Someone (I don’t remember who now…my apologies) linked to this opinion piece earlier today:

The message of Emily Yoffe’s Slate article about binge drinking and sexual assault on college campuses was as important as it was obvious: The best step that young women can take to protect themselves is to stop drinking to excess.

Young women everywhere — not to mention their mothers — ought to be thanking Yoffe. Instead, she’s being pilloried.

Read the whole thing, but the gist is that feminists are up in arms that someone had the audacity to tell young women that they should make some attempt at remaining lucid when out in public to prevent bad things from happening to them.

Of course the whole “you’re blaming the victim” trope was bandied about (and even continued into the comments of the linked opinion piece) as well as “in stead of telling women not to drink, how about we tell men not to rape”, etc.

Good idea.

Because telling people not to commit crimes is so effective in other areas, right?

The bottom line is that we are as responsible for our actions as the perpetrators of crimes are. If we make it easy for them to ply their trade, it is not our fault that they chose to commit a crime, but it is our fault that we made it easy for them.

The bottom line is that bad people are going to do bad things…heck sometimes even basically good people do bad things when under the influence of large amounts of alcohol, especially teenagers and especially in packs.

In light of that fact, you can either strongly support the prosecution of those who take advantage of women who have imbibed too much…which ensures the blame is placed in the right place and the perpetrator is punished, but does absolutely nothing to “unrape” the victim.


You can strongly support the advising of potential victims to take a little responsibility for themselves, keep their wits about them and prevent the rape from happening in the first place.

(or both, which would be my preference)

Which do you suppose is more beneficial for the intended victim?

Apparently, much like the anti-gun lobby, rabid feminists aren’t overly concerned with actually preventing crimes against women, only with effectively exploiting those victims after the crimes occur.


5 thoughts on “Responsibility

  1. So when young women get drunk and do stupid things they are victims and have no responsibility for making bad choices and when young men get drunk and do stupid things and make bad choices they are predators. I don’t quite buy this.

  2. I don’t quite get where your going here.

    If you’re saying that a woman who gets drunk and then chooses to have sex while under the influence is responsible for her actions, I wholeheartedly agree…and I think that a good number of “rape” cases that are reported after a night of drinking may have involved just that.

    However, if you’re saying that a woman who gets drunk and is incoherent or passed out…who becomes incapable of consenting to or refusing sex, and a guy takes advantage of that situation by using her without her consent is not a victim, then I’d say you’re wrong.

    She is responsible for her actions in that if she hadn’t gotten so drunk, she probably wouldn’t have been raped in the first place, but the guy who had sex with her without consent is guilty of rape and she is a victim. Plain and simple.

  3. What I got from James is that if women get a pass on responsibility because of alcohol then men should share that pass equally.

    It won’t happen since men are evil patriarchs. And I doubt any of us would want to live in a society like that. But that’s what we’re building if we are consistent. The good news (?) is that the last thing we are is consistent.

    I think Alice’s hole to Wonderland is nearby.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.