8 ms·

This is an extremely touchy subject but something always pops into my head when I read stories like this and I haven't seen it brought up. I'm hoping this does

This is an extremely touchy subject but something always pops into my head when I read stories like this and I haven't seen it brought up. I'm hoping this doesn't get buried; I really don't have an axe to grind here, but I want to hear how people think about this dynamic. It is something that's hard and not PC to discuss publicly. Do women react to alcohol differently? It seems like our culture and our legal system treat an inebriated woman differently than an inebriated man when assessing a situation. It seems like if a woman is wasted and making out with a guy "consensually" she is being victimized because she cannot consent when she is drunk. But what if the guy is also inebriated and he cannot consent or decipher consent. I, for example (I'm male), would have to be extremely drunk to PDA like that in a professional setting. Even then it's hard to imagine. What if it's just two really drunk people hooking up? Is it one of those "I know it when I see it" situations? This is fine for me, but it seems like it is only applied with women being the victim and a man being the aggressor. Maybe that is because of the natural sexual dynamic of the onus being on the male to seduce the female. By saying that the woman had no control because she was inebriated, but Scoble did, aren't we denying the woman of her agency? Unless of course Scoble plied her with alcohol/drugs a la Bill Cosby? To be clear, and this goes without saying, I am NOT condoning Scoble's actions, I really don't know anything about Scoble other than this story but from what it sounds like he has a pattern of transgressions, including a completely inappropriate groping of the author in this story. I'm also not trying to deflect off of the serious issues at hand here, but the other comment threads are doing a good job of covering those. But I also don't think I am "victim blaming" either. Unless we grant that women inherently have less agency than men. Now this Scoble situation might have been a black and white case, but it seems to me there is a lot more grey area in these situations than we let on as a culture, and I am just wondering what the "rules" are.

