"Women needs to face facts about the link between rape and drinking"

Because as we've seen on the other thread, the conversation then revolves around what people think the victim did wrong in not avoiding getting themselves raped.

From there we get the 'contributary negligence' type mindset, complete with 'what do you expect' type commentary, and headlines like this one:
https://twitter.com/TheSun/status/755867885910851584

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

I was sexually assaulted when I was 17 years old. I've posted this many times but I was 17, I was out with friends from college and ended up in a nightclub. I was drunk but not anywhere near being paralethic. I met this lad and we went back to my friends. We left and he walked me back to my apartment block and he lived in the block next to me. He was so nice, held my hand on the way back and talked to me about his love for classic cars and how he had an old BMW. I was sober enough to remember that, ten years later.

We got to the apartments and he wanted to come into my apartment. I shared with a girl who didn't drink and didn't want to wake her up making noise so I refused. He then asked me to go in with him. He had beer, or at least so he said.

So off we went. There was no beer. I kissed him, I let him go so far, but I had never had sex before and I didn't know him well enough. I didn't want to have sex. I told him no, but he wasn't going to stop. He kept telling me shush, it'll be ok, it's ok, that he'd be gentle. I said no over and over and over, and he didn't stop. He did what he wanted to do and eventually left me to get up and to get dressed again.

I made many mistakes that night. I was underage in a club. I was drinking. I went into his bedroom. I kissed him or led him on. But no means no.

I spent years thinking it was my own fault for leading him on and bringing it on myself, but I said no and he didn't listen. That wasn't my fault. And I didn't do anything that I'm willing to bet most people have done.

It's alright to sit on your high horse and judge everyone else when in the past you've walked away from situations unscathed

LexieOnRale

LexieOnRale wrote: »

I was sexually assaulted when I was 17 years old. I've posted this many times but I was 17, I was out with friends from college and ended up in a nightclub. I was drunk but not anywhere near being paralethic. I met this lad and we went back to my friends. We left and he walked me back to my apartment block and he lived in the block next to me. He was so nice, held my hand on the way back and talked to me about his love for classic cars and how he had an old BMW. I was sober enough to remember that, ten years later.

We got to the apartments and he wanted to come into my apartment. I shared with a girl who didn't drink and didn't want to wake her up making noise so I refused. He then asked me to go in with him. He had beer, or at least so he said.

So off we went. There was no beer. I kissed him, I let him go so far, but I had never had sex before and I didn't know him well enough. I didn't want to have sex. I told him no, but he wasn't going to stop. He kept telling me shush, it'll be ok, it's ok, that he'd be gentle. I said no over and over and over, and he didn't stop. He did what he wanted to do and eventually left me to get up and to get dressed again.

I made many mistakes that night. I was underage in a club. I was drinking. I went into his bedroom. I kissed him or led him on. But no means no.

I spent years thinking it was my own fault for leading him on and bringing it on myself, but I said no and he didn't listen. That wasn't my fault. And I didn't do anything that I'm willing to bet most people have done.

It's alright to sit on your high horse and judge everyone else when in the past you've walked away from situations unscathed

That's awful.
What a bastard, had only one thing on his mind.

racso1975

Candie wrote: »

Because as we've seen on the other thread, the conversation then revolves around what people think the victim did wrong in not avoiding getting themselves raped.

From there we get the 'contributary negligence' type mindset, complete with 'what do you expect' type commentary, and headlines like this one:
https://twitter.com/TheSun/status/755867885910851584

OK firstly it's the Sun. Secondly it's the Sun the only thing that paper reports properly is the date on the top. Anybody who gives credence to a ****rag like that are not worth arguing with.

It's not an ideal world we live in.

Foxtrol

Candie wrote: »

Because as we've seen on the other thread, the conversation then revolves around what people think the victim did wrong in not avoiding getting themselves raped.

From there we get the 'contributary negligence' type mindset, complete with 'what do you expect' type commentary, and headlines like this one:
https://twitter.com/TheSun/status/755867885910851584

But the exact same discussion is had when other crimes occur, from burglary, to assault, child molestation, or murder, yet we don’t see the defensive reaction and calls of victim blaming/shaming when advice is given to reduce the risk of being a victim of those crimes.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Foxtrol wrote: »

But the exact same discussion is had when other crimes occur, from burglary, to assault, child molestation, or murder, yet we don’t see the defensive reaction and calls of victim blaming/shaming when advice is given to reduce the risk of being a victim of those crimes.

