Rape

GWU Prez Should Not Apologize for Remark About Drunk Girls and Rape

That doesn't make him entirely right, though.

|

Rape of Tamar
Rape of Tamar

Stephen Joel Trachtenberg, president emeritus of George Washington University, is in trouble with his campus's feminist alliance, Jezebel, et al., for remarks he made about the causal relationship between intoxication and rape. His comments came during a panel discussion about campus sexual assault and how to stop it on the Diane Rehm Show. Here is what he said:

I think it turns out that there are good and bad in fraternities and out of fraternities. What we're focusing here on is a general situation. I think what we're doing is creating a false correlation. For example, we point out that the women don't drink—don't have sorority parties which have alcohol. They don't have to. They go to the parties at the fraternities. So it's not as if the women aren't drinking. They are, in fact, without taking—without making the victims are responsible for what happens.

One of the groups that have to be trained not to drink in excess are women. They need to be in a position to punch the guys in the nose if they misbehave. And so part of the problem is you have men who take advantage of women who drink too much. And there are women who drink too much. And we need to educate our daughters and our children on that—in that regard.

Co-panelist Cailtin Flanagan of The Atlantic challenged Trachtenberg on that, saying women generally can't overpower male assailants no matter how sober they are. Trachtenberg replied that he "didn't anticipate being taken quite so literally" and was "astonished that somebody would attack me for suggesting sobriety" as a remedy to the campus rape problem.

Jezebel attacked Trachtenberg for being "jaw-droppingly stupid" and a "buffoon." He eventually gave the following response to Mother Jones:

Jezebel has a world view that informs their prose. They are an advocate for an important cause and they take every opportunity to make their case. Sometimes in their enthusiasm they may get a little overheated. It's hard to resist an apparent opportunity when you believe you are on the side of the angels. 

I don't think Trachtenberg should apologize for these comments. It's clear from his other statements he accepts that the blame for sexual assault falls squarely on the assailant. One can—and should!—hold the rapists responsible while still giving practical advice on how to deny would-be rapists the opportunity. And while his line about punching rapists in the nose to frighten them off may seem like a stretch, it's certainly the case that some rapists strike when their victims are immobilized from blackout drinking, and would be deterred if their victims could resist at all.

As my colleague Elizabeth Nolan Brown wrote in response to criticisms made by some feminists against a nail polish that detects date rape drugs:

At the crux of most of these complaints is the axiom that we should teach men not to rape instead of teaching women not to be raped. And that's an important message! Too much cultural focus for too long has been on how a women's own conduct contributed or may contribute to her assault, in a way that winds up absolving assailants of culpability.

But teaching men not to rape and helping women avoid rape aren't mutually exclusive options. It's been said so many times already so as to be a cliche, but no one accuses security cameras of encouraging "theft culture". And neither do most people blame theft victims for getting robbed just because they didn't have security cameras.

On the whole, I don't think Trachtenberg's comments are offensive. But that doesn't mean his advice—drink less—is particularly helpful, either. Instead, he should advocate a clear policy change that would actually reduce binge drinking (and by extension, opportunities for rape): lowering the drinking age. Since drinking any amount of alcohol is illegal for most undergraduates, they have an incentive to cram all their drinking into short windows of time. They can't just order a drink here and there; they have to go to parties where alcohol is being consumed recklessly, secretly, and illegally.

It seems likely that allowing more college students to consume moderate amounts of alcohol—in public, during the hours of daylight—would decrease campus rape, just as repealing Prohibition decreased violent gang crime.

Trachtenberg, however, is not a signatory to the Amethyst Initiative, which calls on lawmakers to "rethink the drinking age," nor is any other past or current GWU president. According to this column in The Chronicle of Higher Education, his opinion on the issue is decidedly mixed.

He should change his perspective and fully align himself with a lower drinking age. He shouldn't apologize to Jezebel, though.

Read more from Reason on efforts to combat campus sexual assault here.

Hat tip: Inside Higher Ed

Advertisement

NEXT: Vid: You Won't Believe What the Pentagon is Doing Now

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Too much cultural focus for too long has been on how a women’s own conduct contributed or may contribute to her assault,

    Sorry, but I think this is a fable, at best. I suspect you would have to go back more than a few decades to find any noticeable “cultural focus” (whatever that is) supportive of a “blame the rape victim” mentality.

    Howsabout some examples? If you want to count advice on how to reduce your risk of being raped as “blame the victim”, go ahead, but don’t expect anyone to agree that “be observant of your surroundings, take a friend” etc. is “blame the victim”.

    1. I think certain people have stopped acknowledging that there is a difference between “encouraging people to take sensible precautions that will decrease their chances of being harmed” and “blaming the victim.”

