol. Once, back in 96 an adorable girl i knew came up to me at a party. She was very drunk and offered to go upstairs and have sex. i told her that i couldn't do that, because i would be taking advantage of her. She begged and begged but i didn't give in. The next week i saw her around and she was mortified. i said, "look, i knew you didn't mean it, that's why i respected you and didn't go upstairs with you." She explained that she was actually mortified that i was able to RESIST her and that the inebriation merely afforded her the courage to come up and ask me directly. She knew precisely what she was doing. The alcohol just made her not worry about being rejected (which she was). She explained this to me while 100% sober. i've told the story to a lot of women since who confirm that this is in fact the way it is. No one - especially a man - is going to convince me that they know this woman better than she knows herself and that it would have actually been rape if she had succeeded in convincing me to have sex with her haha
Monday at 6:18pm

Muata Olatunji Tchiguka
Man, this is a lenghty discussion about something simple. The bottom line men: If a woman is inebriated, the rational, gentlemanly, and most important, moral thing to do is to not take advantage of her sexually, even if she consents. End of discussion, men. Damn, are you guys so hard up for sex that you got to have it with a drunk woman? Sober, consentual sex is so much better and so, so much fun.
Monday at 7:27pm

מיכה נזירי
Muata, you are speaking as a fellow non-drinker. But it is unfair for us to say this to men who drink. Why is a man who drinks taking advantage of a woman who drinks? The argument seems to fall apart when both parties are drinking (as they usually are). There is a big leap from not being a gentleman to being a rapist.
Monday at 7:51pm

Muata Olatunji Tchiguka
I am speaking as someone who drinks wine. And as a wine drinker, I know my limits, and I would never drink too much to the point of inebriation. Never. Incidentally, why are you so inclined to argue for engaging in sexual congress with a drunk woman anyway? Frankly, I find it to be desperate and disgusting. All I have to say is this: if you rape her on the outside, you're gonna get raped by an inmate named Sweet Dick Willie on the inside. Get my drift.

In the words of Aretha Franklin, you better think.
Monday at 9:09pm

מיכה נזירי
Ah, i thought from the dread stuff on your page that you might be a Nazir. In any event, i'm not arguing for having sex with drunk women, i'm arguing that having sex with a drunk woman who is conscious and consents is not rape. Personally i have never even had sex with a drinker.
Monday at 9:16pm

Muata Olatunji Tchiguka
Dread stuff on my page? What do you mean? Anyway, the problem with drinking and sex is that it blurs the lines of consent. Thus, as a rule of thumb, it is wise not to have sex with a drunk woman, even if she consents. It about being a decent, moral human mammal.
Monday at 9:34pm

מיכה נזירי
It shows, when you click on your page, "Dreadheadartist Creations" and some raw vegan stuff. Seemed probable that you were a Nazir because of that.

As for everything you are saying, i 100% agree personally. i just don't think we can make blanket statements like "when a drunk man and a drunk woman have sex, the man is raping the woman."
Monday at 9:36pm

Muata Olatunji Tchiguka
Oh, that's my wife who has dreadlocks and has a business called Dreadheadartist Creations. No, I'm a vegan.

A drunk man and a drunk woman is a recipe for disaster. Now, add sex. Again, to avoid getting raped in prison, men must be mindful of their behavior with women when alcohol is involved.
Monday at 9:48pm

מיכה נזירי
Right on. i'm just saying, recipe for disaster it is. i just don't think we should make blanket statements other than that it's a recipe for disaster and people should drink in serious moderation if they drink.
Monday at 9:50pm
Patrick Morgan Bownes
Patrick Morgan Bownes
Having sex with a drunk girl is rape? Wow, I raped this one alcoholic girl every day for two years, apparently.
15 hours ago
Patrick Morgan Bownes
Patrick Morgan Bownes
Why isn't it rape for a girl to have sex with a drunk guy?
15 hours ago
Patrick Morgan Bownes
Patrick Morgan Bownes
If that's the case I have been raped many times. I did not give these people explicit consent before I started drinking.
15 hours ago

Shelley Michael
My question is if the girl is drunk probably the guy is drunk to so how it is that the girl is allowed to cry drunk and not the guy... it is a shame that women are allowed to cry rape, or abuse etc and the men are so easily blamed for being the bad person... if I go out and allow myself to drink too much and drive, have sex with a stranger or sing lousy Kaorake it is MY responsiblity... it is time women stop passing blame for stupid decisions and take accountability it blurs the lines from REAL rape anyway... geeezzz
13 hours ago
Lauren Waits
Lauren Waits
Keep up the good work Tim!
7 hours ago
מיכה נזירי
Exactly Patrick and Shelley. It's a dubious line of reasoning. The line can be blurred with drinking, but one cannot go from saying "the line is SOMETIMES blurred when drinking" to saying "when a woman drinks, the line is now redrawn."
6 hours ago

Julian Real
@Patrick and Shelley:
I don't believe either of you are honoring Tim's request, made earlier, to not forget that the social horror, the atrocity, the lack of the system to enforce rape as a crime (it won't even be considered by states as a hate crime) and the punishment, in due to male supremacy.

@Kevin and others:
This entire discussion follows one privileged white man's preoccupation with postulating hypotheticals and his assurance that this problem of men being falsely accused of rape happens a lot (that's my representation of what Kevin Shannon has done here, for those who don't wish to take up an afternoon reading all he says, several times over).

Solid evidence to the contrary has been presented which leads me to conclude that Kevin's het male friends are prone to enjoying the practice of drinking and fucking and wanting to be incredibly nuanced about where that fuzzy rape line is, for self-serving purposes. Perhaps I'm wrong. I have been around for a while too, Kevin, and have known hundreds of white het men, and not a one of them has ever told me they know "plenty" of cases of what you describe as men being wronged by sobered up women. And I've known them when they were both drunk and sober. In neither state of mind, did any single white het man ever state this as a social problem worthy of writing as much about it as you have done here. Meanwhile... every woman I know is a survivor of sexual assault or sexual harassment by one man or many. Every one. And most women I known (hundreds) have been raped and/or molested and/or incested, with few exceptions. And not one of them prosecuted the pricks who raped them. Not one. Not one of them ever falsely accused some drunk dood who got into bed with them. Not one. What I've heard time and again is this: women who DO blame themselves and only themselves for being DATE RAPED in the legal sense. That's the reality I hear about and live in. I know of no woman who has cried drunk, to use Shelley's phrasing. I only know women who have cried and beat themselves up politically and psychologically because they blame themselves too much for not being enough of a "gatekeeper" as feminist Jennifer Drew says, against the power, pressures, entitlements, and privileges of het men who wish to use women as "sexual service stations". (Again, credit to Ms. Drew for succinct phrasing.)

Power to the women here who took on Kevin's arguments, and to the men who did the same. I'd have kicked Kevin's ass to the proverbial curb ages ago, for taking up so much space discussing how "there's a serious social problem with white men getting beat up by Black cops", "with Indians provoking whites to attack them" and "with Black women taking away white men's jobs and 'well-earned' spaces in academic institutions". You catch my meaning, I hope.
25 minutes ago ·

Julian Real
Tim, I think folks like Kevin should be told to shut up when monopolising conversations this way, bringing so many people to argue with him about the most basic shit he could have stated once and let be. He's shown himself to be someone who always needs to get in that last annoying word, and did so here, until HE decided to go. This is your space, not his. That's my opinion. And it's your call.

Kevin and Patrick, this is not an invitation for you to speak more here, to me, anyway. I do not welcome either of you to respond to me. You've made your points, quite clearly. I understand where you're coming from. And I hope never to live there in that uberprivileged part of whitehetmaletown. You have entitlements there, that you wouldn't enjoy on my blogspace, I assure you.