mercer 9y ago
One analogy that might work is the difference between biking and driving drunk. At least here in Holland biking drunk is either not illegal, or tolerated within reasonable limits. Driving drunk, however, is outright illegal. In general, I'd say men are more like cars and women more like bikes. Whether nature or nurture, in my experience men are clearly more aggressive, and clearly stronger. They also seem to be more inclined to have and pursue a single obsessive goal (and perhaps especially when that goal is intercourse). But I'd say that's less clear and perhaps untrue.
- PeterStuer 9y ago
  "In general, I'd say men are more like cars and women more like bikes." Oh my! XD
  - mercer 9y ago
    I'm not sure what point you're trying to make...?
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - Veen 9y ago
      "Bike" is a disparaging term used for what is perceived as an overly promiscuous woman (i.e. a "slut") in the UK at least. Your analogy doesn't convey quite what you hope to some English speakers.
      - mercer 9y ago
        Ha, fair point. It actually has similar connotations in Dutch. Yet in hindsight I still feel the analogy is strong enough that I'd still make it. (In Dutch there's the saying that "you have to learn it on an old bike", where 'it' is sex and an old bike is an older woman)
disillusioned 9y ago
>Do women react to alcohol differently? No. >It seems like our culture and our legal system treat an inebriated woman differently than an inebriated man when assessing a situation. It seems like if a woman is wasted and making out with a guy "consensually" she is being victimized because she cannot consent when she is drunk. >But what if the guy is also inebriated and he cannot consent or decipher consent. If the woman is initiating the contact, then it could be argued that she doesn't have consent, either. >What if it's just two really drunk people hooking up? Is it one of those "I know it when I see it" situations? In this case, Scoble proceeded to aggressively grope the author in between going after the clearly too-drunk-to-consent woman. >This is fine for me, but it seems like it is only applied with women being the victim and a man being the aggressor. Maybe that is because of the natural sexual dynamic of the onus being on the male to seduce the female. I think this is a correct interpretation. I also have trouble thinking of examples of times I've ever seen where a drunk (or sober) woman went out of her way to aggressively pursue a male, drunk or not, consent or not, and anecdotally it's much much much rarer. But in those rare cases, would still not be okay. >By saying that the woman had no control because she was inebriated, but Scoble did, aren't we denying the woman of her agency? Unless of course Scoble plied her with alcohol/drugs a la Bill Cosby? Holy shit this is scary. This is perilously close to "she shouldn't have lowered her guard" or "she was basically asking for it" or "it's essentially her fault for getting too drunk to resist." And thus, you're dangerously close to victim-blaming. It's not "denying agency" to factually state that someone could conceivably become so drunk that they are no longer able to willfully consent. "Denying agency" is a dressed up way of accusing the victim for not being strong-willed enough to know what she wants when she gets drunk, instead of recognizing that it's everyone's right (or agency) to enjoy themselves at a party and get inebriated without having to worry that your mental wits and physical fight ability are 100% about you throughout the entire evening, lest an aggressive man approach you and take your slurred protestation as consent. >Now this Scoble situation might have been a black and white case, but it seems to me there is a lot more grey area in these situations than we let on as a culture, and I am just wondering what the "rules" are. Is the other person so drunk that a reasonable observer would recognize that consent is extremely unlikely to be truthfully given? Then don't. That's a very easy rule. If your target requires significant enough alcohol to "deny their agency" or "let down their guard" or "consent" with you, then it's not true consent. And it's not a win. It's gross and disappointing and regrettable and predatory and frequently illegal.
samastur 9y ago
Our culture treats intoxicated women as "asking for it" and not victimized. It is a huge part of a problem and why more of them don't report. But to answer your questions, which I believe are made in good faith, here is my view (not a legal one!). If you can't decipher consent, then you don't have one. If you have a reason to believe you might not have gotten it if the other person was sober, then that is assault too. If you are not in condition to be able to make such assessments and still proceed, you should be held accountable like drunker drivers are. I am not saying sipping a bit of wine should immediately disqualify you from sex, but it should be off the table if any one of you gets drunk to the point where their judgement is noticeably impaired. Sex of a persons involved doesn't matter in consideration and abuse happens to both sexes, but clearly to women more often.
Mz 9y ago
"Do women react to alcohol differently?" Yes, actually. Women metabolize it differently, plus size matters. Men are typically larger than women. They can handle more liquor and be less drunk. So a hetero couple that are consuming alcohol together at the same pace typically causes dramatically greater impairment for her than for him and more quickly. Alcohol is the single most common date rape drug and is a factor in the vast majority of date rapes. Additionally, highly sexually aroused women lose certain cognitive functions. This is not true for men. I strongly suspect this element is a significant factor in many social norms that establish different expectations for male and female sexual behavior. Women literally have their judgment impaired by high arousal. I think this is part of why society as a whole is pickier about the need for women to pursue more cautious strategies when choosing a sex partner.
- mercer 9y ago
  > Additionally, highly sexually aroused women lose certain cognitive functions. This is not true for men. I strongly suspect this element is a significant factor in many social norms that establish different expectations for male and female sexual behavior. I did not know that! Do you have any references at hand?
  - Mz 9y ago
    No. I saw it on a TV show years ago. I am on a phone. I am in no position to provide a citation.
    - mercer 9y ago
      No problem, Google will also work :).
      - Mz 9y ago
        You might try searching for studies where they did MRIs or other brain scans of people masturbating to orgasm. I think that was the study I saw on the TV show. But it has been a few years.
- 9y ago

mercer 9y ago

One analogy that might work is the difference between biking and driving drunk. At least here in Holland biking drunk is either not illegal, or tolerated within reasonable limits. Driving drunk, however, is outright illegal. In general, I'd say men are more like cars and women more like bikes. Whether nature or nurture, in my experience men are clearly more aggressive, and clearly stronger. They also seem to be more inclined to have and pursue a single obsessive goal (and perhaps especially when that goal is intercourse). But I'd say that's less clear and perhaps untrue.

PeterStuer 9y ago
"In general, I'd say men are more like cars and women more like bikes." Oh my! XD
- mercer 9y ago
  I'm not sure what point you're trying to make...?
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - Veen 9y ago
    "Bike" is a disparaging term used for what is perceived as an overly promiscuous woman (i.e. a "slut") in the UK at least. Your analogy doesn't convey quite what you hope to some English speakers.
    - mercer 9y ago
      Ha, fair point. It actually has similar connotations in Dutch. Yet in hindsight I still feel the analogy is strong enough that I'd still make it. (In Dutch there's the saying that "you have to learn it on an old bike", where 'it' is sex and an old bike is an older woman)

