To Prevent Rape on College Campuses, Focus on the Rapists, Not the Victims

[Bonobo]

The problem isn't blaming the victim as much as not recognizing rape as rape.



Almost no one in our DU community actually blames the victims.

The problem is that certain behaviors that ARE rape are not recognized as such because of the side-issue of alcohol involvement. Some men may think themselves excused because they were drunk and some women may mistakenly think that it was not rape because they were drunk. Alcohol should not affect rape as being recognized for what it is. A woman that is passed out drunk cannot consent. This is unambiguous and cannot be contested. If this and this alone were recognized by everyone, a MASSIVE number of rapes would be prosecuted when they are not now. This message should be stated loud and clear by everyone.

Campus rape is a big problem because college kids are in a sort of bubble world where police and campus security are mixed up and where there are lots of parties and risky behaviors such as drugs going on. There are too many young men that think that alcohol confuses the issue of consent. A "no" is a "no" whether alcohol is involved or not.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2013/10/16/it_s_the_rapists_not_the_drinking_to_prevent_sexual_assault_on_college_campuses.html
--------------------------------
Rape is a societal problem, not a self-help issue. Parents can tell their own daughters not to get drunk, but even if those women follow instructions, it won’t keep other people’s daughters safe. It will just force campus rapists who rely on alcohol to execute their crimes to find other targets. As Yoffe notes, the research of David Lisak suggests that most rapes are committed by a small group of predators who claim a large number of victims. We can prevent the most rapes on campus by putting our efforts toward finding and punishing those perpetrators, not by warning their huge number of potential victims to skip out on parties.

Furthermore, while a striking number of college assaults occur while both victims and perpetrators are intoxicated, rape has been a popular tool for subjugating women long before they joined in the “butt-chugging” craze. According to the Department of Justice’s National Crime Victimization Survey—which surveys Americans ages 12 and older about crime they’ve experienced, whether or not they reported it to the authorities—rape has declined markedly in the United States since 1979, even as female binge drinking has risen. That suggests that something other than a youthful appetite for Jäger bombs has shifted in this country—mainly, that women have made significant gains in educational attainment, economic independence, and sexual agency since the '70s. As public policy researchers Amy Farmer and Jill Tiefenthaler note, intimate partner violence declines “as women’s alternatives outside their relationships improve” and they’re “able to achieve self-sufficiency in the long-run.”* Interpreting Title IX to include sexual violence on campus as a form of discrimination against women didn’t hurt.

Colleges can start changing those structures by refusing to put the onus on victims to prevent their own assaults and instead holding perpetrators accountable for the crimes they commit—often, while drunk. Wayne State University psychologist Antonia Abbey notes that one study of college date rapists found that 62 percent “felt they had committed rape because of their alcohol consumption.” They “believed that their intoxicated condition caused them to initially misperceive their partner’s degree of sexual interest and later allowed them to feel comfortable using force when the women’s lack of consent finally became clear to them.” Importantly, the rapists “did not see themselves as ‘real’ criminals because real criminals used weapons to assault strangers.”

This belief isn’t just shared among perpetrators; when you tweet that you are “warning young women that there are rapists who use alcohol, not violence,” you reinforce the idea that rape does not constitute a violent crime if alcohol is involved. Banishing that idea is central to preventing these crimes. Abbey suggests that in rape cases where the perpetrator has been drinking, alcohol can encourage him to prioritize his “immediate sexual arousal and anger” over the “potential risk of being accused of sexual assault.” Colleges could instruct men to not drink so much, but again, most keg-loving frat boys are not rapists. Colleges can help crack down on sexual assault, Abbey writes, by increasing the “risks” inherent in raping other people. “If the costs of sexual assault are obvious, undesirable and immediate, then intoxication-driven sexual assaults are less likely to occur because the potential perpetrator cannot forget about the likely, undesirable consequences. This suggests that colleges need strong, consistent, well-publicized policies that no one can ignore.”

[Deep13]

1. Affirmative consent is necessary.

The intended partner has no duty to say "no." Granted consent can be performative rather than verbal, but there needs to be some reason to suppose sex is also what she wants too. So someone who is alcohol impaired is off-limits.