Unfortunaly there will always be predators and it's never the victim's fault. However it's important to teach people how to reduce risks to their safety. Simple guidelines like being aware of your surroundings and company.

DEFTLEFTHAND

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Unfortunaly there will always be predators and it's never the victim's fault. However it's important to teach people how to reduce risks to their safety. Simple guidelines like being aware of your surroundings and company.

Yes, but that headline does something not too far removed from 'teaching' women to reduce their risks.

It doesn't focus on the crime committed against her. It doesn't focus on the perpetrator.

It focused on what she did 'wrong'.

Women don't need to be taught risk avoidance on one hand, and told the number of people who would do them harm is infinitesimal on the other. Or that you can't tar all men as potential rapists on one had, but live your life as if they are on the other.

Foxtrol

Foxtrol wrote: »

But the exact same discussion is had when other crimes occur, from burglary, to assault, child molestation, or murder, yet we don’t see the defensive reaction and calls of victim blaming/shaming when advice is given to reduce the risk of being a victim of those crimes.

But we don't though.
Take tiger kidnappings for example, is there ever a discussion afterwards about what the victims did wrong?
Do we say, they shouldn't have lived in a big fancy house, shouldn't have worked somewhere with access to huge amounts of money.
When old people living alone in the countryside are burgled, do we all decide that they took those risks, so they knew what could happen?

Foxtrol

Candie wrote: »

Yes, but that headline does something not too far removed from 'teaching' women to reduce their risks.

But read back through this thread, there are clearly many who have their head in the sand on, or at least publicly disagree, alcohol consumption and the increased risk of being a victim of this crime.

If there was a sizeable, or at least vocal, portion of men who disputed a connection between alcohol consumption and their risk of being a victim of street assaults I would also believe they needed some ‘teaching’.

It doesn't focus on the crime committed against her. It doesn't focus on the perpetrator.

It focused on what she did 'wrong'.

Women don't need to be taught risk avoidance on one hand, and told the number of people who would do them harm is infinitesimal on the other. Or that you can't tar all men as potential rapists on one had, but live your life as if they are on the other.

No advice on lowering your risk to any crime focuses on the perpetrator, it would make zero sense. Would you advise your kids to avoid being kidnapped by telling them that people shouldn’t kidnap? No, you’d tell them not to get in a car with a stranger etc, information that would lowers their risk. That doesn’t mean society is giving kidnappers a free ride, you do both.

Similarly you don’t teach kids that every adult is a kidnapper, there’s a balance. You can warn someone about a risk and ways to lower that risk without having to fear the world.

Gbear

For all intents and purposes, in the context of this kind of risk scenario involving a predatory form of rape, the rapist is a force of nature.
Rape has decreased through history and will continue to do so, both by default and through conscious actions of government and society, but at the very least there will be a psycopathic element that can't be taught or reasoned with.

There will be incidences of these assaults and there is only so much you can do to reason with and change the behaviour of someone who proves with their actions that they're completely unreasonable.

But we can take actions to make ourselves safer.

As far as blame goes, it's about reasonable expectations and not absolute safety.
I.e, if you're standing on a mountaintop in wet copper armour screaming all gods are bastards during a thunderstorm (Pratchett), then you probably deserve to get struck by lightning. That's not a reasonable thing to do.

Expecting to be able to walk down the street in a developed country without getting assaulted in any way is a reasonable expectation. It's both something we should aspire to create and something that is actually pretty safe in reality.
As such, you can and should take precautions but that doesn't make you culpable.

There are parallels with the current terrorism issues as well. Western society is generally quite safe and that's the way it should be, but there are some people who can, without there being a whole lot we can do about it, attack us in public anywhere or any time.
That's their fault. We could stop having public gatherings, sports events, music gigs or whatever, but that'd be daft.

There are, however, going to be certain common sense things we're going to discover or may already know that will make us less likely to be vicitims in these attacks.
Whether it was flash flooding or lunatics, we can't control them but we can do something to make ourselves safer.

All I can see the alternative being is cutting our noses off to spite our face because of a fear of in any way besmirching the sanctity of perfect victimhood that is afforded victims of rape.

Obviously it's an intensely traumatic crime and being nice to rape victims is hardly unreasonable, but particularly in an open forum or in a debate designed to steer policy that will do what we all want in the end - to reduce these attacks, emotion driving arguments won't do anyone any good.

