Yesterday, Harpyness reader Christopher F. wrote me about the firestorm of controversy surrounding a recent student column in the Daily Princetonian. In “The Real ‘Sex on a Saturday Night‘”, freshman Iulia Neagu explains that women who are raped while inebriated have only themselves to blame:
She knew what would happen if she started drinking. We all know that the more people drink, the less likely they are to make wise decisions. It is common sense.
Therefore, the girl willingly got herself into a state in which she could not act rationally. This, in my opinion, is equivalent to agreeing to anything that might happen to her while in this state.
It’s okay if your head exploded on reading that. Chris knew that mine would, and wanted to know if it would be shooting fish in a barrel for me to write a screed about Neagu’s op-ed.
Well, yes. But plenty of other women beat me to the punch, including a hell of a lot of Daily Princetonian commenters–rock on, y’all!—student activists at Princeton, Anna North at Jezebel and many, many others. So I’m not going to bother to take apart this poorly-written, small-minded turd of rape apology, although I will note that I have read much more eloquent and insidiously persuasive rape apologia in my time; Iulia Neagu is clearly still a rank amateur at writing, reasoning and victim-blaming.
As I discussed Neagu’s column in various comment threads, some responses–particularly from fellow Jez commenters–caught my attention, including this one:
Confession time: When I was the same age as Neagu I used to partake in the victim blaming. I used to think that women weren’t saying no loud enough or that they shouldn’t have put themselves in dangerous situations. I used to pride myself on my ability to suss out danger and stay away from people who could cause me harm. I thought that instincts, even when drunk, could protect someone. Looking back at my cocky 20 year old self, I want to kick myself, since I now know that instincts and saying no really loud are not enough to protect everybody all the time. And there is someone I truly owe an apology too from that time, since I’m sure I hurt her with my vicitm blaming ways.
Trust me, Neagu will figure it out soon enough and will feel like an ass for this article she wrote. It doesn’t excuse her behaviour, but one day, she’ll see it. I can assure you of that.
I suspect that even if the current blowback isn’t convincing, Neagu will be regretting it hardcore when some future HR recruiter does a Google search on her. But I did feel a pang of recognition–when I was 18, I held a lot of views that I look back on and cringe (although I was never a rape apologist). I also had that same jackass courage of my convictions. Fortunately for me, my youthful arrogance is not enshrined for posterity on the internet.
Still, Iulia Neagu chose to write this preachy, odious column, so she opened herself up for the furious response she’s getting. She’s technically an adult, she’s intelligent, she chose her choice–now she’s going to have to handle the consequences like a grown-up.
Another Jez commenter, though, had a (very) little empathy for Neagu, and I do think her point is worth considering.
I strongly disagree with this young woman. I strongly agree with the people who are calling bullshit on her victim blaming. But I’m a little worried about the way college writers are now being held up for scrutiny in the national media. This young woman is a freshman from Romania. That means she’s probably about 18 years old, and an international student. I’m worried that she, like many students, didn’t quite realize what she was getting herself into. I know, I know–the internet has made college news into a whole new phenomenon. College students are adults and responsible for their actions, but it’s one thing to be schooled by your fellow students, another to end up on Jezebel. I guess I’m imagining her as one of my own students, and thinking about the fact that not many of them could handle this kind of attention. I’m hoping her university has really good psychological services, both for her and her friend who had to read such a hateful statement about her experience.
Yes, I bet peer relations are preeeeetty unpleasant for Neagu right now, and I’m guessing the friend who confided in her will–rightly–never speak to her again. But now thanks to the internet, Iulia Neagu is also being shamed and maligned in public by thousands of people around the world.
That’s a lot for an 18 year old to handle, and it’s entirely possible that the fallout will continue to affect Neagu for years to come. So I ask you, gentle readers–does the punishment fit the crime?
