<p>In defining and understanding consent, Whitman says: “Consent to a sexual act cannot be given by a person who is incapacitated by alcohol, drugs, or passed out.” The Associate Dean mentioned that although 2 male students have talked with her about their incidents, she guesses “that they are probably still very, very under-reported in terms of the number of males who it occurs to.”</p>
<p>That the dean of students has such poor grammar could also be a source of concern. ;)</p>
<p>I agree that sex with a drunk girl is sex without clear consent. My son and I talked about this frequently – about how a woman who is really into you will be into you when she’s sober, and a woman who is only into you when she’s drunk is, at the very least, someone with some issues to work out. I have also been really frank with both my children about an incident when I wasn in college when one of my ex-boyfriend’s frat brothers invited me to his room for a cocktail and then tried to force sex. It’s a story about my being a little naive and probably sending mixed signals to the guy, but still having the right to say no. To quote someone else who was maybe being a little snarky, I am a potential rape survivor, in a sense – someone pushed me down and got on top of me, but I demanded he stop, and thankfully, he did. It scared the hell out of me and taught me a lesson about the stupidity of drinking and going to someone’s room alone.</p>
<p>I also have the sneaking suspicion that at least some Whitman students answering the survey were thinking, “Well, I have experimented with drugs, but not as much as those Reedies!” ;-)</p>
<p>I would not give much credence to the statistical accuracy of a mail-in survey. And a total response of 100? hmm…</p>
<p>I would think that if your child is the type (or becomes the type) that gets too intoxicated to know what they are doing and has sex with someone under those circumstances, it could happen at any school and doesn’t really have anything to do with Whitman. If that’s a concern you should probably start figuring out how to warn your kid against that wherever they go to school. Now if someone is wandering the halls of Whitman forcibly raping all students, sober or drunk, that is an issue for the school (and the polics and community etc.).</p>
<p>TrinSF - Your frankness with your children about your own experience and your expectations of them is to be commended!</p>
<p>The legal issue of rape is actually quite interesting. The rule is if you’re intoxicated, you can’t give consent and having sex without consent is rape. The legal definition of intoxicated is “incapable of acting as an ordinary prudent and cautious person would act under similar conditions” or, essentially, having a B.A.C. of .08 since the states have rules that that’s when acting ordinary isn’t possible. </p>
<p>So if you’ve ever been too drunk to drive, chances are you’ve been legally raped. It doesn’t matter if it was with your wife or whoever. </p>
<p>I personally believe that laws like that are why drunk driving is so common. If you did an intent-based crime when drunk it’s not your fault. Give you give consent when your drunk it’s not your responsibility. However, if you get behind the wheel it’s an egregious crime. </p>
<p>People ought to be responsible for how their actions may change when they willingly consume something. Right now our law isn’t like and is instead something like “he who drinks wins unless he’s driving then he losses.” and it needs to be changed to “he who drinks loses.”</p>
<p>It’s much more consistent.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Nice try, but the weasel word in this sentence is “essentially”. This is the point at which the author substitutes mere conjecture for law and logic. No state, nor science, has established a blood-alcohol level at which one is too intoxicated to consent to sex. In fact, 0.08% is merely the level at which one’s reflexes are measurably slowed to the point that driving becomes dangerous; it has nothing to do with ethical judgments such as whether to have sex.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So you think that being drunk should be a crime? Well, I’ve got something for you. [Pulls hand out of pocket to reveal rude gesture.] I’m having another drink. Maybe I’ll get wasted on pot, too. I mean, I’ve got to have my fun before the moral police elect enough people like you that personal discretion is replaced with draconian legislation, and the word “freedom” loses its meaning.</p>
<p>So, without further ado, here is my real opinion on the subject: If you were forced, then you were raped. If you were unconscious or intoxicated against your will, then you were raped. But if you were conscious and not high on anything that you didn’t ingest willingly, then you weren’t raped. Too bad for you if you wake up tomorrow and realize it was a bad idea. Take some responsibility for your own stupidity.</p>