I will be posting this entire discussion on my blog. If any woman here has strong objections to me doing so, please let me know, either here or there, at A Radical Profeminist. I will remove your portions of the discussion if you wish. To the men: I don't offer you the same choices. How utterly unliberal of me. True that. (I fucking hate white male supremacist liberalism, ad bullshit assumptions about presumed level playing fields and 'men get hurt by rape law' bullshit, almost as much as I hate white male supremacist conservatism and its insistence that the U.S. is a Black Lesbian supremacist State). And stat check: one in THREE Indigenous North American woman is raped in her lifetime, and over 80% of the rapists are WHITE men. Add that to your list of concerns, Kevin, and please do spend as much time being verbosely concerned about THAT in Minnesota, which such an atrocity is going on, as well as in so many other places....
24 minutes ago ·

Julian Real
@Tim, specifically, in response to this:
"I am curious about other people's thoughts on this, especially if you see any differences between how this plays out in hook up versus dating/relationship situations (i.e., there is obviously no difference when a NO is uttered or suggested by the woman of course, but is there any difference in the simple formulation that having sex with a drunk woman is/is not rape in the case of a relationship?) As I explain above, I think there are minor differences, but not very large ones, and that generally even in relationships there is an obligation to discover intent before inebriation. And hell, in a relationship, basic respect for your partner should make getting that indication easy to do, without much difficulty anyway! But like I said, I'm curious as to how others see this..."

I strongly disagree that giving consent before becoming drunk matters one bit in this discussion, which is to say, in reality. What anyone does at one time is no indicator that they are "available for sexual contact" one hour later, in a different state of mind. Acceptance and acquiescence by women of men's sexual advances--where, too often, welcoming and wanting by women is precluded by male supremacist assumptions, rights (wrongs), and socially regulated entitlements of et male manipulation, coercion, callousness, and selfish obliviousness-- doesn't have a time stamped card that comes with it. He isn't "let in" for the next several hours, even if he's in a bit of a panic about when his viagra or her buzz will wear off. And I know you agree with this, and have stated as much, but I wanted to spell this out clearly here.

But it's not clear whether you get that those of us with significant PTSD often know that our consent to do one thing doesn't imply or mean we consent to do anything else at any other time, inside or outside a significant relationship, in a bar, in a motel room, or in a car. What's a het man to do who wants to get laid? My goodness!

Well, he can ask at every turn, literally. He can check in. He can re-ask. He can make an ethical decision--can't he?, as Muata Olatunji Tchiguka poignantly noted, to take heed of this: "the problem with drinking and sex is that it blurs the lines of consent. Thus, as a rule of thumb, it is wise not to have sex with a drunk woman, even if she consents". Imagine that. He CAN (and may) say no EVEN when she says YES because she's had a few drinks.

A predominantly het white male friend of mine was escorting a young woman home, who was at the same party as him. He hailed the cab, and made sure she got home safely. He did this knowing full well that rapists ARE out there, and in there, and every other place. In the back of the cab, she was very grateful to him for making sure she got home safe, in a very inebriated state of being. While in the cab, her head was on his lap, she unzipped his fly, and he... stopped her. He pulled up his fly and said "No". She was hurt and offended. Apparently--and who really knows?--she just wanted to perform oral sex on him as a way of saying thank you for his kindness and consideration. He understood the dynamics, the sexual politics of all of that, and said "No". Men can say no to sexual invitations from drunk women and live to tell about it. And she probably recovered from the rejection.

Do it, boys. Do it. (The saying "no" part, that is.) And then you can stop yer whining about all those imperiled middle class and wealthy academically privileged whiteboys, and men, who get called rapists the next day by women who aren't sure what happened, or if she actually consented to ALL of what happened.

There's another conversation in this--or more than one, about how consent isn't all that meaningful in systems that are founded on gross power imbalances, sexist double standards, and systematised coercion. For more, and perhaps to introduce another topic for another thread, I invite you to read (if you haven't yet) a chapter from Catharine A. MacKinnon's book, Women's Lives, Men's Laws, titled "A Sex Equality Approach to Sexual Assault". There she discusses how rape law is constructed around men's presumed sexual needs, not women's human rights or sexual wants and desires. And she goes into a few actual scenarios that send het men into states of histeria--het men, that is, who want their 24/7 visual and physical access to women-as-sexthings-for-men unfettered by obstacles like radical fairness, justice, and actual equality. I welcome discussion on my blog or here on another thread, about that.

@Tim, specifically, in response to this:
"I am curious about other people's thoughts on this, especially if you see any differences between how this plays out in hook up versus dating/relationship situations (i.e., there is obviously no difference when a NO is uttered or suggested by the woman of course, but is there any difference in the simple formulation that having sex with a drunk woman is/is not rape in the case of a relationship?) As I explain above, I think there are minor differences, but not very large ones, and that generally even in relationships there is an obligation to discover intent before inebriation. And hell, in a relationship, basic respect for your partner should make getting that indication easy to do, without much difficulty anyway! But like I said, I'm curious as to how others see this..."

