drunk nun with bottle of red wine

Tara Culp-Ressler: Man & woman have drunk sex, he’s a ‘rapist’ and she’s a ‘victim’

James Taranto has written a piece for the Wall Street Journal that is the epitome of common sense. Of course it has been purposefully misconstrued by chattering radical feminists.

Taranto writes about sex partners who engage in mutually reckless drunken sex; that is, both parties are intoxicated and mutually decide, in their drunken states, to have sex.Taranto says it is unjust to hold only the man responsible when two drunks mutually decide to have sex.

And this is controversial, how?

It’s not. To label one drunk who decides to have sex a “victim” while labeling the other drunk who decides to have sex a “rapist” — based solely on the genders of the drunks — is something out of “Mad Men.” In Taranto’s scenario, the male is every bit as much a rape “victim” as the female, and the female is every bit as much a “rapist” as the male. Taranto wasn’t talking about a man who decides to rape an incapacitated woman, Taranto was talking about mutually stupid drunken sex. Period.

Taranto’s take is common sense, people. Only someone dishonest, stupid, or insane could disagree.

Cue Tara Culp-Ressler.

“In a Wall Street Journal column published on Monday,” Culp-Ressler writes, “conservative commentator James Taranto argued that a ‘balanced’ approach to the college sexual assault crisis involves placing equal blame on rapists and their victims, if both of them were drinking alcohol.”

What the hell are you talking about, Culp-Ressler?

Culp-Ressler can’t respond to Taranto’s piece, so she rewrites it. She twists and pounds it beyond recognition. She holds it up to a funhouse mirror. I haven’t seen so much straw man since Dorothy met Ray Bolger on the yellow brick road.

Culp-Ressler has deigned to label the participants “rapist” and “victim” based solely on their genders and nothing more. In Taranto’s scenario, that’s the only thing that differentiates them — their genders. Is this what feminism is — a man and a woman engage in precisely the same conduct, and one party is is a felon, and the other is a victim, based solely on their genders?

Shades of Milton Academy. Remember that? Teen boys and a girl all commit what could be construed as statutory rape — but only the boys were charged. The boys were forced to mouth humiliating apologies to the girl and her family in open court. The brilliant Prof. Alan M. Dershowitz said this: ”The idea that these youngsters should be branded rapists and the girl should be labeled a victim is preposterous,” he said.

And they actually wonder why so few people – including so few women — identify as feminist? It is pieces like Culp-Ressler’s that engender disrepute of this tired movement.

 

Editorial note: This article is reprinted from COTWA (Community of the Wrongly Accused). COTWA is a valuable resource for anyone facing false accusations of rape and is devoted to equal justice under law.–DD

  • The Real Peterman

    I just don’t get. Being drunk means a woman can’t make decisions, but a man can? Bizarre.

    • donzaloog

      Men have agency no matter what their mental or physical condition is. Women don’t, according to feminists. More ideally, feminists feel women should be allowed to throw off their agency whenever it suits them. Women are powerful and independent but also victims that need constant pampering.

      • captive

        This isn’t just a feminist thing – everyone believes that in a situation where two drunk people consent to sex – a man has raped someone. That’s prima facie nonsense, but the fact that feminists want to deny the point over and over and over and over and over and that they’re not willing to assent on this issue that women are capable of making their own choices when they drink and taking responsibility for them, just like men, means that there is a tremendous conspiracy of misandry in place.

        The reason for this is, of course, that 75% of the statistics for rape would have to be thrown out in an instant because 75% of them are based around women denying responsibility for their choices when they drink. The proportion of actual rapes where violence, intentional drugging of the victim, or any other form of intentional rape is a very small proportion compared to the “I got drunk and hooked up with a guy” proportion.

        • SlantyJaws

          This isn’t just a feminist thing – everyone believes that in a situation where two drunk people consent to sex – a man has raped someone.

          What? No they don’t. It very much is a feminist thing.

          • http://gloriusbastard.com/ JJ

            Time will tell; I left this question on the article, and I doubt the author will answer:

            To the author.