<p>Will_S, can you give a cite to prove that the law of any state is that a person who is too drunk to drive is too drunk to consent to sex? I’ve never heard that before. </p>
<p>In California, a person who reasonably believes that the victim has consented, even if the victim has not in fact consented, is not guilty of rape. (Of course, it’s for the jury to decide whether the accused rapist’s belief is reasonable.)</p>
<p>Exactly. The whole reason for jury trials is because the law is an ass*. Some human discretion is required, because intent and circumstances can be so hard to define.</p>
<ul>
<li>so said Mr. Bumble in Oliver Twist</li>
</ul>
<p>Okay, steering this back to the actual topic the thread was intended for: greger, I would take anything you read in a student newspaper with a grain of salt, especially if it has to do with a “poll” conducted on campus. Such polls are usually done with good intentions, but college students are honestly so lazy (speaking as someone who was a college student until a few months ago and threw many of those polls from my mailbox straight into the trash) that you’re lucky to get any responses at all, and the ones you do get are usually not what I would call statistically viable. </p>
<p>I’m sure you raised a responsible, thoughtful child, and I hope you’ve discussed with her the risk factors inherent in any social situation where there could be alcohol involved and she may be drinking with people she doesn’t know. I don’t think these reports are enough to discount Whitman from her list, but no matter where she goes to college, it’s a good idea to have these kinds of conversations (at least to have one parent have them with her). After that, you have to trust her judgement, hope she chooses wisely, and/or picks good friends to help her along. </p>
<p>To quote one of my favorite songs about parents and children: “You’re on your own, I have no voice/at least not the kind that ears can hear.”</p>
<p>It is because there are people like mantori.suzuki who teach their sons that sex with a drunk girl is fine is she isn’t fighting the guy off that people like me have to teach their daughters never to be alone with men in college, to treat every guy as a potential rapist, and to guard themselves carefully, even among friends. When adults model these kinds of attitudes to their children, those children grow up thinking that drunken girls are fair game – and young women in those households grow up thinking if they ever get attacked, they probably “asked for it.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yup, that’s right. That’s what I said. You got me. I teach my son to get girls drunk and rape 'em. You done called me out, sista/bro.</p>
<p>In fact, since TrinSF has seen right through me, I guess I should drop the ruse and just come right out and say it:</p>
<p>Rape is great. It’s what every guy should do. And it’s always the woman’s fault.</p>
<p>God, it feels good to get that out in the open. Pretending to be a rational, thinking person with considered opinions on this subject has been such a burden.</p>
<p>Thank you, TrinSF. Thank you so much for letting me finally just be the rape-mentor that I am.</p>
<p>All squinty eyed people are like mantori.suzuki — you learn to ignore them.</p>
<p>This could have been an interesting topic …</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Heck, I even ignore myself. :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It is an interesting topic. It’s a great opportunity to discuss sensitivity, sexism, personal responsibility…as long as we can avoid accusing one another of teaching our children to be rapists. That’s when it gets a little…I don’t know, disrespectful, maybe. Undignified, maybe.</p>
<p>Anyway…</p>
<p>What is the best way to teach our daughters to be safe and responsible about sex without making them paranoid? I tend to think that a respectable, respectful, and responsible young woman generally will not put herself in situations where she will be plied with drink, etc. So, I feel that my job is to teach my daughter to respect herself and her body, and to care about how her behavior is viewed by others, and that this is the best prevention of what I think we call date rape, as opposed to forcible rape by a violent attacker.</p>
<p>Forcible rape is a somewhat different matter. Aside from not walking alone in dark places at night and similar common-sense precautions, I’m not sure what can be done about that. If a criminal is determined to find a victim, he probably will.</p>
<p>I think it’s clear from the posts why I would be concerned about the opinion I expressed concern over. I fully expected to be dismissed, because that’s what happens, isn’t it? I’ll leave the threat, it’s cool.</p>
<p>It would be nicer if we could just tone the rhetoric down a notch. I personally and sincerely invite you to stay and explain your reaction in more detail, without the over-the-top suggestion that I would teach my son to take advantage of a drunken woman. There was really no need for that. I honestly hope to hear more from you on this subject.</p>