I strongly disagree that giving consent before becoming drunk matters one bit in this discussion, which is to say, in reality. What anyone does at one time is no indicator that they are "available for sexual contact" one hour later, in a different state of mind. Acceptance and acquiescence by women of men's sexual advances--where, too often, welcoming and wanting by women is precluded by male supremacist assumptions, rights (wrongs), and socially regulated entitlements of et male manipulation, coercion, callousness, and selfish obliviousness-- doesn't have a time stamped card that comes with it. He isn't "let in" for the next several hours, even if he's in a bit of a panic about when his viagra or her buzz will wear off. And I know you agree with this, and have stated as much, but I wanted to spell this out clearly here.

But it's not clear whether you get that those of us with significant PTSD often know that our consent to do one thing doesn't imply or mean we consent to do anything else at any other time, inside or outside a significant relationship, in a bar, in a motel room, or in a car. What's a het man to do who wants to get laid? My goodness!

Well, he can ask at every turn, literally. He can check in. He can re-ask. He can make an ethical decision--can't he?, as Muata Olatunji Tchiguka poignantly noted, to take heed of this: "the problem with drinking and sex is that it blurs the lines of consent. Thus, as a rule of thumb, it is wise not to have sex with a drunk woman, even if she consents". Imagine that. He CAN (and may) say no EVEN when she says YES because she's had a few drinks.

A predominantly het white male friend of mine was escorting a young woman home, who was at the same party as him. He hailed the cab, and made sure she got home safely. He did this knowing full well that rapists ARE out there, and in there, and every other place. In the back of the cab, she was very grateful to him for making sure she got home safe, in a very inebriated state of being. While in the cab, her head was on his lap, she unzipped his fly, and he... stopped her. He pulled up his fly and said "No". She was hurt and offended. Apparently--and who really knows?--she just wanted to perform oral sex on him as a way of saying thank you for his kindness and consideration. He understood the dynamics, the sexual politics of all of that, and said "No". Men can say no to sexual invitations from drunk women and live to tell about it. And she probably recovered from the rejection.

Do it, boys. Do it. (The saying "no" part, that is.) And then you can stop yer whining about all those imperiled middle class and wealthy academically privileged whiteboys, and men, who get called rapists the next day by women who aren't sure what happened, or if she actually consented to ALL of what happened.

There's another conversation in this--or more than one, about how consent isn't all that meaningful in systems that are founded on gross power imbalances, sexist double standards, and systematised coercion. For more, and perhaps to introduce another topic for another thread, I invite you to read (if you haven't yet) a chapter from Catharine A. MacKinnon's book, Women's Lives, Men's Laws, titled "A Sex Equality Approach to Sexual Assault". There she discusses how rape law is constructed around men's presumed sexual needs, not women's human rights or sexual wants and desires. And she goes into a few actual scenarios that send het men into states of histeria--het men, that is, who want their 24/7 visual and physical access to women-as-sexthings-for-men unfettered by obstacles like radical fairness, justice, and actual equality. I welcome discussion on my blog or here on another thread, about that.


Alex Spalding
"alcohol is the #1 date rape drug. men who rape target women who they think a. have drunk a lot b. might be someone they could coerce or cajole into drinking a lot. what's scary is we're taught as men that this is OK, socially normal behavior to "take advantage of a drunk woman." that "take advantage" part is a euphemism for "rape" and "drunk" is an example of "vulnerability."

Yes! This x100.
Men can do a ton to help combat date rape, the most effective ways is to call out the friends or acquaintances you see going after highly intoxicated women, be loud about it and spread the word. If you make sure people know it's unacceptable behaviour they're a lot less likely to get away with their heinous actions.
Monday at 6:10pm

Doll Kennedy

The issue is consent and a drunk person cannot give consent. It doesn't matter what was said prior to the person becoming drunk. It is illegal to have sex with a person that's unable to give consent at the time of the act. This is why it's illegal to have sex with minors...they lack the tools needed to give consent. A person who engages in a sexual act with a person that's unable to give consent is taking advantage of that person and is exercising their power and control over the person who lacks the ability to consent and in America we call that rape.