I was at the center of a small school newspaper controversy last semester and I’ve gotten into my share of vicious internet fights. Although I’ve never had my name bandied about as an example of everything wrong with society on major blogs (and I bet that’d be pretty hard), the thing about the internet is that you can turn it off. You can at least get some distance from it and maybe de-personalize it a little (clearly Anna North or whoever doesn’t know Neagu personally and therefore isn’t talking about “her” per se, as opposed to talking about the opinions she was espousing). I had a ton of people trolling the op-ed I wrote and a lot of them said really hurtful things and it was very hard to deal with because I stopped being able to trust the people around me. Given, I’m pretty sure I was right, but to be fair I bet she was too. It’s one thing when someone who’s probably halfway across the country is trolling you, but it’s something totally different when you know the people saying this stuff are probably in your classes, in the dining hall, in your dorm. I think Neagu’s op-ed was full of shit, of course, but that sort of social instability is not (to my mind) a fair punishment for writing an opinion piece, no matter what it contains.
As for her name being on what she wrote, though, for future employers — no sympathy there. At this point, everyone old enough to post things online should be cognizant of the fact that once something is on the internet with your name on it, it will never go away. That’s internet 101.
Oh lordy, what a kettle of fish this one is. First of all, even though I find her arguments absolutely heinous and shockingly evocative of old-fashioned pearl-clutching for her age, I do admit that your mention of going to have to “handle it like a grown-up” made my brain shout, “LEAVE HER ALONE!” since I found that wording rather patronizing to say the least. I am, admittedly, only a year older than Neagu, and I would never claim to have all the answers to anything, but what I believe is that she intended to criticize Ivy League drinking culture (I go to Cornell, and that is a culture that is absolutely, 100% worthy of criticism) but missed the mark horribly and came off sounding like a victim-blamer instead. It’s a sadly reactionary viewpoint that I often struggle with myself—I never, ever would be a victim-blamer for rape, but it’s taken me a while to acknowledge that there are willful drinkers out there who do so responsibly, since as a non-drinker I too often fall into the mindset of finding alcohol not only disgusting, but automatically dangerous. Coming from another country, while not an “excuse,” also would have made her all the more susceptible to shock and therefore irrational responses to American social situations.
While this kind of ignorance can never be excused, it can be atoned for and remedied with the right intervention. If I were a Princeton student, I would write a column pointing out all that was wrong with Neagu’s argument, but never, ever attacking her personally. Instead, I’d suggest that she attend some workshops on sexual violence to learn the error of her ways and become involved in a Princeton women’s center—community service, so to speak. I’d also attack the rightful targets of vehement criticism in this scenario—the men who foist drugged alcohol and sexual assault on drinkers and non-drinkers alike.
If you cannot stand the heat, stay away from the forge. The Internet makes any newspaper, any newspaper, a public source, even a college rag. No one who writes for anything that is even remotely connected to the Internet can claim ignorance.
Yes, it’s true, when we are 18, we are opinionated, full of ourselves, and sure we know the the lay of the land. That does not excuse a lack of critical reasoning. When you turn 18, society considers you an adult, and holds you accountable for what you say and do, and youthful exuberance is no excuse.
Perhaps I feel a little bad for her, but I can’t help but wonder how naive she was to think that no one would notice this article? When you put forth an opinion in a public forum, you open yourself to criticism and ridicule if your thoughts are not cogent. If anything, I hope she (and others) has learned a valuable lesson.
I think it makes sense to have compassion for everyone, even people who are saying things that are misguided and heinous. Yes, it’s important to critique and get across just how wrong her statements are but it doesn’t have to be done in a way that’s abusive.
@Cat: I do admit that your mention of going to have to “handle it like a grown-up” made my brain shout, “LEAVE HER ALONE!” since I found that wording rather patronizing to say the least.
I didn’t mean it to sound patronizing, although I can see how you feel that way. Certainly when people older than I am say that kind of thing to me, it makes me reflexively bristle too.
What I meant was, there are many moments in our lives–particularly when we’re young–when we do/say something that has bad, unexpected consequences. If we’re thoughtful and aware of what’s happening, and then fix it or at least figure out where we went wrong, our youthful fuckups can be useful, transformative experiences. It’s part of the maturation process. That’s what I mean by “handling it like a grown-up.”
At 18 she’s old enough to take responsibility for her actions but the fact that she is from another country complicates things. I agree with Cat that it was probably more of an attempt to criticize the drinking culture than anything else and what she needs is a little education about the issue.