    2. Did you hear anything about the rape victim in Maryville?

    3. I’d go so far as to say that the cultural focus is so far from “blame the victim” that the cultural focus, if anything, is on making sure that blaming the victim is unacceptable.

    4. Actually, I’d say the matter has gone even beyond that. At this point, raising questions, suggestions, or evidence of voluntary participation amounts to “blaming the victim”.

      Much like rape isn’t about sex, but power, the campus rape claims aren’t about rape, but power.

  2. I am sorry Jezebel for all the things i have said and done that you find offensive and I apologize for all the things I will do and say that you find offensive.

  3. INSTRUCTOR: Good evening, gentlemen, and welcome to the “how not to rape” seminar. I hope you have read the assigned material – The Rape of the Sabine Women, the Rape of Lucrece, and Titus Andronicus. Now, what lessons have your learned?

    STUDENT 1: It’s no use cutting out your victim’s tongue if she can still write down your name.

    STUDENT 2: If you’re king, you shouldn’t have to rape anyone, the women will come to *you.*

    STUDENT 3: Where can I find *me* some Sabine women?

    1. *Titus Andronicus. Now, what lessons have your learned?*

      Never, ever eat the pie.

    2. Hey Notorious, I like your course, but make sure to plug my educational programs, ‘Don’t Steal Because It Makes You A Dick’ and ‘Murder Makes Baby Jesus Cry’ to your students. Be a shame to waste all that time teaching them not to rape if they’re just going to become robbers and murderers without my expanded curriculum.

      1. Thank Science!! I home school my children so I have been looking for a curriculum that includes robbery and murder! Apparently, “Don’t do it because you wouldn’t want it done to you” doesn’t cover all the bases.

  4. *Trachtenberg replied that he “didn’t anticipate being taken quite so literally” and was “astonished that somebody would attack me for suggesting sobriety*

    Why is this man surprised? We’re dealing with people who don’t think that defense is ever justified or necessary, e.g., they don’t want you to be able to carry a weapon because criminals should just stop committing crimes. Same idiotic mindset.

    1. “That’s what the police are for! Getting there twenty minutes after you’ve been raped and turned into a lampshade.”

    2. I’m not sure they don’t think defense is ever justified, as long whoever perpetrates it is in a “protected class”. They’re pretty much okay with any violence directed against “oppressors”.

  5. “We shouldn’t guard ourselves from the dangers of the world, because we believe in an ideal world where these dangers don’t exist! And if these dangers exist notwithstanding our idealism, that simply means we have to clap harder!”

  6. Why do people take them seriously? They militantly and dangerously preach that women are unaccountable. Jezebel is simply a parody of a victim class.

    1. There’s nothing dangerous about what Jezebel publishes. There’s nothing dangerous about speech. Words can’t hurt anybody.

      1. On the plot of ground at Jezreel dogs shall eat the flesh of Jezebel;[a] 37 and the corpse of Jezebel shall be as refuse on the surface of the field, in the plot at Jezreel, so that they shall not say, “Here lies Jezebel.”

        First of all, we are dealing with website named after an evil woman who was eaten by dogs. So they’ve got that going for them.

        1. Yeah, I never got that. I mean, according to legend anyways Jezebel property theft and murder for royalty’s pleasure and introduced a religion which engaged in baby killing. You might as well choose Irene of Athens as your movement’s mascot.

          OTOH, that list does pretty much sum up progressive feminism.

          1. ntroduced a religion which engaged in baby killing

            Yup

            1. introduced a religion which engaged in baby killing

              I imagine this is a feature and not a bug.

      2. There are different types of danger.

        1. Like the danger of feminists doing to “rape” what race-baiting has done to “racist”. People just start responding less or tuning it out which is dangerous for real victims of the actual thing.

    2. They militantly and dangerously preach that women are unaccountable.

      It is amusing that 4th wave feminists (or whatever wave they’re up to now) have regressed to making Victorian-era arguments for the protection of women. That they don’t get they are portraying women as children and how profoundly misogynist their positions are is all the more hilarious, and depressing.

      And ENB, you’re fucking retarded.

      1. They aren’t saying they’re children, exactly, just somewhere in between children and men.

        E.g., in practice (whatever the laws say), enthusiastic consent laws will never be enforced for men against women, so de facto sexual consent law will be:

        Child – The state presumes that yes means no, always.

        Woman – The state presumes that yes means no in the absence of strong proof to the contrary.

        Man – The state presumes that yes means yes.

    3. They militantly and dangerously preach that women are unaccountable.

      No they’re not! They’re a shining example of the empowerment of women! They can do anything that a man can do!

      No wait! They’re victims! All of them! Perpetual and screeching victims!

      Hold on, they’re empowered, no wait, victimized, empowered, oppressed by the patriarchy…..ehhhh.

      Woozy.