            I have a question for you.

            In Europe, I had a male friend of mine who was drunk. He was very drunk, but able to walk, and stubbornly refuse to allow me to drive him home.

            Cue our mutual female friend, also military, who offered to “take him home.”

            He called me the next morning, though I had fought him not to go, wondering why I did not stop him and let that women have sex with him.

            Whose at fault?

            I bet you will say it is his own fault right? And I would agree with you. So why do you woman get a free pass?

            According to you, if the role was reversed, I was at fault for not forcing said woman back to base, and smacking said dude who tried to take her home. Yet, when a woman “rapes a man by envelopment” it is a funny joke. A real brouhaha.

            So, what’s your take, was he raped? He was drunk, and not sober enough to give consent. Yet she had sex with him.

            I wait with held breath for a response.

        • https://www.youtube.com/user/KopperNeoman Christopher Wedge

          People believe it because that’s what feminists tell them.
          And all feminism does is wall itself up as a stopper against social progress – holding in the gynocentric dark ages like a particularly lazy Snorlax on a bridge half it’s size.

    • Sammich Heist
  • toothless

    What i like to ask these is ; if 2 women have drunk sex together, in the morning both claim to have been raped who is the aggressor and who is the victim?

    This show the huge gaping hole in that logic.

    • Katsuni

      Neither, they’re both victims. It’s impossible for a woman to do anything wrong, but they’re both in a perpetual state of victimhood.

      I dunno, I find alcohol magical – if a guy is drunk and the woman’s sober, he raped her. If the woman is drunk and the guy is sober, he raped her. If both the guy and the woman are drunk, he raped her. Apparently alcohol magically removes absolutely all capacity for a woman to think, but a guy can be passed out unconscious and drooling, yet still be capable of making educated decisions.

      Somehow, a drunk man has more mental faculties at his disposal than a sober woman.

      How is this not an insult to the intelligence of all women?

      Feminism: The #1 misogynistic ideology out there, proclaiming all women are brain-dead retarded monkeys since the 70’s.

    • The Real Peterman

      Impossible. Men rape because our patriarchal society teaches them it’s alright. So it’s not possible for a woman to rape another woman.

    • Jotty

      Pfft. Obviously they were both raped by the guy(s) who didn’t stop them from drinking.

      Or the guy(s) that sold them the alcohol.

      Or the guy(s) that originally brewed the alcohol.

      It’s always a guy’s fault. Always.

      • http://beijaflorbeyondthesunset.wordpress.com Rick Westlake

        “Cherchez l’homme.”

        (The original phrase, from Alexandre Dumas, was “Cherchez la femme.” It got to be a pulp-fiction meme – the idea that no matter the problem, a woman was at the root of it. Obviously a construct of the Pay-tree-ar-keeee, so now it must be translated into the misandric tense.)

    • animatefire

      The patriarchy.

  • Mark Trueblood

    This is an honest recreation of a dialogue I had on this issue with a friend who identifies as a feminist:

    Me: Feminism routinely denies female moral and sexual agency.

    Her: No it doesn’t. Feminism tells women to take responsibility for those things.

    Me: Let me give you an example. Feminists say that if a man and a woman are both drunk and have sex, he raped her, because women can’t consent under the influence.

    Her: That’s not feminism, that’s patriarchy. Patriarchy says that women are weak and can’ make their own decisions.

    Me: *Sends links to feminists advocating the position I said they did*

    Her: Some women are unwittingly helping the Patriarchy, but they aren’t feminists.

    Me: They’re not feminists? But they work for ____ and have ____ degrees and have written ____. *sends more links as reference*

    Her: They’re not real feminists because feminism advocates that women take responsibility for themselves.

    Me: *Metaphorically beating my own head on desk repeatedly*

    • Katsuni

      It’s interesting how they’re “not real feminists”. The leaders of the feminist movement, the ones who make the laws and organize the rallies are not “real” feminists.