FWIW these are my thoughts on the issue of drinking and rape. We should live in a world where a woman can wander drunk and naked into a room of horny guys and pass out on the floor and their reaction is only to get her a blanket and put a pillow under her head. Unfortunately we don’t and so in order to protect ourselves (from any number of things, not just sexual assault) it’s smart to not get falling down drunk. However, if one does get falling down drunk that does not make you responsible for being raped.
I may get flamed for this but I do think it gets complicated when both parties are totally wasted. I’m not really comfortable with a boy being charged with rape because he got really drunk at a party and had sex with an equally intoxicated girl. If she remembers saying no or otherwise indicating that she didn’t want to have sex that’s one thing but if it’s just a case of things going farther than she planned while she was intoxicated…
I feel a bit bad for her. Let her be a Princeton University pariah for a while, but to be piled on by all of the Internet? Yes, she should know that by writing for the paper her work’s available to the world, but she should also know that drinking doesn’t mean you deserve to be raped.
@Kate: I agree with you about how it makes things very complicated when both people are totally wasted. Yet another reason not to get totally wasted, folks!
If her point was merely to say “if you get falling-down drunk, you’re putting yourself at real risk” or “we should take a look at this drinking culture and see how it leads to grievous consequences for everyone”, that would have been useful, IMO.
But Neagu goes a step further–I suspect because she was being deliberately inflammatory and courting controversy–and lays the entire blame on women and says that by getting drunk they are de facto consenting to anything and everything that might happen to them. That’s where my head exploded.
@Kate, yes, it’s reasonable to say we should use common sense, not get falling-down drunk in unknown contexts, etc. But it’s a slippery slope, isn’t it? You might say: If I had eight shots of jagermeister in a strange frat house, I’m being irresponsible. What if I have 4 shots at a party at my friend’s house? What if I have one shot because it’s somebody’s birthday, but I didn’t eat enough that day, and it hits me too hard? We do need to watch out for ourselves and our friends, but deflecting the conversation from “boys, don’t rape” to “girls, don’t drink excessively” is not helpful.
I don’t feel that bad for her. Undergrads are the new middle-schoolers, it seems, in terms of how much responsibility they are assigned.
First of all, her piece is not exactly original. Women and girls get themselves raped! Yawn. Neagu’s article isn’t just stupid; it’s dangerous.
Second, she should have taken her own advice and considered the consequences of her actions before putting this out there with her real name on it. It’s 2010. Wake up.
Also, I think this line of thinking is really unfair to women. We’re never allowed to make mistakes. We’re never allowed to experiment and have fun. Wow, an 18-year-old college student has one drink too many. It shouldn’t be that big a deal–it’s not that big a deal for men.
“I do think it gets complicated when both parties are totally wasted. I’m not really comfortable with a boy being charged with rape because he got really drunk at a party and had sex with an equally intoxicated girl.”
Well, lucky for them, the chances they’ll ever be formally charged with rape for such a thing are slim to none. Nobody is saying two drunk people can’t have fun, consensual sex, or that such activities necessarily qualify as rape.
Neagu is saying getting inebriated is de facto consent, which is wrong.
Spark, I think you’re dead on. Neagu seems to let men off the hook entirely, both when they get drunk and when they rape while drunk. It’s the same old tired, pernicious double standard: WOMEN, DON’T BE VICTIMS! instead of MEN, DON’T BE RAPISTS!
Can a person really be denied employment because of a controversial op-ed piece they write in a college newspaper? Might they not be applauded (however wrong we may feel they were) for daring to take a controversial stand? I think its wrong, but perhaps people of my generation don’t understand how the myriad of internet postings each day can be that haunting (if no laws are broken of course).
Joe, since her viewpoint is pretty mainstream I doubt she’ll have trouble finding a job based solely on the article.
I don’t feel that bad for her. I mean, she’s a college student writing for the newspaper of a very prestigious university. At what point do we assign responsibility? Upon graduation? I also believed and said things when I was younger that make me cringe now. But so what? It’s a learning process yes, and hers just got a lot more public but I still feel like people have the right to call her out. She chose the public forum.
Now of course, I don’t agree with anyone expressing any violent sentiment towards her.
@Joe: Can a person really be denied employment because of a controversial op-ed piece they write in a college newspaper?
