pelican,

'I agree responsibility does by cultural standards rest with the man'

Thank you. That's all I'm sayin'. And we are talking about responsibility here. But, as the suzeonlines of this world go, any mention of responsibility in regards to sex = blaming the victim and stating 'she asked for it' to rape victims.

I'm not saying rape cases based on two paralytic drunk people having sex has likelihood of success or false accusations are abundant, but my points are about the perpetuation of stereotypes via these type of laws not on the practicalities.

The law encourages women not to take any responsibility for their sexual ethics; ie: 'I don't wish see myself as a slut, so I will drink myself into a stupor as a defence mechanism so I can more freely be sexually assertive and adventurous'. But the man ends up being shunted with all the responsibility and all of the risk as a result. And the law encourages this. It's unethical.

It turns men into the keepers of women. Women are adults, and can decide to have sex when blind drunk just as men can. They can also say 'no'. We have laws that suggest they have no responsibility for their sexual behaviour when drunk, and that it's their partner's responsibility to gauge their intoxication level, and to check with them constantly through the act for consent rather than give women responsibility for objecting or saying no.

You have to wonder why feminists support the entrenchment of a paternalistic system of gender relations rather than a rejection of this. Young women should be encouraged to be sexually assertive in the first place when they want sex, and to be an adult when taking responsibility for their decisions and communicating their consent when drunk. Men are held to these standards!

But the Nina Funnells of this world are out their preaching to men about THEIR sexual ethics in this environment where THEY are burdened with all this responsibility FOR women, and encouraging laws to go even further towards a society that treats women like children.

vanna I attended both Griffith and QUT and didn't get any anti-male lectures. Maybe if I'd been doing subject's with some gender studies elements in them but the bulk of students were not doing those courses. The closest I saw was a flier for a scholarship where the eligibility criteria seemed to be everyone except white hetrosexual male's born in Australia and the proverbial gay whales. Given there were only a few scholarships actually on offer not a big issue.

Not every thread is about university accademics. Step back a bit and engage with the topic from a different angle .

The whole obsession with what universities people attended (or work in) does not help.

Have another read of squeers last post and think about what was said in that post. I don't follow the mentioned writers but the basic premise is an important one and worth discussing.

R0bert

Robert,
Walk into any city nightclub on a Friday or Saturday night, and you will find more drunken women than you can count.

Normally they are dressed to specifically attract male attention, with very low cut dresses and their bottoms hanging out at the other end.

If she wakes up the next morning feeling hung over, she is likely to feel guilty and wants retribution.

The training for many women is to always consider a male as to blame, so she is likely to blame a male for getting drunk.

Where does this training originate?

It originates in the media and in the schools and universities.

Pelican

It is nice that you can draw a distinction between discussing forseeable risks and blaming victims. Some people are so obsessed with finding evidence of blaming the victim that they see it in all sorts of comments. One consequence of this has been that most members of our society carefully construct all descriptions of rape to make her look as victim-like as possible and make him look as evil as possible, thereby feeding an inaccurate stereotype of rape. We need to discuss grey rape, so that both parties can recognise the potential for rape and are careful enough about getting and communicating consent.

Every discussion about rape gets side tracked into this debate over blaming victims and personal responsibilities. Some people look so hard for evidence of victim blaming that they are certain to find it. I acknowledge that the perception of victim blaming is an emotive issue and that people need to choose words carefully. However, it is quite difficult to have these discussions if some people continually twist the words of others.

Thanks for considering my post, RObert.
I have a biography by a neuroscientist, Jill Bolte Taylor, who had a stroke in the left hemisphere of the brain, rendering her "languageless". She recovered and had good recall of the experience and that's what the memoir's about.
"I stopped thinking in language [she says] and ... was not capable of deliberating about past or future-related ideas because those cells were incapacitated. All I could perceive was right here, right now, and it was beautiful".
"I felt suspended between two worlds, caught between two perfectly opposite planes of reality".
In Buddhist vein she later opines that, enlightenment is not a process of learning, but of unlearning.
There's no doubt in my mind that the trappings of language, of practical social consciousness, are too easily taken as definitive constructs, reified-reality, in other words. The real world, "outside of the text", that we miss out on, cannot be the subject of gossip. As Lacan says, the real is that which cannot be represented.
A little off topic, but given your background, Jennifer, I'd be interested in any thoughts you might have on the subject?

Vanna,
sorry about all the name-dropping..
did I mention Derrida, Heideggar or Bhaskar btw?

I'm starting to wish I hadn't let all this stuff between me and reality!

Benk
"However, it is quite difficult to have these discussions if some people continually twist the words of others."

Well that is your perception. It does happen on both sides of the gender debate at times, I think it is usually down to miscommunication rather than any 'malicious' intent.

Jennifer/Houlley

I have two daughters and of course as a parent you teach your children about risky behaviours and taking precautions but in real life sh!t sometimes happen. Yes teach girls about protecting themselves from these situations, but the burden of responsibility sits not only with girls but with everybody.

Basically if we all treat each other with respect and behave honourably without taking advantage of another's vulnerability (men can also be vulnerable to attacks on their person) we may develop into a better society. (Ignoring for a moment those grey areas discussed earlier)

It may be that what is needed is a clearer legal definition of rape to cover certain circumstances - it will be messy and I am not a legal expert but there must be some way of continuing to push the message. I don't know how it could be done with absolute fairness - those grey areas can be tricky when both partners are intoxicated or where there is some regret later (but no rape) or downright false accusations. The media tends to focus a lot on false accusations but in reality I would say this is rare compared to legitimate accusations of rape. In truth most rapes do not lead to convictions especially when it is a she said/he said situation.

I don't know what the solution is but Jennifer is quite right when she talks about women taking responsibility for themselves in terms of being in safe situations - as parents we really need to stress these behaviours. But youth are youth - we can only hope the message is heard and heeded.