Irish Slutwalk

Alopex

Its pathetic. No one really believes a girl dressing sluttily gives a man the right to rape her.

The people marching just love getting to act as if they're victims.

AudreyHepburn

Obviously women should be able to were whatever they want without fear of being raped but marches like this serve no purpose and do no-one any favours.

Besides which, if you do decide to go out wearing a skirt that would pass for a belt and top that barely covers you, you will get attention. That's not to say of course you are asking for it, far from it.

But obviously if you don't want men staring at you or grabbing the nearest bit of flesh it makes sense to dress to hide your modesty.

rubadub

The King of Moo wrote: »

I doubt clothes are ever a factor in a rape case. What's more important to a rapist is having their victim in a vulnerable position where they can get away with it, not what they look like.

I would say clothes certainly are a factor, for the very reason you say, being in a vulnerable position, BUT it is not necessarily attractive or slutty clothing which is a problem. For rape or sexual assault to occur the offender has to physically have access, so clothes are a barrier, so a person with less "barriers up" is probably less likely to be victimised.

So a man in a kilt with no jocks on is more likely to be groped or have his penis exposed by assaulters than a guy in skinny tight jeans with a belt on. He is more prone to being attacked, just like a guy with a wallet sticking out his back pocket is more likely to be robbed. Or a house with all the windows open.

If a rapist is waiting down some alley and an attractive girl goes by in skin tight "slutty" leather pants, she may be left alone, while the dowdy one wearing a long bathrobe and curlers in her hair with nothing underneath might be the one who gets raped -its a far easier to perform the crime with those clothes compared to trying to remove skin tight leather ones.

The problem with this whole thing is the policeman said "sluts" and they all go mental -it just so happens that some clothes regarded as "slutty" will provide easy access, some (e.g. extra tight trousers) would have the exact opposite effect. I wonder what would have happened if instead of saying

"women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized."

he had said
"women should dress in slutty skin tight leather pants in order not to be victimized."

Still would have raised eyebrows, but they would have been all confused -and then might have fundamentally reaslised what was the actual problem/advice is.

Want to be safe against drunk drivers at night? -don't dress like a priest or nun.

Most of the upsets seems to be the term slut can be seen as derogatory. "Yuppie" could also be seen as a derogatory term, a policewoman could have said about mugging crimes

"men should avoid dressing like yuppies in order not to be victimized."

Ohhh the ****ing bitch, how dare these women tell us men how to dress. I am going to march in my best suit and reclaim the word yuppie.

jill_valentine

About half this thread is dismissing the protestors as manhatin' ultrafeminazis or "just lesbians", while the other half is wondering with apparently genuine bemusement where women could possibly still keep getting this idea that misogyny remains a factor in public discourse.

iptba

jill_valentine wrote: »

About half this thread is dismissing the protestors as manhatin' ultrafeminazis or "just lesbians", while the other half is wondering with apparently genuine bemusement where women could possibly still keep getting this idea that misogyny remains a factor in public discourse.

You forgot about the people who equate questioning any feminist activity with misogyny.

Wompa1

Alopex wrote: »

Its pathetic. No one really believes a girl dressing sluttily gives a man the right to rape her.

The people marching just love getting to act as if they're victims.

A girl got attacked in Galway at 4am Saturday morning by 2 guys down a well known laneway. Don't know the full facts of course...maybe less don't call me a slut protests and more drink responsibly, don't walk alone and stay away from secluded walkways.

And no she didn't have it coming to her and I don't know that she was drunk but its more advised to publicize protection rather than dressing like a whore

Dudess

The usual suspects in "using the term 'feminist' as a perjorative even though there are so many different types of feminism and feminists and not all of them are man-hating" shocker! :eek:

I don't agree with the slut-walk concept at all - shooting in the foot IMO, but how is it anti men?

Oh and while women in the west have plenty of equality in varying aspects of life, and when it comes to attitudes, there are still some improvements needed.
And yes, there are improvements needed for men too, but this martyrish sh1te of "Oh men are second class citizens these days" - get a grip. Life hasn't become absolutely horrendous for men. There is sh1t faced by both men and women because of their gender, but hey, let's not come together about this issue we have in common at all, let's be bitter and resentful towards the opposite gender... :rolleyes:

A woman certainly is not responsible for being raped, no matter what she wears - true, there are times it is advisable not to be dressed in skimpy clothing, nor is it advisable to walk deserted places alone late at night, but that still doesn't confer responsibility on her, and if she wasn't dressed skimpily she could be raped also.
Walking through a deserted car-park wearing hot-pants and a boob tube isn't advisable, but who the hell would do that, to be fair?