Yes, absolutely. If I were hiring someone to work for me and I saw she–or he–had written something like this, I’d chuck their resume PDQ. I once declined to interview a candidate after I saw his facebook page and it was full of obscenities, sexist jokes and pics of him boozing it up. Employers have the right to consider a candidate’s character as part of the application process.
Might they not be applauded (however wrong we may feel they were) for daring to take a controversial stand?
Not if what you’re taking a stand on is fundamentally wrong or offensive. It might take big balls to publish an essay defending rape or denying the Holocaust or telling the world that Barack Obama is a Kenyan Muslim, but that doesn’t make your big balls good or useful or admirable.
As a former college Op-Ed columnist, I have more sympathy for her crappy writing style than I do for her suffering the consequences of her rape apologizing ways.
Also: Okay, she’s from another country. I’m not … entirely sure what that has to do with anything. First of all, she can’t just ignore the laws here (which certainly do not state that intoxication is consent to whatever comes your way), and secondly the only time I saw this caveat even partially fleshed out it was by a person saying, “I’m from Romania too, there society only really considers it rape [shades of rape-rape, anyone?] if a stranger jumps out of the bushes and attacks a woman.” Well, I’m from Texas, and pretty much the same goes. Doesn’t make it right or excuse the mentality. Especially if the reasoning is that she showed up at college in America, observed that women have it markedly better than back home, and her first impulse was to try to drag them back down. This makes her country of origin an excuse why?
@Becky & Joe, I assume that it would depend entirely on whether the interviewer agreed with her. Sadly.
Yeah, PSoul, you’re probably right. There are certain fields, though, where I think it would be a huge liability.
@Becky & Joe, I assume that it would depend entirely on whether the interviewer agreed with her. Sadly.
The objective becomes chillingly subjective perhaps. Wow. Enlightening, thank you!
(post-pondering…) I think part of the issue is that we as a society are having a hard time adjusting to the changes the ‘net hath wrought in terms of what it means to be a private or a public citizen. I’ve heard a lot of interesting things proposed that are tangentially related to this (Amanda Marcotte arguing that posting someone’s naked pics/sex vid/etc. without their permission should be considered a form of sexual assault, one of the guys on Slog proposing a date to declare internet amnesty exactly so that things don’t affect your job prospects, etc.). I think this is a really bad case to be trying these ideas out because the op-ed was a piece of jackassery, but it is true that the consequences for doing something stupid (like writing a jackassy op-ed or taking a naked picture or what have you) are a lot higher now because doing so not only exposes you to the people around you but to trollery and frankly trollery is something I don’t think anyone should have to deal with unless they go to 4chan voluntarily. While it is true that this woman wrote objectionable stuff, I think we all are aware that the way some people act online is simply beyond the pale of decent behavior. I think until we find some way to make it so that the veneer of anonymity doesn’t make people feel like they can be as mean and hurtful as they want (impossible, maybe?) then in some sense the consequences to doing stupid things that end up online are going to be outsized.
@Jez commenter: This young woman is a freshman from Romania. That means she’s probably about 18 years
This commenter hit the nail on the head. Iulia is new to our culture. She comes from an Eastern European Culture which is VERY different from Western Europe. In her country, women are held responsible for their “honor.” This is what she has been taught. Go back only 50 years. The same attitude that was prevalent everywhere then still exists in the world today. I would fault whomever allowed her to post this without clueing her in that she is now in a culture that no longer believes what she believes. But we should keep in mind, that the USA did believe the same thing. I know because I had the same upbringing… talk to any 60 or 70 year old woman.
She says ” It is common sense.” And it is. In HER country. She hasn’t had the time to adapt to our norms. And this firestorm shows more of our own ignorance when it comes to foreign cultures. Rather than attack her, people should understand her background and deal with her from an informative standpoint, not hostile and belligerent.
English is her second language. She has not been here long enough to get fluent.
Newspapers like controversy.
@OmaAni: I really disagree.
In her country, women are held responsible for their “honor.” This is what she has been taught. Go back only 50 years. The same attitude that was prevalent everywhere then still exists in the world today. Including in the US. Times have not changed that much. I don’t see any difference between Neagu’s argument and the one I heard many times as a college student in Virginia in the mid-90s, or that I hear from the American media today.