Outlaw Pete

Just because there are professional burglars so adept at what they do that they can easily bypass alarms and cut through glass, doesn't therefore mean that it's pointless to give homeowners advice not to leave their keys under plant pots or their windows open, but yet that is the logic of some of the arguments being made. Burglary risk reduction measures reduce overall incidences of burglaries no matter how many expert burglars there are out there who'll burgle homes even when they have state of the art security systems.

All this taking offence here will ultimately do is result in those that specialize in advising girls, about how to reduce their risk factors of being assaulted, deciding to keep quiet instead and who could blame them if all that will happen is that they get accused of victim blaming. If anything this politically correct Guardianesque reaction (and that is what this crap is) could, if it continues, very likely lead to an increase in sexual assaults, if that is, it hasn't happened already.

Foxtrol

bubblypop wrote: »

But we don't though.
Take tiger kidnappings for example, is there ever a discussion afterwards about what the victims did wrong?
Do we say, they shouldn't have lived in a big fancy house, shouldn't have worked somewhere with access to huge amounts of money.
When old people living alone in the countryside are burgled, do we all decide that they took those risks, so they knew what could happen?

I'm sorry it's human nature, in many situations we do.

When someone’s car is robbed we ask where they parked it, when some is assaulted we ask where it happened. If the responses are somewhere ‘risky’ or that ‘they should have known better’ then people will talk about it or use it as an example to warn others.

Take this example, if someone started a thread about this crime you’d be sure posters would question the risk he made by bringing a total stranger to his hotel room with such valuables.

SVJKarate

Samaris wrote: »

I see no issue with bringing up that alcohol makes you more vulnerable to attack. .
. . . (post shortened, but it's worth reading again if you haven't already read it)

This sums it all up very reasonably. Sadly it seems that discussions on this topic keep getting side-tracked by the mean-minded who are intent on equating 'vulnerability' to 'blame', and by the deniers who, despite expert opinion and researched evidence still cannot see the link between excessive drinking and vulnerability, or between precaution and risk.

desertcircus

"Jesus, what a pointlessly mean headline. Why would anyone- oh, it's Niamh Horan, professional awful person. Now it makes sense."

rjpf1980

I read somewhere that something like 8 out of 10 rape and sexual assault cases involve alcohol.

The most vulnerable women are those who are drunk and are most likely to get attacked. A woman goes out with friends goes from pub to pub and gets drunk. An opportunistic guy takes her home or to a hotel room and while she is passed out has sex with her.

Sober women are less likely to be attacked. The case last week in which a woman was apparently raped by a trio of young men in broad daylight is the exception.

Let's get this clear right now. No woman is to blame for rape full stop.

A man who has sex with a woman against her will and without her consent is a rapist. He deserves what is coming to him. Full stop.

However getting sh*tfaced obviously doesn't help.

Anyone who points this out is screamed at by hysterical types for victim blaming and excusing rape preventing a discussion about the obvious link between sexual violence and alcohol.

Thoughts?

mordeith

It's bull. Getting blind drink isn't a good idea for anyone but doesn't mean you are to blame for someone else's actions.

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy

rjpf1980 wrote: »

Anyone who points this out is screamed at by hysterical types for victim blaming

Rightly so. Nobody is to blame for the actions of others. Just because somebody is drunk doesn't mean you can do whatever you like to them.

Canis Lupus

You're on a contentious thread topic roll! Can I get a sneak peak of tomorrows thread? Should marijuana be legalised?

techdiver

I think the point is there are always going to be disgusting individuals who rape. It an unfortunate reality of life. No one is victim blaming. The responsibility 100% lies with the rapist, of that there is no question, but if I was the father of a daughter I would make sure she knew that getting blind drunk will put her at risk.

Shouting people down for making this point does nothing to protect women.

Maximus Alexander

So... The solution to rape is for women to become Pioneers? We could always go the whole hog and keep them in towers wearing chastity belts.

Getting sh*tfaced is a bad idea for lots of reasons. Personally I think people should avoid it, in general. You might walk in front of a car. You might pass out and choke on your own vomit. But it's telling that it keeps coming up specifically in relation to rape lately, almost like there's a bit of an attempt to shift blame going on.

Trent Houseboat

In this study you made up was it the victim or the rapist who had consumed alcohol?

rjpf1980

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy wrote: »

Rightly so. Nobody is to blame for the actions of others. Just because somebody is drunk doesn't mean you can do whatever you like to them.

