I concur with your first paragraph.

And yes, Greeks probably do hear more about it than the average student, just as they probably hear more about eating disorders and binge drinking than the average student. It all depends where it's coming from. If your national GLO has a program on EDs and how to prevent them, then that is part of what you're paying dues for - programming to improve your life and educate you as a woman. If Butthead U holds an open to the campus program on EDs and sorority women are required by the school to attend or else their chapter gets penalized, that's beyond offensive.

When fraternities and sororities were initially founded, a lot of their mission was to provide programming to educate on issues like these (not these same issues, but you get my drift). As the schools took over more and more of that duty, the Greeks let it go. IMO it's time for Greeks to start providing more of these services for their members again, as the programming schools provide is often very prejudicial where Greeks are concerned.

Her article was almost sad. It sounds as though she has a phobia that will absolutely limit her for the rest of her life.

I have news for her. Men live in the real world. If she wants to live there as well, she better get over her issues.

HEY, Caitlin. You and others who have this apparent struggle about fearing men need to "man up" (pun intended) and learn that college boys and yes, grown men, live through their penises. Don't ever go upstairs at a frat house unless its with your established boyfriend who you use for sex, don't make a fool of yourself by being the queen of kegstands, don't be STUPID, and Mr. Penis will have to sit in his room and go fap fap fap all by himself.

Yes, hell yes, I am a lot older than many of you. But here's the flash, girlies. Mr. Penis is an ancient god, one who lives through the ages.

They don't care what she is. They're trying to get laid. Is this a revelation in 2011?

Okay. That's my weekly rant. Carry on.

Men run the real world. Which was kind of her poorly expressed overwrought point.

What. The. Fuck?
Wait now, so if she had a boyfriend she's only using him for sex? Didn't she SAY that she was warned not to go upstairs under fear of rape? You think this was a newsflash?

Right, because if she's drunk it's her fault she was raped!
The punishment for stupidity is not rape.

You know rape is about power, not sex, right? Even date rape, acquaintance rape, drunk at a party rape. It's about having the POWER to force someone to do something that they do not or would not consent to.

WTF is this even.

While they obviously don't care about her as a person, it is NOT ABOUT SEX.

Do all your weekly rants make this little sense?


If that's what you read you're an idiot. It's about teaching our children, from young through college how to act and what is unacceptable behavior rather than permitting men to act however they like, and punishing women.

Your point was that we should stop talking about rape so we don't upset anyone. Oh how terrible, the divide between men and women when men are forced to acknowledge the existence of rape. 99% of which is perpetrated by their gender. Obviously their feelings are the most important here and it's just better not to actually address the real problem.

With all due respect, what in the hell is this post about?

I wanted you to be sarcastic but I think you're serious. Beliefs like yours are exactly why "boys will be boys" persists.

I doubt that is what 33girl is advocating. That seems to be exactly what AnchorAlum is advocating.

Indeed. It is however, the status quo, as is focusing on 'safety' even including men in the safety classes. It is all reinforcing the current state of affairs, and punishing women while permitting men is that state of affairs.

It is seen as her "fault" because she gave up her power by getting drunk.

By being drunk she has limited her control over herself - she can no longer make good decisions.

Now, does this give the man (assuming it is "always" a man) the right to rape her, no, it does not. But, what happens is that the guy becomes an opportunist. He sees an opportunity to rape her and takes advantage of it. It is still not right, but that is what happens.

The woman must exercise responsibility for herself. By being drunk and no longer in control of her actions she has put that burden of responsibility on someone else.

I agree.

Part of the issue regarding why universities attempt to sweep rape under the rug is the degree to which it is punished.

Here in Oklahoma, for example, the statutes (amended as late as 2002), still say that death is an available penalty for first degree rape (totally unconstitutional), and that there's a five-year minimum sentence, and the option of life or life without parole.

As a society, we generally view college students as being at the beginning of their lives, having all kinds of potential, and definitely being fixable as compared to other criminals. Prosecutors tend to give kids in these situations all sorts of breaks that wouldn't go to an individual from the proverbial wrong side of the tracks who did the exact same thing. Plus there's that whole having to register as a sex-offender thing, which can really ruin your life.

The above needs to be considered with how thin the evidence is on these sorts of cases. It often comes down to consent, which is almost inevitably a question of he said/she said, and it is definitely not unheard of for the female to be dishonest in that sort of situation, and even if we do find a prosecutor willing to prosecute getting a conviction in a he-said/she-said situation is certainly not a certainty.