English is her second language. She has not been here long enough to get fluent. Not true. She scored high enough on a TOEFL to get accepted to Princeton, and that essay was written in English that’s better than you’d get from many American-born native English speakers. Neagu’s facility with English is not the problem.
And this firestorm shows more of our own ignorance when it comes to foreign cultures.
This doesn’t make any sense. She’s under no obligation to understand the culture of the country she’s living in — even going so far as to suggest that a woman who has gotten drunk has consented to whatever happens to her, which is not only morally reprehensible but legally incorrect — but anyone who calls her out on her completely incorrect, illegal, and dangerous views is ignorant? No dice.
P.S. Patriarchy and rape apology aren’t national treasures or estimable remnants of foreign cultures, they’re part of a worldwide culture known as Patriarchy. And I’m under no obligation to respect it, regardless of which language or religion or nation it’s associated with in any particular instance.
I didn’t read all of the comments, and am responding merely to the question posed at the end of the blog.
If the crime is youthful foolishness, the punishment is a little harsh. If the crime is helping a potential rapist feel justified in committing a rape, the punishment cannot outweigh the crime.
Joe: Hiring decisions are made by people. People who will take into account everything available to them and use their subjective opinions when deciding who to hire. Most professionals that I have had contact with admit to googling any applicants they are seriously considering. Given that there are usually several applicants for each position, anything they come across can be a reason not to hire someone.
And, OmaAni, it is my opinion that what she wrote is simply a part of, and in furtherance of, the rape culture that is prevalent in popular movies, in frat houses, etc. What you said about her country’s culture might explain why she has those beliefs, but it in no way excuses them.
@yvanehtnioj said, “Especially if the reasoning is that she showed up at college in America, observed that women have it markedly better than back home, and her first impulse was to try to drag them back down. This makes her country of origin an excuse why?” and I completely agree. The whole point of studying in another country is to learn about a new place and really live there. This reminds me of crappy American tourists who go to other countries and are annoyed that they don’t take dollars (I encountered one such individual in London) or that stores are not open 24 hours a day. I presume she came to Princeton to enrich herself. I wish she had remembered that before writing her op-ed — it just sounds like, of all things, an American tourist saying how much better it is back home.
delayed reaction post!
@Kate – Having experienced this up close and personal, for me the justification that both parties were drunk might remove the urge to blame one’s “partner” but it might do absolutely nothing to ease the feeling of having been assaulted, loss of bodily autonomy, etc.
To chime in with the other comments, I agree the personal attacks on the author are inappropriate and that her origin and age, while not removing her from responsibility, should be factored in. It’s not like she was a cultural authority taking a view of the world that is harmful to women. She’s a student who now knows that you have to consider a much wider audience than just the one at your fingertips.
I once wrote a predominately negative review of my college musical in my college paper (one of my first published pieces ever, so I had no idea how/whether people read and respond to things in the press) and got dirty looks and hate mail from musical theater kids for months afterwards – I stood by my review, but I would have worded it differently had I realized how the students were going to respond.
@Spark, as I said originally there are lots of reasons we shouldn’t drink to excess, not just to avoid sexual assault. Just walking home while drunk is dangerous. Think about the phrase “falling down drunk.” If a friend of mine was say, wearing a pair of shoes that were fun but made her fall down I would tell her it was stupid to wear them. I just don’t see why my reaction to someone drinking that much should be any different.
@Kate – Um, if I went up to a stranger wearing impractical shoes and said, “It’s stupid to wear those!”, that’d make me a jerk. There’s a difference between what’s acceptable to say to your friends in private and what’s acceptable to say to strangers/the world at large in public. I’ve talked to my friends about drinking problems or what have you but I would never go out and say, “Everyone who gets drunk in public, that’s a stupid decision and you’re responsible for all the consequences” because that would make me a supercilious jagoff. It’s much more productive to talk about why we as a culture treat alcohol (or shoes) the way we do, what it means, and what we can do about it than to lay judgement on a whole crowd of people making what are essentially personal decisions.
@Kate
There are also differences among “wearing those shoes is dangerous for your physical health” and “drinking to excess is dangerous for your physical health” and “drinking to excess is why you got raped.”