      You might want to point out that the people in charge are the ones who dictate what feminism is and isn’t, not the random little people who want it to be something it isn’t.

      Feminism isn’t egalitarianism, no matter how hard you close your eyes and cross your fingers.

      • Mark Trueblood

        Subsequently, I have had other discussions with her and she has conceded that “some” feminists are bad but they don’t represent “real” feminism.

        • Katsuni

          Try running it this way:

          If the pope says you have to believe in Christ to be a true Catholic Christian, then some random nobody on the street says “Fuck Christ, I’m Catholic and the entire priesthood is wrong.”, who’s right? (Hint, it’s not the random nobody)

          The fact of the matter is, it’s the people who run the show who dictate what an ideology is or isn’t. If you disagree, then you’re not a member of that ideology, you’re a member of a completely different ideology and just mislabeling yourself out of ignorance.

          Which is more likely? That you made a mistake in labeling yourself, or every single member of the leadership made a mistake in what they believe?

          Common sense, GET YOU SOME!

          • Kimski

            Excellent analogy.

          • nawotsme

            To feminists

            Acts of misogyny are the sins, eg catcalling

            To question the institutional structure as Taranto has is blasphemy

            And to reject the ideology itself is heresy.

        • patricio

          In my experience, a feminist uses the tag “not a real feminist” when they disagree with the other feminist, and if you are a man, you are simply a “misogynist”.
          One of the very large list of problems with feminism is that they don’t agree with each other at almost anything, and the worst is that they don’t try to figure out which one is right.
          The perfect recipe to not solving anything and complain a lot.

          • Andy Bob

            Feminists all agree that we live in a patriarchy. They all agree that men have oppressed all women throughout history. They all believe that we live in a rape culture that enables and encourages rape. They all believe that criticizing feminism of any kind is an act of misogyny. They all believe there is a wage gap in which women are paid less than men simply because they are women. .

            These are the central tenets of feminism. All feminists believe these bigoted lies. If a feminist tries to pretend that this isn’t true, demand they prpve it by producing examples of feminists who have challenged them – any of them. Can’t do it? That’s because when all is said and done, all feminists essentially believe the same things – they just quibble over a few little details.

            The most satisfying way to argue with a feminist – if not, perhaps, the most edifying or academically sound – is to begin by declaring that every word that comes out of her mouth will either be a lie, or an example of shaming language (explain what this is if you need to). Then just wait for them to start lying and shaming, which wil happen immediately. It can be quite amusing how quickly they resort to shaming language the moment they get called on their lies. Be sure to debate them in front of witnesses because violence is their other go-to tactic.

            Shaming, violence and lies are all they have. Don’t be intimidated to expose them.

      • BenJames

        Just like Stalin and Mao weren’t ‘real’ soclialists. either.

        unfortunately for women, ‘Feminism’ has been poisoned beyond all recognition – into an ugly hate idealology: you can no longer cling to the term with statements ‘not all feminists are like that’… its tantamount to saying not all communist or Facsits are like that. Whether they like it or not, their movement has been stolen from them and is now irredeemable under that name.

    • Odin

      Good old True Scotsman.

      • giantsandwarfs

        Haha. “You call THAT a feminist?”. NTS is often the last refuge of someone cornered in an argument.

        • captive

          To be fair, I’m inclined to agree with the idea that “I was drunk and don’t want to take responsibility for my actions” has nothing to do with the vast majority of feminist theory. I honestly think it’s a “mind-control” thing cooked up by someone else.

          Some sort of “Midnight Climax” eliminate culturally subversive males plot. But, to be fair, there are a number of feminists who will argue that women are not in fact responsible for their choices when they drink.

    • Kimski

      “Me: *Metaphorically beating my own head on desk repeatedly*”

      I’m sure you know by now, that if you proceed with pushing the issue by pointing out that because she *feels* someone is not a “real feminist”, it in no way equates the reality of said person actually being a “real feminist”, (i.e. the emotional perception of reality versus the really real world the rest of us live in), the outcome will be hissy fits, outright anger, possible but likely threats of (proxy) violence, followed up by tears from feeling unfairly treated.

