UVA and the alleged frat rape - Rolling Stone backpedals

What do you base that on? Scenarios such as the one you presented are not rape or attempted rape. They could be a chain of events leading up to an attempt.

Are there incidents in which both parties were drinking or under the influence of drugs and the woman did not say no, but still technically did not give consent and those end up in that statistic? That is certainly possible. Again, I'm not sure of the criteria used in compiling that statistic.

 

A breakdown of where the 1-in-5 statistic came from: '1 in 5': how a study of 2 colleges became the most cited campus sexual assault statistic - Vox

 

Giving consent when one is not in a condition to give consent is not consent.

Too drunk, too young, too high, etc.

 

Another question regarding that survey is how many of the "some form of rape, attempted or completed" occurred while Darren Sharper was in town?

 

Other than a case where a roofie is involved, who's fault is the "too drunk" or "too high"?

 

The interpretation of the data whence came the "one in five" finding(s) is really where the trouble is. As many (e.g., OOP) have noted, "rape" is not the same as "sexual assault" -- all rapes are sexual assaults but not all sexual assaults are rapes. Yet in the reporting of (and advocacy based on) these studies, rape and sexual assault get treated as the same. Further, college-age women can be sexually assaulted/raped when they are not technically in college. Yet the finding that, say, one-in-X college women is sexually assaulted is interpreted as, while at college there's a one-in-X chance a woman will be sexually assaulted.

 

Good question. My own opinion is a bit conflicted, but my understanding of the law is that a man can be held responsible if the woman is too drunk or too high to give consent.

 

A woman should be able to get as drunk as she wants without having to worry about getting raped.

It doesn't magically become her fault once she's finished her fifth drink, even if, gasp, she decided of her own volition to get drunk in the first place.

There's no reason in the world why a "reasonable person could deduce..." legal standard shouldn't apply.

 

Thanks for posting that. So the statistic probably isn't perfect and it was sexual assaults or attempted sexual assaults, not rapes. (To be fair, President Obama got that part right.)

The article also points out another study that has 13 percent of women being sexually assaulted during their college years. So what would attempts be? 15 percent? Still way too damn high.

 

I agree, MC, but rape isn't what's at issue. What's at issue is that, given the expansive contemporary definition(s) of sexual assault, two people can be equally incapacitated and yet only one of them is typically seen as responsible.

 

So what if she's drunk and grabbing a guy's junk in a bar? Then he grabs her ass? Do you think he should be charged and not her?