I'm interested though that studies are showing rape isn't always just about power, and that it can be about sexual release too. That makes sense to me - why would it NEVER be about sexual release? But no matter what, the rapist is the only one who is responsible, even if the woman took a risk.

iptba

Dudess wrote: »

And yes, there are improvements needed for men too, but this martyrish sh1te of "Oh men are second class citizens these days" - get a grip. Life hasn't become absolutely horrendous for men.

People should be free to make points they want to make. People might say the same thing, about those who say "women are second class citizens" i.e. "get a grip". I imagine some feminists might not be too happy if somebody said that especially if they added "martyrish sh1te" and might in reply say that's not much of an argument, it's just inflammatory language.

I think it easiest to discuss things on a case-by-case basis rather than having to do some over all calculation of which gender has it worse before any discussion.

Dudess

iptba wrote: »

People should be free to make points they want to make.

Sure. And if it's blatant hyperbole/fallacy, others should be free to tell them they're talking through their arse. Men face some obstacles due to being men, yes; they also benefit from being men. Sick of seeing people on this website pretending men have it so tough in general and on a daily basis. They don't. They have it tough when it comes to specific things, which is not the same.
And I'd say the very same about women in the western world.

People might say the same thing, about those who say "women are second class citizens" i.e. "get a grip".

I think they should get a grip (when referring to women in the western world, but they're absolutely right when it comes to other areas of the globe - well they're wrong in some cases... the ones where women are treated WORSE than second class citizens).

I imagine some feminists might not be too happy if somebody said that and might in reply say that's not much of an argument.

I imagine so too.

I think it easiest to discuss things on a case-by-case basis rather than having to do some over all calculation of which gender has it worse before any discussion.

Totally agree, but on After Hours? Flying pigs and all that... :pac:

iptba

Dudess wrote: »

Sure. And if it's blatant hyperbole/fallacy, others should be free to tell them they're talking through their arse. Men face some obstacles due to being men, yes; they also benefit from being men. Sick of seeing people on this website pretending men have it so tough in general and on a daily basis. They don't. They have it tough when it comes to specific things, which is not the same.

That's your opinion. Other people might be sick of some people saying women have it worse - so they feel the exact same anger you feel. Or say that somebody saying "it's blatant hyperbole/fallacy" is just stating an opinion, it's not a complete argument.

But, as you said, people should be free to make their own points.

Many of the ways men might have it worse are barely in the public consciousness: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masculism .
That is one of the things that might frustrate people. That and being criticised for even highlighting that men can face difficulties in particular areas which barely gets acknowledged in a lot of areas incl. a lot of academia.

Dudess wrote: »

And I'd say the very same about women in the western world.

But not all feminists would. So people should be allowed complain about them - which would simply be saying what you've said yourself there. If you don't like the word "feminists" being used to describe such people, it might be helpful if you could suggest an alternative word. If somebody tries to distinguish between them and some other feminists by calling some "feminazis" for example, that's not a popular term either.

Dudess wrote: »

I think they should get a grip (when referring to women in the western world,

So again, why can't people make this point? Saying "some feminists" or something similar seems the most apt way to me to describe people who hold such views.

Dudess

It's not an opinion - it's a fact. Men do not have it terrible overall because of being men, just because of obstacles when it comes to certain stuff. Ditto women in the West. All that "Men have no rights these days" stuff is hysteria. Sure they don't... :rolleyes:

Issues men face often aren't acknowledged, or are even dismissed by men... yet it's always "teh feminists" who get blamed. A lack of awareness/action when it comes to issues faced by men because of their gender - well why don't men mobilise instead of whingeing?
Attitudes that men can't be sexually assaulted by women, can't be physically abused by women, can't be victims of sexism, etc (none of which I agree with) - these are held and propagated by both women AND men.

I'm not a feminist by the way.

iptba

Dudess wrote: »

well why don't men mobilise instead of whingeing?

The distinction between "mobilising" and "whinging" isn't necessarily clear-cut e.g. one could similarly use "whinging" to describe a lot of what feminists do. They might say they are raising awareness of the issues; similarly, people who believe men may have difficulties in particular areas could say the same thing about what they do.

ZombieBride

As far as I've read most rapists are people you know not ones who attack randomly on the street (though this happens too, and no-one is dismissing that). Stranger-danger is scaremongering and nothing more. Slut walks? Really? A better use of time would be to educate about the people you know.