  7. we should teach men not to rape instead of teaching women not to be raped. And that’s an important message!

    We should teach black men not to steal — that’s an important message!

    We should teach Muslims not to behead people — that’s an important message!

    So I’m not gonna say that Elizabeth is unlibertarian or anathema or anything silly like that, but statements like this one are why I just can’t get on the ENB-train. There is no sense in which “teach men not to rape” or “rapists should stop raping” is a meaningful contribution to the discussion, nor should we pretend that it is for the benefit of the Marcusian feminists which comprise 99% of the movement. At a minimum, it is poor engineering to require the enforcement of anti-rape efforts to fall at their weakest point (the rapists). It is an idea that an eight year old would find insulting to their intelligence, and it is being used to push for the feminist version of gulags, complete with collegiate show trials.

    Either ENB is humoring these harpies for no goddamn good reason, or she actually believes that shite. Either way, it’s a nauseating acquiescence to an ideology which nowadays is almost exclusively about restricting freedom.

    1. The behavior and vocalness of the Jezebel crowd is specifically designed to get people to kowtow/humor them reflexively, just to avoid their screeching at you if you don’t. It’s very insidious.

      1. This is true, but ENB better strap on her big brass ones because responding to mindless shrieking is pretty much the job description for any libertarian blogging about culture. If she doesn’t have prog feminists and social conservatives pissed at her, she is probably not doing her job right.

    2. “There is no sense in which “teach men not to rape” or “rapists should stop raping” is a meaningful contribution to the discussion, ”

      Unless maybe a significant amount of men don’t think certain behaviors like having sex with an unconscious woman is rape.

      1. a significant amount of men don’t think certain behaviors like having sex with an unconscious woman is rape

        First, [citation needed] that “a significant amount of men” think this.

        Second, what’s the context. My wife can have sex with this unconscious man any damn time she wants before/during my waking up; same with this inebriated man any time I’m liquored up. That’s a very different scenario than a stranger fucking another stranger who’s not expressed a similar long-standing desire to get fucked by whatever stranger happens to be passing by.

        Third, that’s not a matter of “education” but of character. Changing a tire or doing CPR? That’s a matter of education. Not fucking an unconscious woman who’s name you don’t even know? That’s a matter of character, and ultimately character cannot be instilled in the same respects as, say, mass literacy.

        1. as per Bo-speak, any amount of men who believed something so awful is in fact possible, therefore ‘significant’; no actual citation required because what is sought is not any proof of a point but rather to lure people into an attempt to dispute this an engage in an endless tete-a-tete ‘significant’ of nothing.

          You see, Bo has a worldview which informs his prose.

          1. Gilmore can really project. The Bo in his head is interesting though.

        2. Third, that’s not a matter of “education” but of character

          A very important, oft glossed over point.

        3. Wasn’t it a British MP who, in defending Assange, said that his having sex with an unconscious woman was not really rape?

          As to your second point it does a good job of making a common feminist point: you say ‘my woman can have sex with my unconscious self anytime, Woo Hoo!’ But I bet you’ve on occasion told a frisky significant other you were not in the mood. Of course you never fear waking up to someone stronger than you having your way with you, while for women that’s more salient

          I find your character distinction poor. First because character itself is a process of being taught, but secondly sometimes people do bad things because they just are under the impression that there’s nothing wrong with what they’re doing. We live in a time when most people can’t name their governor but you act as if it’s incredible that some men don’t know the contours of the legality of rape.

          1. Wasn’t it a British MP who, in defending Assange, said that his having sex with an unconscious woman was not really rape?

            I don’t take inbred Euro politician scum as my baseline for human character.

            But I bet you’ve on occasion told a frisky significant other you were not in the mood.

            Not that I can recall, and in any case irrelevant as the context of the relationship is different and we, as two reasonably intelligent adults in a relationship with a mutual understanding about sex, can reason out whether or not we do or don’t like something by telling the other person. I realize this bold and innovative technology is only in its nascent stages, but it’s so crazy it just might work.

            Most people have the basic intuition that other people’s “fuck me” switch is not switched to on for any random stranger to have sex with them when they’re passed out on the floor. The ones that don’t are generally called “criminals”

            We live in a time when most people can’t name their governor but you act as if it’s incredible that some men don’t know the contours of the legality of rape.

            Two things that have nothing to do with one another, united at last in one single, incoherent sentence! We live in a time when Apple is releasing the iPhone 6, yet rapists still roam the streets. See, I can do it, too!

            I have no idea how you can be this stupid, but I’m sure it requires a lot of hard work on your part so… bravo?

            1. “can reason out whether or not we do or don’t like something by telling the other person.”

              Er, we were talking about unconscious people…

              “We live in a time when Apple is releasing the iPhone 6, yet rapists still roam the streets. ”

              Except both of my statements were about the extent of ignorance.

