This, of course, does not mean women do not drink--as a woman myself, I drink alcohol. But I think it becomes easy for our society to place blame on a woman if she is drinking and then raped. After all, "she wasn't supposed to be drinking in the first place". And I think this plays into the ethos of how the target is perceived.
For example: If women aren't supposed to drink--but they do--then they are making a bad decision. Therefore, the ramifications of that bad decision, no matter what they are, is her fault. She then becomes the harlot, the promiscuous woman, the slut, the tease...
While in comparison the rapist just made a bad decision (rape) and was unable to control himself because he was drinking. Which brings us back to the perspective mentioned before--"men are supposed to be drinking/drunk", therefore, they're just doing "what is normal/expected of men".
But I like how Sydney summarized the intention and argument of book--especially given that the stories in Missoula involve intoxication by both men and women: alcohol isn't supposed to be the excuse that makes rape okay.
However, herein lies the problem: our society still considers alcohol an acceptable "excuse" to explain someone's actions (among a myriad of other factors). This leads to a lack in prosecution or lenient sentences; such as those seen in Missoula or, in most recent news, the Brock Turner case.
This is why the challenge to consider how I view men versus women drinking struck me. I had to evaluate my thinking, perspective, feelings on that statement. To question why I consider men drinking alcohol different than women. To ask myself what feeds into my own stereotypes of men/women drinking. To be aware of how this perpetuates rape culture and violence against women.
Check out this timely article that reminds us of just a few women that were affected by an "alcohol excuse"
No comments:
Post a Comment