Chairman Meow

Got any pics of said sluts?? awww yeaaaah

Dudess

iptba wrote: »

The distinction between "mobilising" and "whinging" isn't necessarily clear-cut e.g. one could similarly use "whinging" to describe a lot of what feminists do. They might say they are raising awareness of the issues; similarly, people who believe men may have difficulties in particular areas could say the same thing about what they do.

On this forum, I see a lot of "Why not the outrage when this happened to a man?" kinda questions - from a bunch of lads sitting at their laptops. Do you not see the irony?

iptba

Dudess wrote: »

iptba wrote:

The distinction between "mobilising" and "whinging" isn't necessarily clear-cut e.g. one could similarly use "whinging" to describe a lot of what feminists do. They might say they are raising awareness of the issues; similarly, people who believe men may have difficulties in particular areas could say the same thing about what they do.

On this forum, I see a lot of "Why not the outrage when this happened to a man?" kinda questions - from a bunch of lads sitting at their laptops. Do you not see the irony?

If somebody goes on a march for something instead, for example, they haven't necessarily dealt with the problem either. Using the internet can allow one get one's point across to other people.

Wompa1

iptba wrote: »

If somebody goes on a march for something instead, for example, they haven't necessarily dealt with the problem either. Using the internet can allow one get one's point across to other people.

That and how well did the dads with no rights campaigners get on. Society seems to think white middle class men have it good enough and don't have anything they could be upset about. Generalization but that's how it feels sometimes...almost like every protest and complaint made by a minority is aimed at us rather than at everyone...am I the only that feels this way?

Gay people can say someone is homophobic, women can say someone is sexist, old people can say someone is ageist, African, Latino etc. can say someone is racist...a white middle class young man...if you complain it doesn't seem to have a whole lot of impact...

Morag

"A slut is someone, usually a woman, who’s stepped outside of the very narrow lane that good girls are supposed to stay within. Sluts are loud. We’re messy. We don’t behave. In fact, the original definition of “slut” meant “untidy woman.” But since we live in a world that relies on women to be tidy in all ways, to be quiet and obedient and agreeable and available (but never aggressive), those of us who color outside of the lines get called sluts. And that word is meant to keep us in line."

Jaclyn Friedman

Going by that definition I rather be a slut then a lady and even then that doesn't give anyone ever the right to touch/grope me with out my permission.

TheZohanS

Sharrow wrote: »

Going by that definition I rather be a slut then a lady and even then that doesn't give anyone ever the right to touch/grope me with out my permission.

I have a funny feeling if anyone went to touch/grope you without permission it would be the last person they ever did it to!

Morag

It's happened, usually due to drunken idiocy on their behalf.
Seriously what is it with some guys that when they see a woman in a corset they think that means they have free reign to have a feel of her tits?

CoolHat

I can see this Slut Walk thing turning into something beyond what the original idea meant.

I see this developing into women participating because "if i wanna have sex with 10 blokes in one night it dont make me a slut ya know, yer just ignorant right!"

Feisar

Far better if there was a campaign on general awareness/safety.

Have scanned through this thread and it's always about the drunk short skirt in a car park.

How about the jeans and hoody popping out to the shop for milk for the tea at 10:00 on a pissy Tuesday night?
Milk should have been got with the main shop. It's simple stuff like this that might make a difference. While we cannot live in fear or feel trapped in our homes I feel people should look at their routines and see where they are at most risk and adjust accordingly.

Worth a read: http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/rape.html

Morag

Really?
How about saying rapist shouldn't rape instead?
How about teaching teens about respect and consent?

Feisar

Sharrow wrote: »

Really?
How about saying rapist shouldn't rape instead?
How about teaching teens about respect and consent?

Is that directed at my post?

If so:
Of course rapists shouldn't rape. But they do, that's what we should prep for.

And on the teen thing the average rapist is 31 years old. Well so it says here anyway: http://www.rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-offenders

Napper Hawkins

Sharrow wrote: »

It's happened, usually due to drunken idiocy on their behalf.
Seriously what is it with some guys that when they see a woman in a corset they think that means they have free reign to have a feel of her tits?

Some men are dickheads, just like some women are dickheads.

You really have to ask?

Morag

Feisar wrote: »

Is that directed at my post?

If so:
Of course rapists shouldn't rape. But they do, that's what we should prep for.

Part of that prep is education the public and no matter what a woman was wearing she wasn't asking for it.