              “I don’t take inbred Euro politician scum as my baseline for human character.”

              If we’re talking about how popular an idea is among people then it being espoused by popularly elected officials is not exactly crazy.

              1. If we’re talking about how popular an idea is among people then it being espoused by popularly elected officials is not exactly crazy.

                Like say, Guam tipping over?

                1. Disturbingly, I bet more than a few people in that guy’s district (or any district) would find such a statement reasonable.

              2. both of my statements were about the extent of ignorance

                No, both of your statements were about things which have no business being connected. There is no reason that you should expect knowledge of the first to indicate knowledge of the second thing; knowing more about who controls the executive branch in your state will not make you more or less likely to rape, and vice versa. Why on Earth would you expect those things to be connected?

                we were talking about unconscious people

                Yes, people with a prior sexual relationship in which preferences have been expressed, oftentimes emphatically. My friends don’t need to ask whether they can have a beer out of my fridge; they are welcome to it if it’s there and it would annoy me if they asked every time they came over as if they were guests who didn’t know me. If I don’t want them to have a beer I’ll let them know. The same general principle applies to other interactions: getting to know a person gives you a good understanding of that person’s boundaries, and after that’s been established it’s on that person if they want to redefine those boundaries.

                If we’re talking about how popular an idea is among people then it being espoused by popularly elected officials is not exactly crazy.

                Yes, it is. Ron Paul, Barney Frank, and John McCain say things daily which are absolutely insane and psychotic. I don’t take any of those statements as indicative of national culture

                1. 1. Because my claim is about people committing rape in part because if not knowing that that is rape.

                  2. Context matters in deciding whether real consent existed, yes. I’m not sure how that’s relevant to my point though.

                  3. They just regularly buck the national consensus and yet somehow get elected to major office, huh?

                  1. Because my claim is about people committing rape in part because if not knowing that that is rape

                    What we need are rape detectives, to tell us whether a rape actually happened — that’s the ticket! Clearly people’s moral intuition and a fairly clear definition of the thing aren’t enough; I think we need inquisitors and experts (preferably with wymyn’s studies degrees) to get to the bottom of this mystery. This isn’t Nancy Drew material here — rape is really not that complex, and the only one on this board who seems to think it’s a confusing topic is you.

                    Context matters in deciding whether real consent existed, yes. I’m not sure how that’s relevant to my point though

                    Because most feminists think context is irrelevant and that enthusiastic, active consent must be obtained in all sexual encounters — once again demonstrating that the problem is less one of “education” and more one of “people not agreeing with the harpies”. To the degree that a “significant” number of men need “education”, it is because they disagree with the feminist concept of rape, not because they fail to understand it.

                    They just regularly buck the national consensus and yet somehow get elected to major office, huh?

                    Look up what the American public thinks about subject like immigration and get back to me. You can’t be this ignorant on libertarian literature on the subject of democracy? Arrow’s impossibility Theorem? Anyone?

                  2. 1. Because my claim is about people committing rape in part because if not knowing that that is rape.

                    Of course, you omit the part where an ever expanding definition of rape makes that possible.

      2. Which I would imagine is not the case.

        There are definitely some who don’t care if it is, or can make up excuses for their behavior, and there are others who do things that they would consider unethical because they put themselves into a judgment-impaired state. But no amount of teaching is going to fix that (except, maybe, teaching the latter group not to binge drink).

        1. “But no amount of teaching is going to fix that (except, maybe, teaching the latter group not to binge drink).”

          You don’t think public education efforts have made any impact on, say, drunk driving ( it’s incidence and cultural stigma)? Why would this be so different?

          1. False equivalence. Drunk driving can ultimately harm no one at all, it’s conditionally bad on the possible damage it inflicts to others. Rape, on the other hand, always requires in engaging with an individual without their consent. You have to deliberately and purposefully undermine another person’s autonomy.

            Your argument entirely rests on the belief that sex offenders are unaware of the immorality or cultural stigma of their actions. Which is hilarious assumption based on absolutely nothing.

            1. The entire discussion is on things like rape of unconscious women or women close to that. I don’t think that’s as universally as recognized as wrong as you think. And I picked drunk driving for the reason that, like the rape debated here, you’ve got impaired people involved.

              1. Jensen is right. Drunk driving is not morally wrong in the sense that the mere act causes no one harm; it is reckless and inconsiderate to the extreme because of the high propensity of harm resulting from bad reflexes or being in the wrong place/wrong time while driving impaired.

                This is different from rape of an unconscious woman, which is a violation of that woman every time it happens.

              2. I don’t think that’s as universally as recognized as wrong as you think.

                Why for Science sake?! Is there some statistic of increased rapes or are you simply convinced it must be for some feeling you have?