Perhaps if it was possible to punish someone for a rape without statutes and societal attitudes that left the death penalty on the table, there might be more reporting of it. Until then, right or wrong (and certainly, this should not be viewed as my endorsement of rape), we will continue to see administrators and prosecutors utilize their discretion in cases such as these.

OMG, DF, you are SO right. I'm going to go out and cut off every penis I see.

No really...from one post to another, you changed from "teaching men" to "teaching children."

Obviously what I said made you realize you were wrong and I was right.

Thank you, drive through.

Beyond the "penises don't rule the world" point that some of us are making, I admit that I don't know what the discussion in this thread is about.

I disagree. She was drugged. Big difference.

Let me state this. I was once slipped a "mickey"/"roofie" into my beer by our pledges as a prank. I was totally incapacitated. I was somewhat aware of what was happening but it was beyond my power to do anything of my own volition. I woke up in the middle of the night in my girlfriends apartment and had no idea how I got there. I was stone cold sober as I had only had a part of a single beer. Unless you have ever been given one of these things it is hard to understand how helpless one becomes.

This type attack has nothing to do with the victim and it is the perp/s who should be called to account. Via further reading, it is my understanding that the perp was not a fraternity member but someone who lived in the house. At least that is the story the Fraternity gives. If she was indeed gang raped then many members of the Fraternity were in on it. That has not been proven, though.

Agree 100%

Even if a person is shit-faced drunk, when s/he says "No," it means "No." It doesn't mean "You should've been more careful. Now the rape is your fault."

That is what I said - even though the woman, or heck guy for that matter, may be isht-faced drunk, no one should take advantage of that situation in any way.

But, that does not mean that person should not exercise any responsibility.

If you know that you get totally drunk after a few beers and some shots and pass out, then that is on you. No one forced you to get that drunk and pass out. Still, no one should attack you, but you have left yourself vulnerable by your own means.

I'm advocating personal responsibility.

Go out, party and have a good time, but know your limits.

I see.

I hope you also realize that victims are often attacked when completely sober.

You're right. It is a HUGE difference if a person is drugged without their knowledge.

The way I have read the thread though, the issue has not been in particular if the person was drugged.


IDK, when I was cautioned by my parents and good friends I was told to never let my drink out of my sight, and more specifically, my hands.

Oh, I know.

But, that person is more aware if she/he is sober than drunk.

Thank you.

And what's up with pledges thinking slipping a mickey is a decent prank? Was that a sign of the times? I am glad that you had a safe outcome. That kind of incapacitation is terrifying.

The problem here is that all too frequently society puts the onus on women, the responsibility on women, to not be raped. Yeah people should be safe and be responsible, but if the reaction to a rape is "well she shouldn't have been drinking so much", or the inexplicable "she shouldn't have been going upstairs with Mr. Penis" of the post I was replying to, there is a serious problem and it is not with the rape victim. It's good to encourage responsibility, but never to put responsibility for a crime onto a victim. And as a society we should be "encouraging" more responsibility on the part of the rapists instead of only looking at the victims.

So yeah, when people come into a thread about rape and only want to say "Buuuuuut I just mean personal responsibility is important" when that is pretty much ALL society bothers to say, it suggests a real blindness to reality.

J.F.C.

If you think that my point was that we should stop talking about rape so we don't upset anyone, I AM NOT THE IDIOT HERE.

I read what this woman wrote, and I read also the op-ed in the WSJ last weekend. I have my take, and you have yours.

She's a freakin' pansy if she was so upset by those horrible fraternity houses at UVA full of preppy little assholes who wear oxford shirts and orange and blue rep ties to the Wahoo games on Saturdays and leave at halftime cause their team sucks and their buzz is off.

Seriously, would YOU let a kid scare you off of that campus? Riiiiiggghhht.

Girlfriend would NOT survive a visit to a Baltimore McDonalds....

Where is the sarcastic emoticon? I don't see one that is capable of conveying the correct level I was trying to express. So your use of the term "beliefs" reveals your mistaken interpretation.

There was an enormous amount of sarcasm in my post....and yes,

there was a lot in there to slam on "boys".


Rape is an ugly and heinous crime. Drugging women should NOT be an easy thing to accomplish in a room full of informed and aware females, and women have to know this and be smarter than men.

Because men who drug and then rape women are admitting that they aren't good enough to get a woman in bed any other way. I'm just saying that we're smarter than that. Or should be.

No the point of YOUR post was that you associate rape with sex and told women to stop being so dumb. The only place where YOU were an idiot was when you failed to notice that I was replying to 33girl which ironically was the only part of the post you actually responded to.