Many rape cases never get to court due to the fact it is assume they would not result in a prosecution as the Jury will judge what the woman was wearing and judge her to be a 'slut' and if she is not jury friendly then the case will not get to court.

If they think she flirted with him they it gets said she was asking for it.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0930/rape.html

Almost one in two students in Northern Ireland believes women who flirt have only themselves to blame if they end up being raped, according to new research by Amnesty International.

Amnesty said the attitudes of the students polled were disturbing.

In the study carried out by the human rights body, 46% of the young people interviewed said rape victims who flirted with their attacker were partially, or totally responsible for what happened to them.

Nearly a third of those polled also said women who wear revealing clothing are effectively inviting rapists to target them.

These figures are significantly higher than the findings of a similar UK-wide study.

Amnesty's Belfast Director Patrick Corrigan said the survey showed there were some extremely disturbing attitudes swirling around our university campuses.

Amnesty has launched an awareness campaign in student unions and urged university heads to do more to tackle the problem of violence against women.

Until we have a better rate of cases getting to court and getting prosecuted esp when the rapist is known to the victim or has been in a relationship with the vitcim, then those who find themselves continuing when they do not have consent or when consent has been revoked, will know there is a greater chance of being done for it.

So it is about changing what men and women think they see someone dressed 'sluttish' and the assumptions they make.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8515592.stm

A majority of women believe some rape victims should take responsibility for what happened, a survey suggests.

Almost three quarters of the women who believed this said if a victim got into bed with the assailant before an attack they should accept some responsibility.

One-third blamed victims who had dressed provocatively or gone back to the attacker's house for a drink.

The survey of more than 1,000 people in London marked the 10th anniversary of the Haven service for rape victims.

More than half of those of both sexes questioned said there were some circumstances when a rape victim should accept responsibility for an attack.

iptba

dsmythy wrote: »

Reclaim the word slut? Women use it against each other all the time.

Apologies for bringing up an old thread but I heard about this research on the Sean Moncrieff Show on Newstalk and thought it was interesting:
http://blogs.vancouversun.com/2011/11/22/women-behaving-badly/

A new study out of the University of Ottawa should come as some relief to working women who worry their inner-bitch may be a little too ready to show itself around the office, particularly when it comes to how we treat our sexy female colleagues.

[..]

In the first experiment, women were exposed to either an attractive female peer who was dressed in a sexy outfit or someone who was dressed conservatively.

[..]

Results showed that almost all women were aggressive toward the attractive peer. The women in this situation were more likely to roll their eyes at their peer, stare her up and down and show anger while she was in the room. When she left the room, many of them laughed at her, ridiculed her appearance, and/or suggested that she was sexually available.

By contrast, when the same peer was dressed conservatively, the group of women assigned to this second scenario barely noticed her, and none of them discussed her when she left the room.

Killer Pigeon

Don't we all.

goose2005

Sharrow wrote: »

Really?
How about saying rapist shouldn't rape instead?
How about teaching teens about respect and consent?

While we're at it, how about saying murderers shouldn't murder, and teach teens about respect and not stabbing each other.

iptba

goose2005 wrote: »

Sharrow wrote:

Really?
How about saying rapist shouldn't rape instead?
How about teaching teens about respect and consent?

While we're at it, how about saying murderers shouldn't murder, and teach teens about respect and not stabbing each other.

I don't like the safety measures I have to pay for e.g. alarm service on our house, and generally safety precautions I have to make. Can we teach people not to burgle when we're at it.

LeeHoffmann

guys - do you really not get the point she's making? rape isn't like burglary - if you're breaking into somebody's house, you know it's against the law. On surveys, young men have stated that they would do things like carry on if they were half-way through when she changed her mind...these guys didn't think that was rape. So obviously they need a bit of educating on the matter. Likewise the surveys that showed that 30% of young people thought a woman was fully or partly to blame if she wore provocative clothes or drank alcohol before she was raped. Also, when people talk about rape, it's often the stranger danger idea they discuss when rape is far more likely to be inflicted on you by somebody you know. Another point: marital rape was legal in Ireland up until 1990 and there are still many countries in which it's legal. So it does seem there's a lot of backward thinking around this issue.

iptba

It's a while since I read the discussion. I believe the impression was given in this thread that giving people suggestions how they might reduce their chances of being a victim of a sexual assault or rape was wrong - people should be free to do whatever they like.

However, just like with many crimes, there may be situations or actions which increase or decrease your chances of being a victim. And just like with many crimes, our life might be easier and freer if there were no strategies that were useful.

