Getting drunk.

Seems very sensible advice by your mother NanKate to me. Just as sensible as not tottering down dark alleyways [snickets] in high heels at one in the morning.Or hanging about in doorways wearing a mini skirt and low necked top.Or getting into cars full of men you hardly know.We all know in theory that you should be able to do these things, but will that theory comfort you later, when you have been raped?

Many of the girls I worked with seemed to think that getting off their faces and having no idea what they were doing was the sign of a great night out. The idea of things turning nasty never seemed to cross their minds.

In the version I read the judge was saying that there was no defence for raping a woman or taking advantage of a drunken one.

I thought that if a man has sex with a woman when he is aware she is so drunk that she's completely "out of it" and incapable of giving consent, it constitutes rape? I suppose the problem would be proving that she was incapable of giving consent, and proving that he was aware of it? Does anyone know?

I thought that was what we'd been discussing, Eloethan.

Sorry, I'm getting confused. I just thought that having sex with someone who is so drunk that she can't remember what she said, amounts to rape anyway.

Well, of course, it's silly to get very drunk but I've done it a couple of times in the past, though not deliberately. I can't see the point of the Judge's comments because it's not likely to change daft behaviour but it is likely to be misconstrued.

Yes, I agree. The point I was trying to make earlier, though, was that a woman could give consent while being drunk but not 'completely out of it', and not remember a thing the next day.

I'm in no way excusing rape, just saying that if both parties have drunk a considerable amount of alcohol (or consumed a considerable quantity of drugs) it must be very hard to establish consent/non-consent or culpability.

That's not her point.

Her point was how can a jury make a decision when the woman admits she was so drunk she has no memory of whether or not she gave consent.

So she may have been quite happy to have sex, eager even, but the next day hasn't a clue about it. How can a jury convict a man, who might have had a willing partner, but all she can say is 'I don't remember, but I'm sure I wouldn't have agreed'.

Yes - I thought that was my point, too!

Crossed posts Ana same point being made.

I'd like to add too that it is difficult to establish just HOW drunk someone actually is, unless they are throwing up or passed out cold. I had a friend at college who could hold a reasonable conversation (it seemed) when well bladdered but you had to know her to realise this and she couldn't remember anything next morning.

Thanks Roses for your kind comment. My mum's advice works for me now too as recently I went by train to London, something I do rarely, to meet an old friend for lunch. I would have loved a second glass of wine as we were chatting happily away, but that 2nd glass (at my age) could easily have caused me to forget to pick up everything I was carrying, or accidentally trip over and yet again I felt I needed to keep my wits about me - thanks MUM.

Now to my second point. In my youth I drank, stayed out late, had some dodgy boyfriends, all the usual stuff, but nowadays SOME young people seem to have have taken it to a new level. Binge drinking is a regular occurrence together with having many sexual partners.

Everything seems to be about excess and call me a boring old f**t but I it saddens and horrifies me.

I was reading a newspaper article yesterday about a young man of twenty who is on trial for attempted rape of his female friend. They had been in the pub together drinking bottles of wine and then walked home to her flat holding hands and they also kissed on the lips. She said he could stay with her overnight because the last tube had gone. Although he offered to sleep on the floor, she said he could get into bed with her. She meant it to be on a platonic basis and they had done this before. However, on this occasion the young woman awoke in the midde of the night to find the young man on top of her and her pyjama bottoms removed. She screamed and asked him to go and he did straight away.

Yes, I do understand that a woman has a right to say no in any circumstances, even in the middle of the act itself which should then stop. However, I find I am ambivalent in my reaction to a situation like this.

I have a lot of admiration for all those lads who, despite being bladdered themselves, are still able to say no when a scantily dressed young lady throws herself lastly at him!

(Sorry mixed tenses)

When my DS used to go out on the razzle with his mates (before marriage and fatherhood) they would nominate one member of the group to stay sober and not drink in order to make sure they stayed together, got in taxis going in the right direction and didn't get up to stuff they shouldn't. The girls did the same. I think this is a sensible way forward.