Did you read the OP?
I said rapist is to blame not the victim.

rjpf1980

rjpf1980 wrote: »

I read somewhere that something like 8 out of 10 rape and sexual assault cases involve alcohol.

On the part of the accused, the victim or either or both?

The rest of your post presupposes the victim.

Could you link the stat? Thanks.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

If a woman is so drunk she's unconcious and naked, she is still not fair game nor does she ask to be raped. 99.9% of people would help her or make sure she was at least looked after, 0.01% will drop their kaks.

Rapists are rapists. They will prey on the weaker and most vulnerable. If they're drunk, alone, young, unable to defend themselves. Scumbags

Peregrine

rjpf1980 wrote: »

I read somewhere that something like 8 out of 10 rape and sexual assault cases involve alcohol.

Did you read it after you typed it?

rjpf1980

Trent Houseboat wrote: »

In this study you made up was it the victim or the rapist who had consumed alcohol?

I cannot remember the author but I believe it was in a book I read about sexual assault and rape. I think the rape crisis centre published these figures somewhere? Anyway the majority of rapes are committed against drunk women. Excessive drinking makes women vulnerable to rape obviously. The rapist is 100% responsible. However women are not being told about the link because hysterical types want to shut down discussion.

VinLieger

Canis Lupus wrote: »

You're on a contentious thread topic roll! Can I get a sneak peak of tomorrows thread? Should marijuana be legalised?

I for one can't wait for tomorrows thread as this one isnt too original tbh, they also seem to get bored of their threads after they get asked too many questions they can't answer though.

28064212

I read somewhere that something like 8 out of 10 assault cases involve alcohol.

The most vulnerable men are those who are drunk and are most likely to get attacked. A man goes out with friends goes from pub to pub and gets drunk. An opportunistic guy looking for a fight sees a drunk man and takes a swing at him.

Sober men are less likely to be attacked. The case last week in which a man was apparently punched by a trio of young men in broad daylight is the exception.

Let's get this clear right now. No man is to blame for being assaulted full stop.

A man who assaults another man against his will and without his consent is an assaulter. He deserves what is coming to him. Full stop.

However getting sh*tfaced obviously doesn't help.

Anyone who points this out is screamed at by hysterical types for victim blaming and excusing assault preventing a discussion about the obvious link between assaults and alcohol.

Thoughts?

rjpf1980

Peregrine wrote: »

Did you read it after you typed it?

What are you trying to say? I read it somewhere in a book or pamphlet published by an author or by the rape crisis centre or something.

weisses

Are we all assuming the rapist is sober ?

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy

rjpf1980 wrote: »

Did you read the OP?
I said rapist is to blame not the victim.

Well then why'd you call them "hysterical types" for getting angry or upset by victim blaming?

Wigglepuppy

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

So... The solution to rape is for women to become Pioneers? We could always go the whole hog and keep them in towers wearing chastity belts.

Now you do know nobody even implied that to be fair.

rjpf1980

mordeith wrote: »

It's bull. Getting blind drink isn't a good idea for anyone but doesn't mean you are to blame for someone else's actions.

I clearly said in the OP the rapist is to blame for his actions.

VinLieger

rjpf1980 wrote: »

I clearly said in the OP the rapist is to blame for his actions.

So are you bored of banning motorbikes already?

Pawwed Rig

People should always be aware of their surroundings and not put themselves in dangerous situations where possible. There are nasty people out there that the courts don't deal with so we need to protect ourselves by being smart about our actions.
Becoming incapacitated by choice is rarely a wise course of action.

rjpf1980

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy wrote: »

Well then why'd you call them "hysterical types" for getting angry or upset by victim blaming?

Did you read the OP? I clearly said the rapist is to blame for the rape didn't I?

weisses

weisses wrote: »

Are we all assuming the rapist is sober ?

There seems to be one HUGE assumption being made here. And that is that the 8 out of 10 cases involve a victim who has taken drink.

I'd find that very hard to believe.

rjpf1980

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

People should always be aware of their surroundings and not put themselves in dangerous situations where possible. There are nasty people out there that the courts don't deal with so we need to protect ourselves by being smart about our actions.
Becoming incapacitated by choice is rarely a wise course of action.

The rapist to blame 100%. Getting blind drunk facilitates rape by putting the victim in a vulnerable position. She is not to blame for being attacked and is 100% innocent.

Maximus Alexander

Wigglepuppy wrote: »

Now you do know nobody even implied that to be fair.

That's exactly what the implication is: women should avoid getting drunk if they don't want to be raped. Struggling to see how you could read it any other way to be fair.