                Even in this modern age, I regularly punish my son for infringing on the rights of his sister. When he is a bully I metaphorically shit on him as hard as I can.

                I just can’t believe, have seen no convincing statistics, nor have personally experienced this culture where it is cool to have your way because a woman is passed out. In a country of a quarter of a billion people there will always be some exceptions but that is what rapists are, exceptions.

                Like my father before me, I would so kick my son’s ass for doing something like that. I doubt that I am in the minority.

              3. The entire discussion is on things like rape of unconscious women or women close to that.

                Oddly, you restrict your category of unconscious or near-unconscious to the woman. What if the man is near unconsciousness? Or have you never heard of beer goggles? Or is that somehow not rape?

      3. Unless maybe a significant amount of men don’t think certain behaviors like having sex with an unconscious woman is rape.

        Are you claiming this is true? You just asked a stupid question and can’t wait for people to respond so you can pretend it wasn’t stupid?

        Perhaps, running in different circles than I have, you know lots of men who will fuck a passed out woman. I am not certain that I have ever known one. I am certain that I have known several, myself included, who wildly didn’t have sex with a woman just because we could and she was passed out.

        I have never once heard “she passed out but I fucked her anyway.” I have heard and siad “dammit, she passed out before I could fuck her”. Which is the whole point. I wonder why it does not surprise me that your experience has been with a different type of men?

        1. Your anecdotal experience is of course strengthed by you insulting me. I’m glad you’ve only mixed with honorable men, but yes I’ve at times experienced different

          1. I doubt Marshall Gill is insulting you because he thinks it strengthens his argument. He’s likely insulting you because you’re acting like an insufferable dick.

  8. As to the issue at hand: is anyone really going to suggest that what the professor says is untrue? I drink booze with no problems, but being pitch-drunk is a great way to lose your wallet, get your teeth knocked out in a fight, and — yes — get raped by a shady type. Yet, only suggesting the third will get you in trouble with people and get you accused of being in favor of the harmful act in question. Are we so far gone that stating simple truths like these elicits a witch-hunt?

    1. No, silly, a warlock hunt. Witches are empowered women. Warlocks are evil men with the magical power to Hold Women Back.

  9. which calls on lawmakers to “rethink the drinking age,”

    Tell the Department of Transportation to rethink the drinking age. I’m sure they’re enabled by some logrolled legislation but it’s an oddly powerful fiefdom that department.

  10. Feminist thinking, applied to car theft:

    “Sure, I left my new convertible with the top down, the motor running, and the keys in the ignition in the parking lot of the sleazy downtown liquor store at midnight on Saturday. But don’t blame the victim! The real solution is that we need to educate people not to steal cars.”

    1. Their response: we don’t have a society that endorses and encourages theft, like rape culture does for rape.

      1. Of course the idea that our society endorses rape is absurd. It’s illegal, widely condemned, and the average man is not only not a rapist, but would happily have all rapists executed.

        1. Not only absurd but extremely offensive.

          1. I know. If you’re male, white, Christian, and/or straight, the people who are always whining about stereotypes will be happy to stereotype you.

            1. +1 ‘Typical white person’

        2. It’s certainly taken to absurd hyperbolic levels by some feminists, but the thing is, like most things that catch on with an appreciable number of people, there’s a little more of a kernel of truth upon which its based. There are many things like the ‘marital rape’ exception which was long part of our laws (Oklahoma and NC only got rid of it in 1993 for Pete’s sake) that were ‘pretty messed up’ and give some credence to the claim that at least some classes of rape were not taken very seriously.

          1. All political ideologies take kernels of truth and claim that they are mountains.

          2. There are many things like the ‘marital rape’ exception which was long part of our laws (Oklahoma and NC only got rid of it in 1993 for Pete’s sake) that were ‘pretty messed up’ and give some credence to the claim that at least some classes of rape were not taken very seriously.

            It remains an absurd parsing of “culture” to the extremes defining the norm. Wouldn’t the fact that only OK and NC had not outlawed “marital rape” be a stronger indication that the culture opposed rape, than an indication that it was accepted? 48 states against and 2 for doesn’t sound like the prevailing culture to me.

            “Not Utopia”, are the words you are looking for.

            1. That was just to 93, for centuries it was law in every state. States started to repeal them in the ancient times of ..,, the 1970s

              1. 1970’s? So the culture today can be judged by the culture of 40 years ago? They are the same? Why didn’t you mention the raping of slaves? Do you ever even think before posting?

                1. Feminists are like anti-racists: the more sexism/racism recedes, the louder they get about whatever remains.

                  1. Well, sure. Both groups are at least led by would-be martinets. To the extent that there were rampant racism or sexism, they’d be the first in line coddling up to the most powerful racists or sexists they could find. To the extent it’s widely condemned they can use racism or sexism as a cudgel to bash people over the head with.