Any one who dares to have sex with a drunk person is "asking for it!" - "it" being trouble. The law is the law and most laws are created to keep us safe and maintain order.

I strongly believe that any man who thinks it's okay to have sex with a drunk woman, at some point must question his own manhood.
Monday at 10:04pm

Julian Real

Right on, Doll. And let's consider that men trying to get women drunk in order to have sex is standard heterosexual male practice. 

Monday at 11:48pm

Ethan Young

"I strongly believe that any man who thinks it's okay to have sex with a drunk woman, at some point must question his own manhood."

right on, Doll, Alex, Julian. both violent and violence-linked [patriarchal] masculinity needs to go. the trick is how we get men to the point where we can begin to see, understand and experience all the benefits!

and in the process, let's get that bystander intervention thing going! :P community accountability! (and no accountability w/o community!)
about an hour ago


Tim Wise
Bam! These are all brilliant additions to the thread, Ethan, Doll, Julian, etc...very excellent points all around. Getting men to understand that we can indeed say no (and should in those situations), and not take advantage of inebriation (in others or ourselves or both) is a huge step towards developing a positive sexual dynamic between men and women. It certainly isn't enough, but it's not a bad start, for sure...
24 minutes ago


All text and images from Facebook is copyrighted by Facebook © 2010, and is used here on this blog, A Radical Profeminist, for non-commercial free political expression and human rights activist purposes only, and not for any monetary gain.

4 comments:

eileen said...

@Kevin your drunk driver analogy does not apply. The car does not try to convince, coerce, or force the driver to participate in the DUI.

You're default setting is rapey...period. Yes means Yes...how about looking to see if you get active consent...instead of pathetically clinging to this whole bullshit meme that blames the victim and legitimates men's unquestioned sexual access to women.

Julian Real said...

Hi eileen!

I hope Kevin finds this here, away from Tim's place. We'll see.

If he does, I hope he reads AND gets what exactly what you're so clearly saying. The more such messages (er, mental "corrections") ring around in his head like a ceaseless echo, the better. I'm so pissed at other guys for not being clear with each other about this kind of rape-think. Because, of course, that means women are at risk of rape and women also have to do all the explaining of what's fucked up about Kevin's brand of "logic".

Kevin said...

Kevin Responds having found this on a routine google search of his name: I have no problem with you disagreeing with me. Sometimes any one of us should have people disagree - we are all wrong at times (regardless of gender or race).

"White male supremacist"??? That's an absurdity, and a slander that if I was a rich person and had money for lawyers, I could sue you for. I don't, since I am a very poor person (yes, surprise!! even white males are poor...), so I won't/can't take legal action. However, taking it to that level of inflammatory wording IS what the slander laws are there for. You will go one without consequence for your slander only because you slandered someone on food stamps who can't afford to use the protections of the law.

Congratulations, hope taking advantage of someone's poverty by picking them as your slander target is something you are proud of. You have taken advantage of it, because you have not had any cost - if I was wealthy, you would have already been sued (that's what wealthy people do when they are slandered!)

You are welcome and encouraged to disagree and discuss. Calling someone who is too poor to defend themselves a "white male supremacist" online, when I have no means to defend myself against that libel, is not - cannot be - a proud moment.

Julian Real said...

Hi Kevin,

Please show me where, above, I call you "a white male supremacist". Please quote me directly. Because in my read I speak about the meaning of the words you use, I don't draw a conclusion about YOU. So that's not slander or libel, just so you know. It's my own opinion about what you wrote, an opinion I'm standing by.

Most of my family is white and poor and the males participate in rapist and racist social values and practices in various ways. They've done this by having sex with very drunk people--with people with whom they don't know the level of drunkenness, and without much caring as long as they get the sex they want, regardless of what the women they've been with experience or feel.

So poverty doesn't exclude any white man from behaving in a white male supremacist manner. He may not have the power of wealth, but he can still point a finger at a Black man and accuse him of being the rapist of his white wife, when he's the rapist of his own white wife. He can still call women any number of misogynistic terms, blame women for being raped--as you sure appear to do above.

Again, show me where I call you a white male supremacist and we can go from there.