Penny Tration

OP, when a boyfriend did it to me, I had had one drink. One single can of cider. So if we're being totally strict about it, my case would fit the alcohol/rape criteria, despite me being 100% sober.


Yes, being drunk can lead to more vulnerability, but what are women supposed to do? Avoid the glass of wine with dinner? Don't bother drinking at a birthday night out? Stay teetotal lest some bast@rd can't control himself?


Women and men have to be able to live their lives.

Yes, there is a correlation between alcohol and rape, but similarly most rapes are committed by someone the victim knows.


We can't live in a bubble, avoiding all correlating things based on statistics. If that were the case, we'd have to never drink, never go out alone, never go anywhere after dusk, never be around any man we know, and assume all men are rapists.


Of course women and men can take measures to stay safe, like not drunkenl walking down an alley at night, but just how many measures are we expected to take? We'll never be fully rid of the risk, no matter what we do, because rapists will rape no matter what we do.

Story Bud?

rjpf1980 wrote: »

What are you trying to say? I read it somewhere in a book or pamphlet published by an author or by the rape crisis centre or something.

Get a grip.

If you're going to throw around numbers like that then at least have the cop on to be able to back them up.

spud82

When I was 23, I was happy in a relationship. I went to visit my OH, and he was in a weird and ratty mood all day. I ignored it, and thought it was because he was stressed/tired/hungry. To cut a long story short, we went out that and he got hammered drunk. When we got back to where we were staying, he beat the sh7t out of me and raped me. He had sobered up by than but I can remember him screaming at me ( the alcohol is giving me the courage to do what you deserve whore) I hadn't drank all night and can remember thinking that I was going to be murdered that night it was just horrendous.

After this incident I didn't tell anyone for years because I was so ashamed and scared. I suffered from panic attacks a lot. However one day I was sick of feeling like **** so I went to the Rape Crisis Centre and started going there every week. I know am training to work up there, and help survivors of rape. What is scary is the amount of rape cases in Ireland on a yearly basis, and how many of them don't get reported. There is so much stigma anytime a rape case is reported, and women are afraid to report it because they won't be believed and because of the **** conviction figures.

If anyone here has been assaulted and wishes to talk feel free to DM me x

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy

rjpf1980 wrote: »

Did you read the OP? I clearly said the rapist is to blame for the rape didn't I?

Did you read my question?

Your Face

I'm getting suspicious about the increase in the amount of threads like this.

bonyn

Sex had while inhibitions were lowered is not rape.
The inability to commit short term decisions to long-term memory is not rape.
Regret is not rape.
Wolf-whistling, mansplaining, manspreading and interrupting a woman while she is speaking are also good examples of things that are not rape.

The Backwards Man

I'd say the food poisoning from dodgy chip vans to alcohol ratio is pretty high too.

People don't make good decisions when they're pissed, never have, never will.

Any blaming of one person's drinking on the actions of another is beyond stupid though

mordeith

mordeith wrote: »

It's bull. Getting blind drink isn't a good idea for anyone but doesn't mean you are to blame for someone else's actions.

You are 100% right if someone is raped when they are blind drunk it is 100% not their fault. In saying that I would like my daughter to not put herself in a situation where she is so drunk she can't scream or walk down an alleyway alone she might not have done if she wasn't drunk, I am making an extreme point there but what I am saying its not smart for Man/Woman to get really drunk because it puts them in danger whether that danger is assault/robbed/rape etc but women are at a danger for rape where with men normally it will jsut be beaten up. People always say "she isn't to blame just cause she is drunk" I mean i have never heard anyone say that it would be her fault.

Stay safe folks :P

VinLieger

Could it be prevented by banning motorbikes is what id like to know?

Your thoughts OP?

Story Bud?

bonyn wrote: »

Sex had while inhibitions were lowered is not rape.
The inability to commit short term decisions to long-term memory is not rape.
Regret is not rape.
Wolf-whistling, mansplaining, manspreading and interrupting a woman while she is speaking are also good examples of things that are not rape.

What's that got to do with the OP?

I'm intrigued.

rjpf1980

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

That's exactly what the implication is: women should avoid getting drunk if they don't want to be raped. Struggling to see how you could read it any other way to be fair.

Yet again I am amazed I actually have to repeat this. The rapist is 100% responsible for the rape. What part of that didn't you understand? I said it in the OP. I am not victim blaming. I am merely pointing out the link between alcohol and rape.