And just like with many crimes, we would like them (the crime) to go away and like the idea that with a better society, they wouldn't happen, but that doesn't mean that we are going to reach that situation any time soon.

Even if there are education or societal strategies (i.e. generally aimed at males) that might reduce people raping, doesn't mean that would stop *every* case. Until that happens, learning how to reduce being a victim may have a value.

K-9

iptba wrote: »

Even if there are education or societal strategies (i.e. generally aimed at males) that might reduce people raping, doesn't mean that would stop *every* case. Until that happens, learning how to reduce being a victim may have a value.

I'm kind of wondering what exactly women have to do to reduce the risk though, barring the obvious personal safety measures?

iptba

K-9 wrote: »

I'm kind of wondering what exactly women have to do to reduce the risk though, barring the obvious personal safety measures?

It depends what is defined as the "obvious personal safety measures" to know might be on top of them.

Research might give information on what are risk factors.

K-9

iptba wrote: »

It depends what is defined as the "obvious personal safety measures" to know might be on top of them.

Research might give information on what are risk factors.

Walking alone late at night would be something to avoid for a young lad or girl.

After that I can't think of anything. What are the risk factors that you have researched?

Arianna_26

The King of Moo wrote: »

There's due to be a slutwalk in Galway this afternoon (despite the stormy wind and torrential rain) organised by NUI Galway's Feminist society and the Rape Crisis Centre.

As you probably know, the first slutwalk took place in Toronto in April in response to comments by a police officer that women dressing "sluttily" reduced men's responsibility for rape, to an extent, and it was followed by others around the world.

A ridiculous idea from the police officer of course, and though I have mixed feelings about the effectiveness of the slutwalk as a form of protest, I understand why it took the form it did and the idea behind it.

Now the thing is, today's slutwalk (Ireland's first) isn't in response to any particular comment, and its stated aim is to drive home the point that the way women dress doesn't excuse rape.

Again, a laudable idea, but I'm not sure a slutwalk here is such a good idea. Seeing as it's not based on any high-profile case, I think it's going to send mixed messages at best. I think lots of people who come across it won't get the idea behind it. It made sense shortly after the cop's comments, but now I think most people won't get it.

What do you think? Do we need a slutwalk in Ireland, and will it be effective?

I'm glad we had a slutwalk. We've been repressed far too long what with the Magdalene Laundries and all. More power to them!

iptba

K-9 wrote: »

Walking alone late at night would be something to avoid for a young lad or girl.

After that I can't think of anything. What are the risk factors that you have researched?

I haven't researched anything.

I hear drinking a lot mentioned in the lay media as a risk factor - perhaps comparable to drinking a lot being a risk factor for pedestrians being injured or killed in motor traffic accidents?

Cavehill Red

K-9 wrote: »

Walking alone late at night would be something to avoid for a young lad or girl.

After that I can't think of anything. What are the risk factors that you have researched?

Sorry to jump in the middle of a lengthy debate, but the Rape unit at the Rotunda hospital has reported in the past that up to 80% of the women they see are impaired by alcohol. Furthermore, this has a significant impact on the possibility of identifying their assailants and pursuing prosecution.
So, speaking as a father, friend, brother and son to women, my single piece of advice to Irish women who wish to avoid the horror of being raped is: don't get drunk.

K-9

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Sorry to jump in the middle of a lengthy debate, but the Rape unit at the Rotunda hospital has reported in the past that up to 80% of the women they see are impaired by alcohol. Furthermore, this has a significant impact on the possibility of identifying their assailants and pursuing prosecution.
So, speaking as a father, friend, brother and son to women, my single piece of advice to Irish women who wish to avoid the horror of being raped is: don't get drunk.

I'd give the exact same advice to Irish men as well. Far more likely to get attacked if drunk, the wits just aren't about you.

I suppose we could have bars and nightclubs full of sober women but I don't know how realistic that is?

What you think?

Cavehill Red

K-9 wrote: »

I'd give the exact same advice to Irish men as well. Far more likely to get attacked if drunk, the wits just aren't about you.

I suppose we could have bars and nightclubs full of sober women but I don't know how realistic that is?

What you think?

I think this particular nation is desperately dysfunctional when it comes to alcohol. I like alcohol personally. I love a fine potstill Irish whiskey, a smokey Islay malt, a well-aged cognac, an oaky spicey Burgundy, a syrupy Sauternes or Tokay. I enjoy exploring Irish craft beers and British ales and European brews. The difference is, I think, that I'd be just as happy if none of those drinks contained alcohol because I drink them for the taste and sensory pleasure.

