News It Isn’t Rape If She Was Drunk, Take 5,187
posted by December 7 at 13:04 PMon
This time in Britain, where a survey reveals that a majority of jurors “appear to believe that it is reasonable for a man to assume that a woman’s silence amounts to consent, even if it is due to her intoxication.”
From the Times:
The research, conducted with simulated juries because of the prohibition on jury research, also indicated that juries hold a drunken victim partially responsible for what happens.
This is either because she accepted drinks from the defendant, failed to stand her ground against pressure to drink more or did not take adequate care to ensure that her drinks were not spiked.
Even when a woman had unknowingly consumed a spiked drink, juries were reluctant to convict defendants of rape, unless they were convinced that the drink had been spiked with the specific intention of sexual assault, as opposed to “loosening up” a reluctant partner.
Another finding was that jurors were less inclined to see “taking advantage” of a drunken woman as rape in situations where the woman’s normal behaviour was to drink heavily in the company of men.
When I start to despair about the situation here in the US (where as recently as two months ago a judge ruled that a woman cannot withdraw consent for sex, no matter what happens after she has agreed), I can always look to Britain, where troglodyte attitudes about women remain very much in the mainstream.