We’re not just talking about Drinking Being Potentially Dangerous, we’re talking about Women’s Behavior which is always fraught with more judgment and scrutiny than Drinking itself.
@baraqiel – you’ll notice in my response that I specifically referenced a friend, I said nothing about wandering up to a stranger and commenting on their choices.
@mkp-hearts-nyc – I am aware that there is a difference between “drinking to excess is dangerous for your physical health” and “drinking to excess is why you got raped,” hence my statement in my original post “However, if one does get falling down drunk that does not make you responsible for being raped.” I am aware that being sober, dressed in sweats and “safely” at home are not necessarily going to prevent you from being raped.
People have the right to make decisions that I don’t agree with and think are stupid just like I have the right to my opinions about those decisions. Do I go around to bars telling random people that they shouldn’t be getting drunk? No. But we are having a discussion here, specifically one where opinions were requested. Cat brought up the point that the author was perhaps intending to be critical of the drinking culture in general and my point was that I agree with that criticism.
@Kate, you have the right to the opinion that a woman acted recklessly. What does that have to do with ending rape? You say yourself that there’s basically nothing a woman can do to 100% prevent rape, and yet you keep focusing on the woman’s drinking, shifting the responsibility for the crime to the victim instead of the perpetrator.
@Kate – It’s true! Unfortunately your first two comments were not addressed to friends, but to the internet (or at least, this little corner of it). Thus my point: statements like “it’s smart to not get falling down drunk” and “Just walking home while drunk is dangerous” when posted online are much more like walking up to a stranger and critiquing their choices than they are like talking to a friend. They’re also not exactly cogent criticisms of drinking culture in the exact same way that Neagu posting an op-ed about how drinking means you’re signing up for all sorts of consequences is not a cogent criticism of drinking culture.
I say this out of no personal investment in alcohol — I don’t even drink. But what is it that you think that sort of statement achieves? It’s not like people who regularly get drunk don’t understand that doing so is in some sense irresponsible. That message is pervasive in PSAs, school programs, college alcohol workshops, commercials for booze, etc. Repeating, yet again, that getting stupid drunk is often a bad decision does no one any good, and in fact it would be much healthier, in my opinion, if we were able to talk about alcohol use (which can sometimes be a perfectly neutral or even positive activity) without immediately jumping to the “getting drunk is dangerous and stupid!” argument.
My concern is that we spend so much time defending a woman’s right to drink and not be raped that it comes across as defending getting falling down drunk. We don’t seem to spend nearly the same amount of energy addressing the negative effects all of this excess drinking is having on both women and men. Kids are dying from alcohol poisoning and killing themselves and others in drunk driving accidents. People have the right to drink as much alcohol as they want but you can’t convince me that getting drunk “can sometimes be a perfectly neutral or even positive activity.” Alcohol use in excess of moderation is unhealthy and potentially dangerous, period.
“Kids are dying from alcohol poisoning and killing themselves and others in drunk driving accidents.”
Drunk driving is a problem in the same way that all reckless driving is a problem. It’s not, to my mind, essentially a problem of alcohol abuse, but rather essentially a problem of disregarding the impact your actions can have on others. In this way, it’s much more similar to getting drunk and raping someone than it is to getting drunk and getting raped. In both cases, what we should be talking about is not simply the use of alcohol, but the importance of making sure that you are in control of your actions *so that you don’t hurt others*. People have a right to hurt themselves and trying to abridge that right is always a losing proposition.
“you can’t convince me that getting drunk “can sometimes be a perfectly neutral or even positive activity.” Alcohol use in excess of moderation is unhealthy and potentially dangerous, period.”
Look, like I said, I don’t drink. But I’ve been around a lot of people drinking in a lot of different ways and it is not hard to tell the difference between someone who’s getting a little drunk to have fun and someone who’s getting plastered to deal with their problems. It’s not hard to tell the difference between people who know their limits and people who don’t. And when people don’t know their limits, that’s often not a problem with alcohol, that’s a problem with them not knowing their limits — it extends into other parts of their lives, in my experience. So talking about this as if alcohol is the problem and not any of the reasons why people abuse alcohol is just talking around the problem and does no one any good.