  11. Funny, my brother told me about the How-Not-to-Rape classes he is forced to take every year by the Army. The lessons consist of role play and lectures similar to the parenting class from The Simpsons.

    Teacher: And put your garbage in a garbage can, people- I can’t stress that enough. Don’t just throw it out the window.

    Marge: (under breath) This is so humiliating…

    Homer: (writing) garbage…in…garbage..can. Hmm. Makes sense.

  12. 2 possible incidents of relevance:

    My sister was at a college party. A guy spiked her drink with something. She started to feel weird, so she went back to her room and locked herself in. The creep lingered outside her door, but gave up eventually. She complained to the admin to get him expelled, but nothing happened. She transferred to another school.

    A female classmate in college got wasted at a party and passed out. She was awakened by another classmate humping her. The guy claimed he was so drunk he though she was her girlfriend who was also at the party. The professors told him he could drop out or they would go to the police. He dropped out. My classmate got married to another classmate.

    1. So, they covered up a rape? Well, I guess dropping out is at least a harsher punishment than paid leave. So the new clerical estates are somewhere between the new knightly estates and decent folk in terms of justice.

      1. Alleged rape. Consider the difficulty (at least in the normal course of affairs when quaint things like due process existed) in convicting someone of a he-said, she-said crime. Hassling the alleged offender into dropping out seems like a simpler prospect, one which doesn’t involve handwaving away the burden of proof.

        1. If you don’t even know who you’re sticking your dick in, you’re probably not being too conscientious about the whole consent thing either. Sounds more like he said and she said the same thing, just with more/less excuses.

          But if she wanted to press charges, she could have, so eh.

          1. Oh, I don’t disagree. Just that it’s a messy proposition and (who knows?) he might have told the truth about whom he thought he was bedding.

            1. I doubt it.

    2. So, the situation that actually looks most like an attempted rape gets brushed aside and the situation that more plausibly could have been drunken stupidity resulted in expulsion. Yup. That sounds about right.

  13. Oh, good God.

    As a parent I tell my sons not to get falling down drunk.

    Drunk people, whether male or female, are easy to victimize.

    Also, a bit of truth is in order. Some women – and men I presume – actively seek to get shitfaced and laid. I know, shocking.

    1. Yeah, well, it’s tough telling the ones who just want to get laid from those who consent drunk and cry foul the next morning.

  14. “Jezebel has a world view that informs their prose”

    YOU DONT SAY

    … i am now using this phrase whenever and wherever possible.

    Because its basically college-administrator speak for “crazy fucking asshats”

  15. Jezebel has a world view that informs their prose. They are an advocate for an important cause and they take every opportunity to make their case. Sometimes in their enthusiasm they may get a little overheated.

    Jeez, Trachtenberg. You may as well just suggest they’re being hysterical.

  16. Jezehadists want an “apology” like Sharks want a bleeding swimmer to give them a cookie.

  17. I’m sorry Jezebel, that you are all a bunch of ingornat cunts. How’s that?

  18. The best way to get away with rape is to be a Nuncio and have the Vatican whisk you out of the country when the authorities start to suspect you.

    1. The best way to get away with serial rape is having a coterie of outraged feminists in your corner. Not only are your crimes generalized to all men, rather than particularized to you, but your victims are encouraged to continue the sort of behavior you find convenient. If I didn’t know better I’d think the Jezebel outrage peddlers rather enjoy abetting these crimes.

      1. True, being a Democrat elected official is helpful

        1. Democrats are incapable of rape. Like racism and sexism, their good-hearted nature would cause them convulsions if they even considered perpetrating anything untoward.

          1. Bob Filter agrees

            1. Filner

              Damn auto correct

            2. He’s who I was thinking of as I wrote it. That leering face would be considered ‘too obvious’ for such a role on television.

    2. Yet you wonder why you’re not taken seriously

      1. Don’t pick on the Nuncio?

        1. Don’t barge into a thread about a campus prez, try to make it about an unrelated thing that favors your biases, and equivocate away the wrongs of the instigators of the idiotic thing that is actually being discussed. We already have Shreeeeeek around to do that whenever the topic is Obama, and he charges far less for the service and is frankly better at it than you are.

          1. “try to make it about an unrelated thing that favors your biases, and equivocate away the wrongs of the instigators of the idiotic thing that is actually being discussed.”

            You put more thought into that than I did, I was just reading about the Dominican thing and thought it was an amazing story and thought it’d make for a funny comment. The ambassador literally is accused of rape you know.

    3. Well, after being a cop.

    4. No, the best way to get away with rape is to be a Muslim in the UK or Oslo.

      1. I guarantee you’ll never hear a pseudofeminist Marxist intersectional feminist say “we need to teach Muslims not to rape”.