      I tried it once with a friend with the same stance as yours, and even went beyond the point of her crying instead of banging my head against the wall, (which would have been a far more rational response, I agree), and she actually ended up threatening me with suicide if I continued.

      I lost her as a friend, of course, but gained an invaluable insight in feminist based “reasoning”, that I wouldn’t have gone without:
      Even the NAFALT’s and “I’m not that kind of feminist” are fucking crazy to some extend, if you just keep applying the necessary amount of logic to any kind of gender discussion with them. That’s how predominant the illusion and borderline religious belief system of “feminist equality” are in most of them, which sometimes makes me wonder if we’re dealing with some kind of self-inflicted autism here, ’cause the reactions are pretty much the same.

      • Mark Trueblood

        Oh I know. I’ve even been told by a feminist that everything I say is true but things will never change so I should just give up.

      • https://www.youtube.com/user/KopperNeoman Christopher Wedge

        Self inflicted autism?
        Pretty sure you meant some kind of denial, or narcissism. Completely different disorders.

        • Kimski

          No, I didn’t.
          Have you ever witnessed the behavior of an autistic individual when things are not done exactly the way he or she are used to?
          Same kind of reaction, IMO.

    • Usagi Yojimbo

      Put it simply for the feminist twit:

      “Yes, they are real feminists. YOUR feminists. YOU own them. Now, admit that your movement hates men, robs women of will to power, OR get out of the way so we can effect real change and freedom.”

      And when they point out people who advocate men’s rights that advocate violence against someone, say:

      “Yes, they exist. But we as a movement don’t let them have the power to cause change, and we won’t let them. It’s called policing your own house. YOUR movement lets these people that advocate violence not only have power, not only teach impressionable young minds in higher education, but have political power to carry out their misandric agenda. So, you either get these crazy people out of power, or you are part of the EXCAT SAME HATRED-FILLED-KILL-90%-OF-THE-MEN FEMINISM THEY ARE.”

      We have got to keep the everyday feminist from squirming out of things with that excuse. I have been trying to find a way to nail it like an Amish barn. I think I may have.

  • crydiego

    All alcohol containers should have warning labels to inform men of the dangers! “Warning! Consentual sex after a women drinks alcohol is rape.

    • Katsuni

      Warning, consentual sex after a woman drinks alcohol is rape.
      Warning, consentual sex after a man drinks alcohol is rape.
      Warning, consentual sex after both parties drink alcohol is rape.
      Warning, a woman who drives while drunk is still at fault, even if she wouldn’t be if she had sex.
      Warning, alcohol may impair judgement of both the user and the legal system.

      • http://www.imnotamensrightsactivistbut.wordpress.com Isaac T. Quill

        Can these be memed please!

  • giantsandwarfs

    The level of dishonesty is striking. If you google-news “James Taranto”, the headline of nearly every feminist response is something along the lines of “rapist and victim should share responsibility, says Taranto”, thus grossly misrepresenting his position, which is that both parties are willing participants in the hypothetical scenario he describes.

    • Kimski

      Yes, but one of the participants just got stuck with personal responsibility of choices, and that’s apparently “oppressive” to those who can’t handle it.

      Here’s an idea:
      Remove the ability for women to buy or get served alcohol in all social spheres, and then ask them which of the two kinds of “oppression” they think is worse, if they have to choose one of them.
      That should make up for a pretty interesting choice, if my personal prediction of outcome is correct.

      • SlantyJaws

        Remove the ability for women to buy or get served alcohol in all social spheres, and then ask them which of the two kinds of “oppression” they think is worse, if they have to choose one of them?

        Boom, nailed it. Feminism should support prohibition for women to reduce rapes. There are a hell of a lot of good memes in that I reckon.

        Or is that victim blaming, I’m losing track of the number of ways they want it coming and going.