[Bonobo]

2. "there needs to be some reason to suppose sex is also what she wants too"

I agree.

And similarly, even if they don't say "no", if there is a sign that it is unwanted, it should also be presumed to be a "no".

[arely staircase]

4. I am in total agreement with affirmative consent being necessary

This is often misunderstood and mocked by those who think that requires some awkward unromantic verbal affirmation at various points. The affirmation can be non verbal.

[jessie04]

8. What happens if the guy is equally drunk ?

Just wondering.

[seabeyond]

9. rape is rape. drunk or sober. rape. jail. nt

[jessie04]

10. Just wondering...can a man be raped?

Not looking to start a fight.

[Cerridwen]

11. 'I never thought I would be a victim'

http://www.theguardian.com/global/2011/apr/04/raped-policeman-colleagues-investigation

Raped policeman: 'I never thought I would be a victim'

A detective investigating sexual assaults was devastated when he himself was raped. But he grew even more angry when police colleagues insisted on investigating the crime. Here he tells his tale anonymously


<snip>

I've been a police officer for two decades and a detective, specialising in serious crime and sexual offences, for 15 years. Never once in all the time I've investigated these horrific crimes has it occurred to me that one day I would be a victim; that I would be raped – and that I would refuse to help the police investigate.

But a couple of weeks ago, I made a series of choices that led to me, a heterosexual man, waking up in a man's bed, trapped underneath him. Being raped. I'm still struggling to come to terms with how, despite my decades of professional experience, I made the choices that led to me being raped. At no point the evening before had I felt at risk. At no point did I think I was making a bad decision.

I also never anticipated using the service the police provide to rape victims. I've always been the one asking the questions. To be on the other side of the table has been a shock – if I investigated a sexual crime now, there are things I would do differently.

<snip to much more at link>

And then there is prison...

[seabeyond]

19. tearing up in this story. almost in the matter of fact, being told... wow. people should read.

My boss was also a friend, so I decided to tell him what had happened. I was clear that I didn't want to make an official report. But he called in two other officers, opened a case file and started an investigation. I was horrified. I said I wouldn't help but they kept saying they had a duty to protect one of their own. I believe they thought they were doing the right thing, but if I'd been any other victim, my wishes would have come foremost. They perhaps felt they could put extra pressure on me because, as a copper, I didn't need the careful handling we give other victims.

I was furious but dumbfounded. The strain on me was – and still is – intense. The sexual abuse team ask me to meetings where they say the same thing, again and again: "We appreciate you don't want to substantiate this allegation but what else can you give us?" Then they say they'll come back to me in a couple of weeks to see if I've changed my mind. This relentless stress means I can't start coming to terms with what's happened to me. I want to sign a closure statement that puts all this behind me. I keep telling them that I'm not refusing to co-operate to be difficult. I tell them repeatedly that I don't want to talk about it because it was horrible and I want it to go away. I want to not think about it any more.

My experience has led me to seriously contemplate whether I or other officers investigating similar serious sexual assaults put undue pressure on victims. Do we push victims to go through the court process? Do we do it for the right reason – because we want to fight crime – but, in doing so, not listen to what the victims are telling us? The pressure my colleagues put on me was conscious – but I think there's a risk that we do it subconsciously in other cases. That worries me deeply.

Another question I've had to ask myself is why, as a police officer, I am not doing everything I can to get my attacker off the streets. But I'm a victim first and a police officer second. I'm not the first victim to decide not to press charges, and I won't be the last. Being a cop means I know the system, and it has scared me off. I know this case would be likely to end in court and, from that point, I couldn't maintain my anonymity. I couldn't cope with the added burden of being a cop as well as a victim.

very good article from both the police perspective as victim.

[KentuckyWoman]

22. recommended the thread for your post

Thanks for that link.

[seabeyond]

12. a man raped? ya. by another man. men rape 98.7% of the time. women the rest. women, mostly

underage. there have been instances of women threatening men in some way, and raping ...

[Iggo]

14. You ever do time?

[uppityperson]

21. Of course they can.

[WowSeriously]

24. A man can also be raped.

[Rex]

32. Not looking for a fight...just asking a rhetorical question?

Sure right...but I have no dog in this hunt either.