    5. The best way to get rid of rape is to give every woman a cute little .25.

  19. The closer you get to the truth, the madder people on the left get.

  20. I recall Heinlein writing about a heavily-male lunar colony where rape was unknown because an accused man would be thrown out an airlock at the drop of a hat.

    1. The Moon is a Harsh Mistress

  21. A first encounter with the Jezebots must be a shocking experience.

    1. I first visited Jezebel after Deadspin was absorbed into the Collective and it was an eye-opening experience. I grew up in an area with a pretty left all women’s college and talked with and debated feminists fairly regularly but Jezebel was a whole different level of crazy.

  22. This reminds me of the people who always cry “blaming the victim” when anyone suggests that US foreign policy might have in some way contributed to 911 and other terrorist activity. You can make the observation that getting drunk makes you easier to rape without implying that you deserve to get raped if you get too drunk.

    1. That is a good point, though in fairness many of the people who make that argument really are crazy and anti-US enough that you can see them arguing that 9/11 was a good thing (e.g., the antiwar.com crowd and maybe some of the Rockwell people).

      1. You could see that ‘but’ coming from a mile away…

        1. So long as it was fully-conscious and I obtained enthusiastic, active consent from it, it’s none of your damn business whether my but came or not

          1. OK, that did make me laugh.

    2. When I think about US policy contributing to 911, I think more about Uncle Sam going around the world poking people in the chest until someone gets mad and punches him in the face, than anyone having too much to drink.

    3. Bingo.

      Unfortunately, progs believe in a kind of a topsy-turvy morality where the freedom of all must be sacrificed to protect a few from their own stupidity.

      So if some people hurt themselves with X, X must be banned.

      X = smoking, sugar, trans fat, guns, etc.

      1. “progs believe in a kind of a topsy-turvy morality where the freedom of all must be sacrificed to protect a few from their own stupidity.”

        At the risk of living up to type, they’ve likely learned that from SoCons (pornography, gambling, etc).

        1. Good point. I often use the term “prog” when I should say “authoritarian” or “slaver”.

          1. I use ‘statist’

          2. Socons are progs. Not all progs are Democrats and not all Socons are Republicans. Progs use the force of government to achieve their social visions for society. Eliminating due process for those accused of rape and banning the evils of gambling are adjacent philosophies, not opposing ones.

            1. I literally mean that they learned it from SoCons, remember William Jennings Bryan?

        2. At the risk of living up to type, they’ve likely learned that from SoCons (pornography, gambling, etc).

          I realize you have never met the strange and obscure species known a Socialis Conservatorum but many actually do not favor conversion through coercion. Your broad brushing of them is more than a bit obtuse. It makes you appear very…small, shallow, insignificant.When they support government action I generally agree with your apparent opinions of them. When you claim to speak for people with whom you have so little knowledge, you simply smell of shit.

  23. The first axiom of self defense: If you don’t want to be eaten, don’t look like food.

    Couldn’t post that anywhere else but here. This isn’t victim blaming. This is self defense.

  24. Uh, it’s called taking self-ownership and actively doing things to mitigate your risks, defend yourself, and help to ensure your own safety. This should not be controversial.

  25. You had me until you started talking about the drinking age. Do you honestly believe that will result in fewer college parties? Please. I know plenty of legal drinkers (over 21) that drink too much on the weekends. It’s what they consider blowing off steam after a week at work. Same reasoning for college students.
    And Universities absolutely should be educating students (men and women) about the dangers of drinking too much. It does lower your inhibitions. You are more likely to be raped or agree to sex that you might not have agreed to if sober. If groups like Jezebel want to keep young women from being raped, they would do well to tell them how most on-campus rapes happen.

    1. Sex education is based on the idea that the little moppets are going to fuck anyway, so we’d better teach them about safe fucking — and if you disagree with this, you’re some sort of evil monster.

      On the other hand, if you point out that the little moppets are going to drink anyway and that therefore alcohol education should be predicated on the idea that since they’re going to drink we ought to teach them how to do it safely and not to excess, you’ll be considered beyond polite society.

  26. Snore. Yes, the ridiculous positions of the Jezebels actually makes me want to ignore the serious problem of rape, because nothing that they do about is likely to help. Sorry, but being drunk on campus is stupid. It is common and it is stupid. You leave yourself without defenses and YOU suffer the consequences. Sure, we can talk about training men not to rape till the cows come home BUT there will always be a handful of sociopaths out there–the ones who are raping now. TALKING to men, most of whom never would rape, is mostly pointless. Find and address the sociopaths. In the mean time, stay alert and aware. Have a drink, but be careful. It’s not like the culture of college binge drinking is a societal value that we need to protect against recommendations that young women stay relatively sober. Sheeesh. Whose life is ruined by a rape?