I'm not shovelling buckets of vodka-red bull down my neck, or swilling pints of 'fat frog' or hoovering endless scoops of piss-water lagers, all in order to get as intoxicated as I can. I'm not interested in being so drunk I soil myself, or vomit, or can't find my way home without assistance, or become embroiled in violence, or get arrested, or wake up the next day having blacked out much of the previous night. None of that remotely interests me.

So I don't understand why so many people choose to behave in that fashion, getting drunk for drunk's sake. Yet they do, and as a result, our streets flow with vomit and urine each weekend night, our young men end up assaulted (or assaulting) and our young women become so impaired that they run the risk of being raped. I'm not attributing blame here, because when people are so intoxicated, they can't really be held responsible for their actions. But if you're asking me what people can do to minimise their chances of being raped, be they female or male, my single answer to you is that they should drink less, drink responsibly or not drink at all.

LeeHoffmann

my single piece of advice to Irish women who wish to avoid the horror of being raped is: don't get drunk.

That's all well and good but if you drink, then it's extremely likely that at some point you're going to get drunk. The only way to fool-proof that is not to drink at all - I think that's too big an ask tbh.

the Rape unit at the Rotunda hospital has reported in the past that up to 80% of the women they see are impaired by alcohol

what exactly do they mean by 'impaired by alcohol' - it's a little vague. Does that mean that they were drunk or just that they had been drinking and had alcohol in their bloodstream?

when people are so intoxicated, they can't really be held responsible for their actions.

I disagree with this. If you believe that, then people shouldn't be punished for the crimes they commit when drunk.

I think this particular nation is desperately dysfunctional when it comes to alcohol.

agreed. The 'get drunk for the sake of it' mentality is baffling.

Cavehill Red

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

That's all well and good but if you drink, then it's extremely likely that at some point you're going to get drunk. The only way to fool-proof that is not to drink at all - I think that's too big an ask tbh.

Nonsense. I think I've been drunk precisely once in the past five years. Yet I drink more days than not, be it a pint after work, a glass or wine with dinner or a whiskey for a nightcap. You don't need to drink to get drunk. You can drink moderately and stop.

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

what exactly do they mean by 'impaired by alcohol' - it's a little vague. Does that mean that they were drunk or just that they had been drinking and had alcohol in their bloodstream?

It means they were drunk.

LeeHoffmann

Nonsense. I think I've been drunk precisely once in the past five years.

then you've just proved my point.

It means they were drunk.

are you assuming?

Cavehill Red

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

then you've just proved my point.

By drinking and consistently not being drunk? That's the opposite to your point.

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

are you assuming?

No.

In 70% of cases the victim reported that she had been drinking prior to the incident; 16% had consumed two drinks or less, 25% had consumed 3–5 drinks and 29% had consumed six drinks or more. In 58% of cases the victim reported that the offender had been drinking; 24% stated that the offender had consumed a moderate amount of alcohol; and a further 24% stated that the victim had been drinking a lot at the time of the assault.

The results of this study indicate that alcohol consumption, especially drinking to intoxication, is a feature in a high proportion of rapes committed in Ireland. Alcohol use also decreases the likelihood of the victim reporting the rape and increases the likelihood of blame being attributed to the victim. Research has shown that 58% of clients attending the Sexual Assault Treatment Unit in the Rotunda Hospital in 2003 had consumed more than four drinks; alcohol has also been found to be involved in approximately half of all cases of adult sexual abuse.

Source: http://www.drugsandalcohol.ie/13023/

LeeHoffmann

By drinking and consistently not being drunk? That's the opposite to your point.

read my point again:

if you drink, then it's extremely likely that at some point you're going to get drunk.

i.e. not that you will get drunk every time or often but that, if you drink, it's extremely likely you will get drunk at some point in time. You drink often and you've been drunk once in the past five years. That once = at some point in time.

alcohol consumption, especially drinking to intoxication, is a feature in a high proportion of rapes committed in Ireland. Alcohol use also decreases the likelihood of the victim reporting the rape and increases the likelihood of blame being attributed to the victim.

this is the part that's relevant - thanks for posting it. (The number of drinks consumed doesn't tell you whether a person was drunk or not - doesn't tell you how potent the drinks were, how large they were, how quickly they were consumed, or how high a tolerance level the person has). Interesting that alcohol use decreased the likelihood of reporting rape