[Deep13]

18. So who's the rapist and who is the victim?

Since the law is supposed to be gender neutral, that's a pretty good question. If they were both active participants, then theoretically, they are both guilty. A criminal offense requires a volitional act by the defendant. So if one person is passed-out and the other is active, the active one is guilty. Even though rape requires intent for guilt, voluntary intoxication cannot negate intent.

[Major Nikon]

23. There's a lot of distance between being impaired and passed out

By saying "someone who is alcohol impaired is off-limits" are you saying that consent can't be legally given by someone who is impaired, or are you saying the laws should be changed?

[Deep13]

45. Well, how drunk is too drunk?

What are you willing to role the dice on?

[Major Nikon]

46. I asked you first

Just sayin'

[Deep13]

48. It's a question for the jury.

Twelve ordinary people who don't know anything about anything, but who want to do their civil duty. They'll listen to the experts who will talk about how drunk they both were and the Judge who will tell them that intoxication is no defense, but that it can negate apparent consent. Maybe she'll recant on the stand and the DA will ask why she told the cops she was raped. And then a forensic nurse will explain how victims feel remorseful or ashamed and try to stop the case. And you'll take the stand and tell them how much she wanted it, and you'll come across as a creep, even if you are being truthful. Then on cross, you'll admit to having a couple drinks and admit that she was drinking too, allowing the DA to make it seem like your were both drunk.

If, somehow, you beat the rap, you will have lost your job and your house if you have one. No one wants to employ a rapist, and being unemployed, you won't make your mortgage payments. Either that, or you'll sell it or go into debt to your family for the $50,000 or so in lawyer fees.

So, what are you willing to roll the dice on.

[Major Nikon]

50. It's not something I personally spend a lot of time worrying about

If my wife or I has a drink or two I can assure you neither one of us considers the other off-limits. YMMV.

There is no legal standard for voluntary intoxication that's short of mental or physical incapacitation in any state that I'm aware. So the idea that both could be guilty, theoretical or otherwise seems highly unlikely if not impossible unless you're aware of a state where this is not the case.

[Deep13]

52. As a former appellate prosecutor, I worried about it all the time.

As a practical matter, no one is going to indict for a crime without clear culpability or a clear victim (except for drugs).

[Major Nikon]

53. I see the issue a little differently

I'm not convinced there's a large number of false rape accusations. I see it as a very rare event which is often well publicized when discovered because of the serious ramifications to the accused (which is a good reason why our justice system has so many protections for the accused). Rape is very difficult to prosecute because it generally happens with no witnesses. Quite often, if not most often, it's one person's word against another.

[arely staircase]

3. recommended nt

[In_The_Wind]

5. kicked and recommended

[pnwmom]

6. What happens when two sexual partners are both drunk?

Assume there is no element of force, but there is also no clear consent. Are they each both the rapist and the victim? This situation may be more common than only one partner being drunk . . .

[nomorenomore08]

13. The way I see it, drunk consensual sex is still consensual sex, drunk rape is still rape.

Drunkenness, contrary to what some (not on DU but in society generally) seem to believe, is not de facto consent. Whether a person is sober or intoxicated, obtaining consent is equally necessary. And obviously you can't obtain consent from someone who's un- or barely conscious.

[Nye Bevan]

15. If a woman takes advantage of a man's drunkeness,

and performs any kind of sexual act upon him without his affirmative consent, then she is just as guilty as a man who does the same thing.

Also, if a couple are both drunk, and engage in sex without obtaining the affirmative consent of each other, it is entirely possible for both to be guilty of rape.

[Comrade Grumpy]

27. Your second paragraph is a hypothetical that makes my head hurt.

Is each raping the other while simultaneously being raped by the other?

Judge: "Alright, please be seated. Now, who's the defendant here?"

"The victim, your honor."

"Hmmm," the judge scratches his head. "Well, then, who's the victim?"

"The defendant, your honor."

[Vattel]

29. That can't be right. The one who initiates a particular sex act needs the consent of the other.

So a drunk woman who simply allows penetration without consenting to it is raped, but cannot rape her drunken date. The initiator cannot be raped and there is always an initiator, isn't there?