  27. Hyper literalism is the refuge of morons.

  28. Before they “train men not to rape,” who will train obnoxious feminists not to be bigoted twerps?

    Maybe they can cut a deal: the twerps train the men not to rape, and the men train the twerps in how to speak to their fellow human beings.

  29. But that doesn’t mean his advice?drink less?is particularly helpful, either.

    Yeah no shit. I’m Irish. Sex and drunk are like synonyms. As with every other noun and drunk.

    “The classic Irish man’s dilemma: Do I eat the potato or do I let it ferment so I can drink it later?”

  30. When it comes to absolving a criminal of of their culpability, you’ll find no better way than to suggest that they did it because of something inherent in them, something that grows between their legs and somehow causes them to be born with a desire and talent for sexual assault.

    It’s the same thing as saying “Aww, they can’t help it. They were born that way.” It sounds pretty damn sympathetic to those that perpetrated an evil, and places the blame on others that did nothing wrong, merely because they were born into the same group, a group they did not choose, nor have any real chance to choose.

    More…

  31. And while he’s not exactly right about drinking less, as you yourself said, I don’t think I would go to an event where I got plastered and worried if I would be raped or worse. Maybe I wouldn’t stand a chance sober, but if I had to go, that would be better than giving them a handicap. Even as a child I didn’t go to those events, because even in highschool, there were cases where classmates would get drunk at parties and some girls were at least claiming to be raped at them after getting drunk (not sure if true or not). I personally stay away from alcohol as well because if I need alcohol to have fun, then it must not be that fun in the first place, and if I do have fun, I prefer to remember it, and lastly, I don’t want to risk doing something really stupid. But if I did drink, I would try to avoid getting plastered. It’s not so much paranoia for that part, but I believe if I allowed myself to get plastered, that is, I drunk alcohol willingly to the point where I couldn’t fight back, then I have myself to blame.

    More…

  32. Though I do agree that the drinking age should be lowered. I’ve seen too many situations which would have not occurred if drinking would have been seen as a more normal and not a taboo hobby. I’ve met students who were allowed to drink at home and they usually were the smart ones. They were given a time and place where they could drink and it took a lot of the mystery and taboo away from it, so they didn’t binge drink. I have also met an exchange student from Germany who was allowed to legally drink alcoholic beverages like beer and wine. And he said his classmates at home rarely binged because drinking was such a normal pastime.

    More…

  33. So now we’ve got a problem where girls are at risk of getting raped at parties? I’m sorry, but it sounds to me like it’s a pretty standard risk at those events. So first of all, I would avoid going to them, or at the least if I was holding a party, it would need to be monitored (like locking bedrooms and making sure nobody was trying separate others from the party. I’m not sure that there’s really not much else you can do. Rape isn’t something you can “teach” against. Like a lot here have noted, nobody had to be taught not to kill one another, it comes to you naturally, killing is wrong, therefore don’t do it. Same thing with rape. It’s not like teaching them will make them go “My god, what have I been doing all of this time? I never realized that taking advantage of somebody when they were drunk or asleep was wrong! Forgive me!!!” They’re going to do it no matter what you say, so the first step is to avoid people like that, and if you can’t do that, then to avoid giving them an opportunity to harm you.

    If somebody told me “Crime is rampant in that part of the city.” I would avoid that part of the city, and if I had to go, I’d try to go prepared to defend myself. I wouldn’t just go and get drunk and show off all of my technology. I’d might as well be wearing a bulls-eye T-shirt.

    And some general protection would also help. Maybe I’m in a good part of a city, I’d still like some protection even if the chances of harm to me are lower.

  34. No one is saying applying contributory fault to women, but rather suggesting actions they can take–here, drinking less–to help and prevent the oppurtunity.

    It’s not much different from leaving one’ s car doors unlocked overnight in a bad neighborhood. A simple suggestion to prevent one’s own victimization would be to lock those doors. If you fail to do so and your car gets broken into, the fault is still squarely on the person doing the breaking and entering.

    1. There Ben goes, blaming the victim for leaving his car unlocked and $1000 in cash sitting out in the open on the dash.

      When will you stop blaming the victims, Ben?

  35. Personal responsibility for one’s own behavior is too much to expect in our culture. Please stop asking for the impossible. (Disclaimer: I am not responsible for this viewpoint)

  36. Is this really about a drunk girl not being able to physically resist an aggressor or about a drunk girl with inhibitions lowered consenting to sex she may regret the next day? I would suggest that most cases involve the latter. I really don’t believe most college age men are rapists, using force or having sex with passed out women. Most often, both students are drinking and regretting what was consensual sex under the influence.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.