Of course it is very wrong for men to rape women under any circumstances. However, what saddens me deeply is that so many young women think that a good night out is getting very drunk and they do this on a regular basis. Why do they have to get very drunk in order to feel they've had a good evening out ?? When very drunk they are not thinking clearly and avoiding the situations that can potentially be risky. It also saddens me that some young women feel that in order to attract men they have to dress very scantily. Women have the right to dress as they wish but they should not feel they have to dress very scantily or they will not attract men. Unfortunately getting very drunk seems to be something a lot of young men do as a regular activity too and this may result in them doing things when drunk that they would never do if sober.

I am with you all the way Marion6.

What is worrying is this sort of behaviour seems to be accepted as the norm now.

What girls have to realise is, that it may be seen as the norm to do these things, but if they do them, it could have disastrous consequences for them. You would think it would be obvious to them, as it was obvious to us [me anyway] when a teenager/young woman.It's not rocket science to think that if you are scantily clad and staggering down a street, bad things may happen.It's no good being in a group either, if all of you are drunk.Just as it's not rocket science to tell a man he can share your bed, and then expect him to behave! Naive or what.It doesn't matter how many laws are in place to punish the man...... after the act.

Too true Roses.

Completely agree with Marion6. The drinking habits and behaviour of some young people these days is absolutely sickening. Rape is never to be condoned under any circumstances, but some young women should stop and think what they are doing with their lives, and their health.
Is this an old fashioned view? Probably. but I don't care.
Please note that I said 'some'.. I know that there are many fine young people who simply like a social life which includes a drink or two. That's different.

People of all ages and sexes can do what they like but be prepared for the consequences. Of course these consequences vary depending on the individual. In order to reduce risk to (health alone) its wise not to become so drunk that you open yourself to abuse of whatever sort. At my age and stage I`m so sorry that we don't seem to be able to look after our girls well enough. Every day there`s another sort of horror story. The ladette culture is cool - but risky in so many ways.

Sad reality is that if you drink until you are drunk and incapable you re unable to look after yourself. You are at risk of a whole range of crimes (handbag theft etc as well as a range of assaults) . You are at risk of being knocked down because you are incapable of crossing roads safely. You are at risk of inhaling your own vomit if you pass out, and dying as a result. And if you keep doing it you will damage your health. By singling out "you are more likely to be raped" people cloud the issue considerably - because it sounds like you are blaming the victim rather than the perpetrator. Thus distracting everyone from the many dangers of binge drinking.

Very true JessM

The Judge commented that it would be difficult for a jury to find a man guilty of rape if his accuser stated she couldn't remember whether or not she had consented to having sex. That is a legal point and should not be linked with views as to how a woman should conduct herself.

I thought it was an unwise and pointless comment as it is unlikely to change women's behaviour - which is influenced by a number of things, including the culture in which they live, their age and life experience and their state of mind - and it immediately shifts the focus away from the behaviour of men to the behaviour and implied culpability of women.

A lot of people - myself included- would agree that it is unwise for people (men and women) to get drunk in a public place because it alters their judgment and leaves them vulnerable to a number of risks.

But when it is said that women can do what they like but they should be "prepared to accept the consequences", I feel this is unacceptable. Would we blame people for getting mugged because they were drunk?

The low conviction rate for rape, matched by the low prosecution rate for rape in the first place, is the result of many factors, as any judge should know quite well. Drunken victims are by no means the main reason. This was a foolish comment that once again suggests that women are to blame when they are assaulted.

She didn't say that and it wasn't a foolish remark, she was making a legal point. Have you read her actual words in context? She said drunken women made poor witnesses after the event as they couldn't remember what had happened or if they gave permission. So in fact it may not have been a rape but consensual drunken sex. I quoted her words earlier.
A case like that should not even have got to court