[Nye Bevan]

31. Think of a drunken couple engaging in "69"

without either party giving affirmative consent. Then the next day they both realize that they truly did not want to engage in such an act, and each was taken advantage of by the other.

Here's another example. A drunken couple passes out on a bed. The man wakes up (still drunk); the woman is passed out, and he has sex with her, then he drinks some more beer and goes back to sleep. A couple of hours later the woman wakes up; the man is passed out but she nevertheless performs a sexual act on him. Can anyone seriously argue here that both the man and the woman are not guilty of rape?

[Vattel]

38. Your second case works, but that is only because there are two separate sexual acts.

The man rapes the woman and then a couple hours later the woman rapes the man. Sure, that is possible. Your first case is more problematic. If I were a juror, I would have a hard time convicting a person A of rape if the alleged victim B willingly initiated and enthusiastically performed oral sex on A at the same time as A was performing oral sex on B without receiving B's express consent. If B explicitly said, "No just let me go down on you. I don't want you to go down on me," then I would be more torn, but I would still have a hard time voting for a guilty verdict in that sort of case.

[pnwmom]

43. I wasn't discussing the case of someone who is passed out.

I was discussing the possibility of someone who is drunk enough not to be able to give legal consent, but not so drunk s/he can't cooperate in the activities.

[pnwmom]

42. No, there isn't always an "initiator," in my opinion.

Two people can be equally involved in commencing to have sex. But if they're both drunk, then, technically, neither can give proper consent.

[Vattel]

44. I see. Interesting position. I am not sure what to think, but your view seems plausible.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

35. I think you've crossed a bridge too far on that one.

[Cerridwen]

16. What was their relationship before?

Romantic? Engaged to be married? Room mates? Significant others? Study buddies? Strangers? Cell mates?

What?

Context helps and, as old gingrich told us, context and language matters.

[Nye Bevan]

17. Irrelevant.

It used to be believed that there was no such thing as a husband raping a wife (for example) but those days are over.

[pnwmom]

26. So if two drunk people have sex with each other, without obtaining

affirmative consent, they are both rapists? Should they both be charged?

[Nye Bevan]

33. Two wrongs don't make a right (nt)

[Gravitycollapse]

25. That is an extremely tricky situation and I'm not sure anyone has a clear answer.

Even after years of consideration I haven't been able to come to a meaningful conclusion on the subject of sex between two drunk people.

[redgreenandblue]

37. As a person who grew up around a lot of teenage drinking and burning down:

The issue is a lot less complicated than it seems. When we were teenagers alcohol was often used as a pretext to make out (this was promoted by both genders). Even then, there were boundaries that one wouldn't cross, and they were usually obvious to everyone. Kind of a "you know it when you see it" type of thing.

[Gravitycollapse]

41. As someone who's had drunk sex with a drunk person, it is as complicated as it seems.

Pretty much everyone grew up around teenage drinking and sex.

[NuclearDem]

28. The way I handle it:

If the other person I've known for a while and have discussed the topic, then go by what the two of us have decided.

If it's not someone I know or someone I haven't discussed drunk sex with, then just avoid doing it at all. Exchange numbers and see if they're still interested in talking once we're both sober.

[one_voice]

7. k&r

[Niceguy1]

20. that is a good idea

along with teaching people to avoid risky dangerous situations would b beneficial

[Vattel]

30. I think colleges need to do more

to emphasize to college males that because drunkenness impairs judgment, the drunk male is more likely to misinterpret a situation and so believe that consent is present when it is not.

[pnwmom]

36. Good idea. But if he was too drunk to give consent

was he raped, too?

[Major Nikon]

51. The data suggests that a criminal mindset is the biggest part of the problem

When you have a large number of repeat offenders, this tells me misinterpretation is not the bulk of the problem. The problem seems to be criminals who don't care if consent is present or not and are preying on the most vunerable people they can find.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124272157

[NoOneMan]

34. Good read

I went to a college where rape wasn't even grounds for expulsion. That's clearly not going to help the situation

[etherealtruth]

39. I think many of us did ...

... the universities simply didn't want to deal with it (at least back"in the day&quot

[Dash87]

40. Nothing's changed, especially if they're on a sports team.

[Lost_Count]

47. I think we should be interested in the one that prevents the most rape...

[seabeyond]

49. ?