So, LTR. Til then, my "What the fuck" at your crazy rant stands.

IT IS NOT ABOUT SEX.
RAPE IS NOT ABOUT SEX

And most rape victims are not drugged and they are no more responsible for their rape than someone who is, in your opinion, stupider than men.

Sigh of relief.

It read like you were seriously trying to inform "younger women" about men and how men were ruled by their penises. You were just being sarcastic and don't really believe that. Good.

Personal assessments aside, there are researchers who posit that rape is a heinous and inexcusable act that is motivated by sexual fulfillment. They propose that the debate over the motivation doesn't minimize the heinousness of rape or excuse the actions.

In response to those researchers, others propose that some rapists do so for sexual fulfillment but the majority do so for dominance. The research on rapist motivation is relatively scarce on either side. The support for the notion of rape as dominance instead of sex is partially rooted in studies of offenders and victims; but mostly rooted in the push for rape victims to be seen as more than sexual pawns who tempted and sexually enticed a horny offender.

@ bolded. Citation needed.


Some researchers say a lot of things, but mostly I see this out of the mostly misguided, imo, evo psych. Evolutionary psychologists like to argue that rape is natural. Some, though not all, are careful to condemn it at the same time. Evolutionary psychologists are also incredibly unscientific by specifically selecting the behavior of other animals and comparing it to humans and then attempting to apply motivations based on evolutionary success. I've not seen anything out of evo. psych. that I'd consider valid. The Rationally Thinking podcast addresses many of the issues I have with the quasi-field.

There is a sexual component to rape by the nature of the act, but that isn't the same thing as saying it's about sex. Many rapists are also having consensual sex. Many rapists rape someone with whom they regularly have consensual sex, or have in the past. Elderly women, children who are raped/molested by non-pedophiles* and so on.

AA's rant was absolutely nonsensical to me on every ground, and any satire was lost by the focus on the guy not being able to get any and the reduction of men to their penises. It did more to excuse rape than 'satirically' call it out.

That and the fact she responded to the wrong reply.

The problem that I have with your logic / rationale is that you are putting adult women on the level of children - people who are incapable of fully protecting themselves.

I never suggested that the guy can and should get away with it.

What I'm saying is that as women we may have to exercise a little more judgment than men. That is to say use some common sense too.

If a girl at a party gets drunk and goes upstairs with a guy, what does she anticipate will happen? That he is going to do her taxes?

As long as you put drole at that level, you'll save yourself some time.

@ Drolefille

No, not only (psychologists and) evolutionary psychologists take that approach. While I consider rape to be about control and domination, I also have extensive knowledge of the limited rape as sexual fulfillment literature and research. The rape as power and domination research (not just theory pieces) is also relatively limited.

I don't necessarily agree with the rape as sex perspective and am quick to tell people "rape is about power." However, my response is after having read the "rape as sexual fulfillment" literature and agreeing with some components of it.

Rapists are like any other motivated offender in that there are different theories and research findings about why motivated offenders do what they do. There is much less research about why rapists do what they do than there is about why other offenders do what they do. Agree or disagree, whether rape is motivated by power, sex, or a combination of both is not a closed debate. All of these issues warrant continued discussion and research for further knowledge and understanding. So, yes, "some researchers say a lot of things" and I welcome all of this research and discussion regardless of whether I personally agree with all of it.

*****
For people who want to read some of the literature on both rape as motivated by power and rape as motivated by sex:

(1) Some consider these two books to be the main originators of the rape as power perspective:

(a) A. Nicholas Groth and H. Jean Birnbaum. 1979. Men Who Rape: The Psychology of the Offender.

(b) Susan Brownmiller. 1975. Against Our Will: Men, Women and Rape.


(2) Christopher Jarvis. 2004. Rape Myth Acceptance and Rape Proclivity. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19: 4, p. 427.

(3) Patricia Smith. Rape and Equal Protection. 1956-Hypatia. 19:2. Spring 2004, pp. 152-157 (Review).

(4) KK Baker. 1999. Sex, Rape, and Shame. Boston University Law Review. 79:3. p. 663.

(5) James Tedeschi and Richard B. Felson. 1994. Violence, Aggression, and Coercive Actions. American Psychological Association.

Good question. I was the pledge trainer and evidently someone thought it would be funny. It was not and there was hell to pay. I never did find out exactly who did it but I blamed them all and they all suffered for it.