And this:
“We don’t seem to spend nearly the same amount of energy addressing the negative effects all of this excess drinking is having on both women and men.”
Is just not true, in my experience. I gave a bunch of examples in my last comment. When was the last time you saw the curriculum of a high school health class? I cannot tell you the number of pictures of diseased livers I’ve seen followed by the message, “That’s what alcohol does to you!”. People talk about the negative effects of drinking all the time. But they do it in a way that’s sensationalistic, as if there’s no way to drink in a healthy manner and if you have a single glass of wine, you’re going to end up homeless with liver cancer. Again: this helps no one.
@baraqiel – I can’t really write a detailed response to your post right now since my son is now awake and likes to go after the computer. I did want to clarify that by “we” I didn’t mean american society at large; I was specifically referring to the feminist community. I thought that was contextually evident but apparently not.
@Kate – well…okay, but in that case I have no idea what you’re talking about. I wasn’t aware that alcohol abuse was a part of gender oppression except with respect to sexual assault (and maybe gendered pressures to drink or not drink). Does the feminist community really need to have a stated opinion on everything?
I feel sorry for this woman if that’s honestly her 100% opinion. I don’t think making the mistake of having one too many makes you responsible if someone else decides to harm you. Accidents happen. I hope she will grow and with that growth gain an open mind and understanding of how not to blame a victim who needs love and support more than anything else.
I also think you can disagree with an opinion in a polite and resonable way. This woman gave her opinion and while I don’t agree with it I see no reason why to harass her from her view (so long as she isn’t physically attacking a victim or harassing anyone herself).
She gave an opinion. It’s not a fact and she isn’t some president or huge political person. Many of the people in power have horrible ideas and morals and remain in commanding positions. If she gets back lash, well, everyone has an opinion about an opinion.
I always have had a problem with the post-feminist “don’t judge!” attitude. Disapprobation serves a purpose in maintaining, and in changing social norms and Neagu deserves every bit of what she’s getting.
Notice how often in these discussions people say, “Well, since we don’t live in a perfect world, women who do X really are more likely to get raped so they should keep avoiding Y” But what Neagu’s doing here is what enough people in America do to maintain a rock-solid rape culture, one in which 95% of college rape victims don’t report their attacks:
http://jezebel.com/5480276/how-colleges-fail-assault-victims–and-how-students-can-help
This is not neutral, it’s harmful, and not just to her “friend” who was already dealing with the aftermath of her rape before someone she trusted shit all over her in a public forum. I’ve heard enough guys say similar things, that drinking mitigates rape and that it’s the woman’s responsibility to not put herself in harm’s way. This attitude doesn’t just encourage women to be vigilant and control what they can, it encourages men to rape, and especially, to seek out drunk women who they can rape without consequence.
About her coming from Romania, please. This attitude is misogynistic anywhere. It encourages rapists in Romania, just like it does here.
And I would bet that people on campus are also agreeing with her and offering her support. Her view is mainstream enough in this country.
I’m with Kate when she says that feminist sites sometimes seem to “spend so much time defending a woman’s right to drink and not be raped that it comes across as defending getting falling down drunk.”
And I agree with Baraquiel to some degree when she says that “what we should be talking about is not simply the use of alcohol, but the importance of making sure that you are in control of your actions *so that you don’t hurt others*. ”
But I don’t understand why it seems like it’s not OK to also talk about being in control of your actions so that *you* are not hurt. Baraquiel argues that “people have a right to hurt themselves,” but I don’t think that applies — I don’t think that college women in general are getting falling down drunk because they want to hurt themselves, yet they get hurt anyway.
Is there no way to speak about women protecting themselves without then blaming them if they choose not to?