disillusioned 9y ago

>Do women react to alcohol differently? No. >It seems like our culture and our legal system treat an inebriated woman differently than an inebriated man when assessing a situation. It seems like if a woman is wasted and making out with a guy "consensually" she is being victimized because she cannot consent when she is drunk. >But what if the guy is also inebriated and he cannot consent or decipher consent. If the woman is initiating the contact, then it could be argued that she doesn't have consent, either. >What if it's just two really drunk people hooking up? Is it one of those "I know it when I see it" situations? In this case, Scoble proceeded to aggressively grope the author in between going after the clearly too-drunk-to-consent woman. >This is fine for me, but it seems like it is only applied with women being the victim and a man being the aggressor. Maybe that is because of the natural sexual dynamic of the onus being on the male to seduce the female. I think this is a correct interpretation. I also have trouble thinking of examples of times I've ever seen where a drunk (or sober) woman went out of her way to aggressively pursue a male, drunk or not, consent or not, and anecdotally it's much much much rarer. But in those rare cases, would still not be okay. >By saying that the woman had no control because she was inebriated, but Scoble did, aren't we denying the woman of her agency? Unless of course Scoble plied her with alcohol/drugs a la Bill Cosby? Holy shit this is scary. This is perilously close to "she shouldn't have lowered her guard" or "she was basically asking for it" or "it's essentially her fault for getting too drunk to resist." And thus, you're dangerously close to victim-blaming. It's not "denying agency" to factually state that someone could conceivably become so drunk that they are no longer able to willfully consent. "Denying agency" is a dressed up way of accusing the victim for not being strong-willed enough to know what she wants when she gets drunk, instead of recognizing that it's everyone's right (or agency) to enjoy themselves at a party and get inebriated without having to worry that your mental wits and physical fight ability are 100% about you throughout the entire evening, lest an aggressive man approach you and take your slurred protestation as consent. >Now this Scoble situation might have been a black and white case, but it seems to me there is a lot more grey area in these situations than we let on as a culture, and I am just wondering what the "rules" are. Is the other person so drunk that a reasonable observer would recognize that consent is extremely unlikely to be truthfully given? Then don't. That's a very easy rule. If your target requires significant enough alcohol to "deny their agency" or "let down their guard" or "consent" with you, then it's not true consent. And it's not a win. It's gross and disappointing and regrettable and predatory and frequently illegal.

samastur 9y ago

Our culture treats intoxicated women as "asking for it" and not victimized. It is a huge part of a problem and why more of them don't report. But to answer your questions, which I believe are made in good faith, here is my view (not a legal one!). If you can't decipher consent, then you don't have one. If you have a reason to believe you might not have gotten it if the other person was sober, then that is assault too. If you are not in condition to be able to make such assessments and still proceed, you should be held accountable like drunker drivers are. I am not saying sipping a bit of wine should immediately disqualify you from sex, but it should be off the table if any one of you gets drunk to the point where their judgement is noticeably impaired. Sex of a persons involved doesn't matter in consideration and abuse happens to both sexes, but clearly to women more often.

Mz 9y ago

"Do women react to alcohol differently?" Yes, actually. Women metabolize it differently, plus size matters. Men are typically larger than women. They can handle more liquor and be less drunk. So a hetero couple that are consuming alcohol together at the same pace typically causes dramatically greater impairment for her than for him and more quickly. Alcohol is the single most common date rape drug and is a factor in the vast majority of date rapes. Additionally, highly sexually aroused women lose certain cognitive functions. This is not true for men. I strongly suspect this element is a significant factor in many social norms that establish different expectations for male and female sexual behavior. Women literally have their judgment impaired by high arousal. I think this is part of why society as a whole is pickier about the need for women to pursue more cautious strategies when choosing a sex partner.

mercer 9y ago
> Additionally, highly sexually aroused women lose certain cognitive functions. This is not true for men. I strongly suspect this element is a significant factor in many social norms that establish different expectations for male and female sexual behavior. I did not know that! Do you have any references at hand?
- Mz 9y ago
  No. I saw it on a TV show years ago. I am on a phone. I am in no position to provide a citation.
  - mercer 9y ago
    No problem, Google will also work :).
    - Mz 9y ago
      You might try searching for studies where they did MRIs or other brain scans of people masturbating to orgasm. I think that was the study I saw on the TV show. But it has been a few years.
9y ago