        • Katsuni

          http://forums.avoiceformen.com/showthread.php?5043-Women-drinking-should-be-illegal

          I’d considered the idea a few months ago, so thanks for the reminder, since I’d forgotten about having written that =P

          I should probably revisit it, tidy it up a bit, then send it in. Meh, sounds like work. >.>

        • sungecko

          Look at the DOJ’s 2007 Campus Sexual Assault Study (link-everyone should read this thing, it is basically the new Ms. Report!) the Whitehouse miscited (link-pg 17). The Whitehouse claims the study says “1 and 5 woman have been sexual assaulted while in college.” The study actually says 19.0% of undergraduates were victims of attempted or completed sexual assault and only 13.7% were victims of completed assault. The study found that: “4.7% were victims of physically forced sexual assault; 7.8% of women were sexually assaulted when they were incapacitated after voluntarily consuming drugs and/or alcohol…0.6% were sexually assaulted when they were incapacitated after having been given a drug without their knowledge” (vii).

          Let’s say I am a feminist (a rare one that actually reads the studies I cite). I’ll ignore suspicious flaws in the study (only 37.8% of women the CSA classified as having been raped while incapacitated actually agreed they were rape victims; the most common source of incapacitation by far was voluntary consumption of drugs/alcohol- remind you of the Ms. Report yet; 5-2,5-20-21). As a feminist, I might think: “You know, “reforming” rape laws, changing “rape culture” is hard and gonna take a long time. If we just tell woman to stop doing drugs and not to drink or only drink in careful moderation, we could stop the vast majority of sexual assaults/rapes on campus!” Of course, most of us know that wouldn’t fly, because immediately another feminist would say, “Wait! That is victim blaming!”

    • captive

      Which is why you know that feminism is a nasty, vile plot that is a threat to the human rights of every person in the country. When a blatant miscarriage of justice exists like the assertion that “women are totally cool to make their own choices but if they’re drunk they can’t make their own choices unless they’re driving but men can make their own choices when they drink under any circumstance” shows just how stupidly brutal western culture has become and how contemporary feminism has absolutely nothing to do with equal rights for men or women.

      The question remains… if it’s not about equal rights and responsibilities for women and men… who’s running the show?

  • MGTOW-man

    Pierce, Thanks for this piece. It is an apt followup to the hysteria produced by radical feminists every time a man tries to say something femies do not want told—that would be uumm, the truth.

    I want to add something to this:
    “And they actually wonder why so few people – including so few women – identify as feminist?”

    Most women may not actually “identify” as feminists, but they ARE feminists at heart (and vote) whether they know it or not. Either by design or by oblivious participation, most all women are guilty of being feminist…at least tolerating it, accepting the benefits while talking our both sides of their mouths—same difference.

    Sure we are fighting feminists and for darned good reasons, but that is not all of the story. The sooner we can be honest about this to the very women in our little lives, the sooner we can make this ball roll a lot faster.

    Don’t believe me, try and take away all the PROVABLY unfair things feminism has extended women—even the anti-male laws that these women in question HAVE to see…see what happens. For those who do not believe me, watch.

    Getting feminists told and stopped is only part of the fight.

    • Mark Trueblood

      I agree. As much as I appreciate Mr. Harlan’s wonderful blog I think he’s whistling past the graveyard on this.

  • Wylie2

    This argument can be shut down with one simple question: who here has never had sex with a person that was drunk?

    Pretty much everyone has at one time or another unless you’re a Mormon. And since one cannot consent when one is drunk that means everyone who’s ever had sex with a drunk person is actually a rapist and they were committing a violent felone – each and every time.

    • Mark Trueblood

      The people advocating this double standard have not one iota of concern for logical consistency and there are way more of them then there are of us.

      • https://www.youtube.com/user/KopperNeoman Christopher Wedge

        In terms of power, yes. For now.

        But “most people” in a society just keep to themselves. Most people never think about any of this. It’s easy to think them malicious – they’re just fooled. But telling the difference is the trouble, a wolf in sheep’s clothing looks to the world like a sheep.