EMS even asked my girlfriend if I was capable of making it back. It was that bad. She somehow convinced them that I was. I was totally out of the loop when she was walking/dragging me back to the apartment with the help of some brothers. I remember nothing until I set up on the couch and wondered where the hell I was. These type drugs are not funny and are only used/abused by losers. The experience was terrifying and I feel for anyone who has ever been the victim of this type drug and experience. You are totally under the control of the drug and at the mercy of whomever or whatever.

Will do. ;)

In other words, you are talking about victim precipitation (which is NOT synonymous with victim blame) and victimology. Victimology is extensively studied as is offender motivation.

In that case, I agree with you. As long as people know that the average rape is not a result of a victim who chose to get intoxicated or drugged and decided to hang out with potential offenders. And as long as people aren't stuck in "but why did you do that...you should've known better." After we note the instances in which the victim could have made smarter choices, there is a need to move on to determine (whether and) how the alleged perpetrator should be held accountable.

(You aren't saying "boys will be boys" or anything of that sort.)


This really bothers me. I just can't even imagine. This is another example of why both women and men need to be careful and smart. Not everything is preventable but some things are.

I guess... I don't know all the sociology jargon.



No, but I think we need to be honest and admit that they will. Once we acknowledge this, then we as women can be better prepared to defend ourselves.

Nevermind, I was actually giving your perspective more credit than was due. You are saying "boys will be boys." That isn't what victim precipitation and victimology are about.

They won't if people don't act as though it is inevitable. It is all about socialization and what the aggregate allows. Therefore, I as a woman refuse to acknowledge that and am well prepared to defend myself without acknowledging that. I urge other women to be safe and well prepared without acknowledging that nonsense.

"Women protect your rep and guard your vaginas from those crazily unpredictable men who may be rapists!"

OH NOES MEN ARE OUT TO RAPE US!

And there really is no way to insist upon "boys will be boys" without making the primary status of men that of rapist or potential rapits. "Boys will be boys" implies that males are going through life with their balls in their hands and oblivious to anything beyond their balls. As a result, they can intentionally or accidentally become offenders. I feel sorry for them. :( Awwwwwwwww. Poooor babies.

It's funny because sigmadiva said that Drolefille was making women helpless children who can't protect themselves but it's okay for men to be helpless children who can't control themselves. Women need to be the safe adults here, not the men. Ahhhhhhh...this takes me back to my very first post in this thread. It doesn't need to be about "helpless women" or "boys will be boys." Those are extremes on each end of the scale. Instead, the scale should be balanced where both men and women are conscious and accountable.

/redundant

What you said.

Again you're putting the onus on women. This is the equivalent of the "women should wear burqas so as not to incite men to sin/arousal/rape" argument. I mean, you know the guys are going to get aroused if they can see your shoulder, so why not just accept that and cover up?
Thanks for the cites, I'll put them on the list of things to look into in my non-existent spare time. (No sarcasm.)

That said, even though sometimes what I read on the subject "makes sense" that alone isn't enough to convince me that it's scientifically valid. It's a too frequent error in research - like the whole bigger brains = smarter ergo women = dumber belief. Scientists knew it was right, proved it was right, until further research occurred.

Running around in circles on it aside, the example I was responding to fully equated rape with sex and that's what I was responding to.

It was this very "women as victims men, especially fraternity men, as lewd predators" that led to my college's crazy lawsuit and John Stossel coming to campus. Luckily, the PCU-type administrators are gone but I can see how it happens at other schools.

Strictly physically speaking, a man who becomes aroused and doesn't see it through to its conclusion IS going to be far more uncomfortable (for lack of a better word) than a woman who becomes aroused and doesn't see it through. That's simple biology. Young men do not always do a good job of using their brain instead of their hormones.

I honestly think there are a lot of nice, sweet, thoughtful, enlightened guys who end up acting in ways they normally wouldn't because the biological urges are so strong. It truly is impossible for a woman to understand how that feels.

The bolded sounds very strange coming from a woman in the first place.

And my question then is, how do other guys, whether "enlightened" or sexist pigs, seem to manage to avoid acting in those "ways?"

Some men have more willpower than others. Some men have weaker urges than others. I find it bizarre that you don't understand that men and women are biologically different, and that within those two genders are differences. I'm talking about YOUNG men for whom all this is relatively new.

I'm sure there are guys who went out on a date with a girl never intending to exert any sort of pressure who ended up doing so because of their physical urges. If you don't understand that, you must not have dated males in high school or college. Then again, you said you didn't like going to mixers and pretty much looked down your nose at them, so maybe you didn't.

But NONE of this applies to the original post and giving someone a freakin' roofie. Or what fraternities have to do with it.