@pedimd – I understand where you’re coming from. But the thing is, what exactly constitutes “protecting yourself”? And who gets to decide that? This woman (http://blog.seattlepi.com/lynscircle/archives/195567.asp) thinks that when women are home alone we should be closing our curtains or else we’re “dumb” and lacking in “common sense”. Clearly that’s absurd — it’s not reasonable to say that women who like natural light when they’re at home are somehow being unsafe. And I think it’s clear that, for example, me going to Afghanistan and walking around alone in a bikini isn’t a smart decision. But in between those extremes, there’s a lot of room to account for different ideas of personal liberty, what a reasonable or acceptable level of safety is, who gets the privilege of irresponsibility (as Spark mentioned above), and so on. And of course there’s the fact that, in my experience, people’s responsibility not to hurt other people is discussed so much less than women’s responsibility to never be in positions where any man could possibly take it into his head to rape us. The message that women need to protect ourselves is so pervasive in the rest of society — do we really need to join that chorus when there’s so much need of other messages? Especially when it is really difficult to do so without being proscriptive and victim blaming.
@Baraquiel: I don’t know how enthused I can get about fighting for women’s right to be irresponsible. It sounds really great to say there are a lot of different ideas of personal liberty and safety, and we have to respect them and not preach. But that’s only great so long as people are giving those choices careful thought. My observation is that people in college don’t really tend to make thoughtful cost-benefit analyses when they decide to drink. And the thing about alcohol is that impairs your judgement, so even if you were thoughtful when you started your evening, you may not be so thoughtful later. I agree that the message that women should protect themselves is more pervasive than the message that men shouldn’t rape. We should talk more about how men shouldn’t rape, but that doesn’t mean we should talk less about women protecting themselves. Especially since year after year, it seems that a large group of young women aren’t listening.
@Baraqiel: Sorry I keep spelling your name wrong!
“My observation is that people in college don’t really tend to make thoughtful cost-benefit analyses when they decide to drink.”
Definitely true.
“And the thing about alcohol is that impairs your judgement, so even if you were thoughtful when you started your evening, you may not be so thoughtful later.”
Also definitely true.
And believe me: I hate seeing my friends get stupid drunk. I hate it even more when they make bad decisions. But making bad decisions, honestly, is part of life, and it’s a valuable part. This is the exact same thing with any freedom. You can’t fight for someone’s freedom if it’s contingent on them only using it in ways that you approve of — then it’s not a freedom at all, it’s a privilege.
@BeckySharper: “Neagu goes a step further–I suspect because she was being deliberately inflammatory and courting controversy.”
This. This is the reason I have trouble feeling too bad for her. I used to teach college-level freshman composition courses, and one of the things I always taught my students was that there is a difference between making an argument to inform and persuade and simply trying to be inflammatory. Neagu’s letter reads more like the latter to me, and IMO if you set out to inflame, you have to be willing to take the heat from the fire that you yourself set.
You are right that making bad decisions is a part of life. People are allowed to make bad decisions. I just don’t think it’s anti-feminist or anti-woman to say that bad decisions are bad. (Not that you personally are saying that.)
@pedimd – No worries about the name thing.
I don’t think it’s anti-feminist or anti-woman in and of itself to do so but you have to consider the context. Saying only that “drinking is a bad decision because it puts you in danger of assault” to women is anti-feminist, in my opinion, because it contributes to an extant discourse of victim-blaming and taking responsibility off rapists. Like I said before — why should we add to that pile when we can say something different that is, in my opinion, more important?
The other thing, of course, is that it doesn’t work. It just doesn’t. Talking about how unhealthy, dangerous, or irresponsible xyz behavior is has never, in my experience, been an effective tactic to get anyone (especially teenagers!) to stop doing it unless you are a close personal acquaintance of theirs, and even then it’s not a sure thing. I’m a little puzzled as to why people keep trying this since it’s so useless.
I didn’t realize that it’s feminism’s responsibility to tackle irresponsible drinking on college campuses. This is another common attack on feminism: why are you angry about x (in this case, rape) when you should be angry at y (drinking)? It’s changing the subject.
We keep saying “falling down drunk.” It’s a subjective term. I have a feeling it means “that reckless girl who got herself raped” and not me, oh never me, I just get a little tipsy every now and then, or not me, I only got really drunk that one time in college when I didn’t know my limits yet.
And of course there’s a place for judgement and maintaining reasonable conduct. But there’s something off about expecting women to be so perfect–you can never have one too many drinks, you can never have an extra slice of cake. Sometimes people experiment. Sometimes they make mistakes. Sometimes people go to excess. It’s called life. Why are we so hard on women for living it?