  • Iconoclast Dynamite

    Tara’s article, and those like it, not only exhibit a stunning inability to comprehend the rudimentary point Mr. Taranto was making, but they ironically prove the bias he highlights to be true as well.

    The fact that feminists and their ignorant sympathizers cannot (or, more likely, will not) follow the simplest of logical arguments that “dare” to challenge an approved gender narrative is a depressing reminder of the gargantuan task the MHRM has in front of it.

  • roarkroar

    In other news: “To stop the violence, men have to stop raping and battering.”

    http://edition.cnn.com/2014/02/12/opinion/sutter-alaska-blame-rapists/index.html?hpt=hp_c5

    Repeat after me: only men rape. So guys whether you like it, by definition you are a rapist. So shut up about it already. If she’s drunk, if she makes the first move, and he is drunk too, the MAN is a rapist. Kapish?

    (to tell a woman to protect herself is to be a rape apologist? seriously are these people mad?)

  • crydiego

    Rape requires penetration. http://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/attorney-general-eric-holder-announces-revisions-to-the-uniform-crime-reports-definition-of-rape

    This means a hand job is not rape, – so we got that going for us!

  • captive

    More feminist redefinition of “rape” here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/12/more-than-yes_n_4774615.html?ir=UK+Universities+%26+Education&ref=topbar

    Now they want to say “yes” isn’t actually “yes.” So, consent now might mean rape because it wasn’t “enthusiastic consent”, even if there’s no alcohol involved.

    The fact is, I’ve had sex with more than one woman when I wasn’t enthusiastically consenting, and I hate her so much I was more than willing to tell her I hope she dies when I was fed up with her abuse. However, I would still not dispute my underwhelming consent out of vindictiveness in a situation when I was not particularly inclined to sex because I wanted her to commit to a relationship prior to having sex with her because I was not remotely casually interested in her. I had refused her the night previous and her reaction was about as angry as I’ve seen a woman be with me in my life.

    More indications of the absolute unabashed sociopathy and childishness of feminists. The fact that we can redefine rape to include all situations that there is no force, no restraint, no unlawful coercion is indicative of how much the governments of western culture have become depraved and tyrannical.

    The surest way of saying “no” is to go somewhere else or tell him to leave. Very simple.

    It should be overwhelmingly evident to any judicial or executive officer the level of endemic false rape allegations due to the persistence of the feminist agenda in pushing all rape definitions towards: “heterosexual sex is always rape if she changes her mind later.” This is not evidence of an endemic rape culture, it is evidence of an endemic false rape report culture.

  • tango

    Radfems say all sexual contact between a man and a woman is rape. Coffee-shop feminists will say radfems are strawman feminists, nobody listens to them etc. etc. And while its true that the average person doesnt believe all sex is rape, the point is, radfems have sucessfully shifted the goal posts. In a sane world, stating that two equally drunk people are equally responsible for any drunk sex they have, would be the moderate view, with the extreme views being “the man is always more responsible” or “the woman is always more responsible.”

    Feminism has been very wiley. By inserting “all sex is rape/all men rape” into the dialog, even though it is seen by most as an extreme viewpoint, it has cast ‘drunk men and women have exactly the same agency’ as the other ‘extreme’. Now the moderate view is “the man is always more responsible.”

  • dubs

    They constantly re-define rape because they need big numbers.

    If there are no big rape numbers, they’re out of a job.

    It’s wagging the dog.

    1. Re-define rape to include bad sex, drunk sex
    2. Claim high rape numbers
    3. ???
    4. Profit

    • http://www.imnotamensrightsactivistbut.wordpress.com Isaac T. Quill

      This pattern of bogus stats to gain power,control and money just keeps on giving.

      It was debunked by Christina Hoff Sommers in her 1994 book “Who Stole Feminism” and yet 20 years later the same slight of hand is being used to emotively manipulate and pick pockets.

      There have been so many debunkings I am obliged to conclude that There is a Cult built around the worship of the tax funded rape meme.