Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
    • Reason TV
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • Just Asking Questions
    • Free Media
    • The Reason Interview
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Print Subscription
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password
Reason logo

Reason's Annual Webathon is underway! Donate today to see your name here.

Reason is supported by:
F.A. Hayek

Donate

Brett Kavanaugh

Viewing Bar Fights As Normal Male Behavior Encourages Violence

The debate about a 1985 kerfuffle involving Brett Kavanaugh reveals a split in perceptions of how men should be expected to behave when they drink.

Jacob Sullum | 10.4.2018 12:05 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Senate Judiciary Committee

The 1985 altercation that led New Haven police to question Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, then a 20-year-old junior at Yale, does not sound like much of a bar fight. According to the police report, a 21-year-old complainant said Kavanaugh had thrown ice at him, while one of Kavanaugh's friends, Chris Dudley, had hurled a glass, injuring his ear. The genesis of the fight is barely intelligible: Apparently Kavanaugh and his friends were staring at the complainant, trying to figure out if he was the lead singer of UB40, which had performed in New Haven that night. The guy told them to cut it out in an unfriendly manner, which annoyed Kavanaugh.

I'm not sure what, if anything, this incident has to do with Kavanaugh's fitness for the Supreme Court. But attempts to use the story against him have provoked a revealing debate about how common it is for young men to get into bar fights. Broadly speaking, Kavanaugh's defenders think bar fights are a rite of passage for men, so they are no big deal, while his detractors say most men don't get into bar fights, so Kavanaugh's involvement in one reflects on his character. Although I'm inclined toward the latter view, I've yet to see any solid data on the question. But it seems likely that men who view bar fights as normal are more apt to start or join them.

"I don't know one guy, including myself, who wasn't in a bar fight," Newsmax TV host John Cardillo remarked on Twitter this week. "Not a single one." New York Times columnist Ross Douthat, one of the paper's token conservatives, reported that "I've been in two bar fights, though I suppose one was technically a 'Jumbo Slice fight.'" Fox Business Network correspondent Charles Gasparino bragged that "Ive been in dozens of bar fights (ask the guys I grew up with)," "nearly lost an eye in one," and "that's just one of the injuries (I have the scarred stitch marks to prove the rest)." Although Gasparino has "never been black out drunk," he said, "I have had to defend myself, which I am still perfectly capable of doing."

These accounts, especially Cardillo's, are very different from my own experience. I've patronized many bars over the years, but I have never been involved in a bar fight (or even witnessed one, as far as I can recall), and I know lots of male drinkers with a similar lack of such experience. For what it's worth, an online survey that Esquire conducted in 2010 found that 74 percent of the 5,000 or so respondents had never been involved in a bar fight. This was not a random sample, but given the magazine's audience I assume it was overwhelmingly male. Within this group of men who read Esquire and take the time to fill out online surveys, bar fights were definitely not the norm.

Some people are more temperamentally inclined to violence than others, which may be a good reason for anyone who values peace to avoid drinking with Cardillo, Gasparino, or their friends. But social expectations and beliefs about the relationship between alcohol and violence also can affect how people act when they drink.

In their classic 1969 study Drunken Comportment, the psychologist Craig MacAndrew and the anthropologist Robert Edgerton pointed out that behavior under the influence of alcohol varies between individuals in the same culture, across situations in the same individual, over time in the same individual, across cultures, across situations in the same culture, and over time in the same society. Their most interesting evidence came from cross-cultural comparisons, including societies in North America, South America, Africa, and Asia. They cited examples of tribes where people would get falling-down drunk without any dramatic changes in demeanor and others where people routinely got into bloody fights after drinking. Within the same society, people drinking in a ceremonial context would be peaceful and friendly, while people drinking in a less structured situation would be raucous and violent, even though the amounts consumed were comparable.

Violent tendencies vary from one person to another in every culture and situation. But when you combine aggressive people spoiling for a fight with a context that gives them an excuse, you are asking for trouble.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Texas Students Will Now Learn How To Survive a Police Stop

Jacob Sullum is a senior editor at Reason. He is the author, most recently, of Beyond Control: Drug Prohibition, Gun Regulation, and the Search for Sensible Alternatives (Prometheus Books).

Brett KavanaughAlcoholViolence
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Show Comments (224)

Latest

No, SCOTUS Did Not 'Invent' Judicial Review in Marbury v. Madison

Damon Root | 12.2.2025 7:00 AM

Republican Socialism: Trump Is Taking Federal Stakes in Private Companies

Eric Boehm | From the January 2026 issue

Brickbat: the Cost of Doing Business

Charles Oliver | 12.2.2025 4:00 AM

Hegseth's Alleged Order To 'Kill Everybody' Complicates Trump's Defense of His Murderous Anti-Drug Campaign

Jacob Sullum | 12.1.2025 3:35 PM

Chicago Is the Latest Example of How Public School Spending Doesn't Prioritize Students

Gregory Lyakhov | 12.1.2025 2:00 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS Add Reason to Google

© 2025 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

HELP EXPAND REASON’S JOURNALISM

Reason is an independent, audience-supported media organization. Your investment helps us reach millions of people every month.

Yes, I’ll invest in Reason’s growth! No thanks
r

I WANT TO FUND FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS

Every dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.

Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interested
r

SUPPORT HONEST JOURNALISM

So much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.

I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK

Push back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.

My donation today will help Reason push back! Not today
r

HELP KEEP MEDIA FREE & FEARLESS

Back journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

STAND FOR FREE MINDS

Support journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.

Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK AGAINST SOCIALIST IDEAS

Support journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BAD IDEAS WITH FACTS

Back independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BAD ECONOMIC IDEAS ARE EVERYWHERE. LET’S FIGHT BACK.

Support journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

JOIN THE FIGHT FOR FREEDOM

Support journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BACK JOURNALISM THAT PUSHES BACK AGAINST SOCIALISM

Your support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

STAND FOR FREEDOM

Your donation supports the journalism that questions big-government promises and exposes failed ideas.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BACK AGAINST BAD ECONOMICS.

Donate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks