Tuesday, 15 December 2009

Alcohol causes TWO types of drunkeness?

The wonderfully-named Lady Stern is calling for more men to be jailed for rape by withdrawing the defence of intoxication (or rather, I presume, the defence that being intoxicated the defendent lacked the required mens rea - I had thought this defence was removed by the 2003 Sexual Offences Act, but no doubt Lady Stern knows what she's talking about).

Stern is quoted as saying "Being drunk is voluntary and people who become drunk are responsible for their actions."

But only, of course, if they are men. For Lady Stern, women who become drunk are not responsible for their actions - they are victims.

Go figure.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

If a sober man has sex with a drunk woman, it is rape.

If a sober woman has sex with a drunk man, it is also rape.

If a drunk woman has sex with a drunk man, it is most certainly rape.

Let's just cut to the chase: the goal of Labour's misandric ideologues is that all heterosexual(*) is rape (thank you, MacKinnon and Dworkin) and should be prosecuted as such.

Thus the paradigm should be: if a man and a woman has sex, the state should intervene, imprison the man and send the woman to a Womyn's Lesbian Re-Education Camp where she will don ethnic garb, receive a mandatory crew cut and be fed a diet of organic tofu until such times as she recants the patriarchy by embracing her Inner Lesbian.

(* = Gloria Steinem, of course, maintains that homosexual activity is an imitation of heterosexual norms and, therefore, when two men have gay gay bum sex, it is an expression of the gay men's desire to rape a woman and should be treated as though it were a real rape.)

Anonymous said...

I think that drunkenness was at best only ever a partial defence to a charge of rape. In any case, I suspect that what Lady Stern is getting at is not drunkenness as a defence per se, but the difficulty in proving beyond reasonable doubt that consent was denied when both the alleged victim and perpetrator were completely bladdered. As the only way round this problem is to completely disregard anything the defendant has to say on the matter, it is hard to think of a practical and just solution, but no doubt that won't stop New Labour coming up with something that is neither!

JuliaM said...

I think I'll set up a company making pre-coital voice recordings of contract agreements for legal purposes, to be used after the fact.

I'll make a mint!

Krauser said...

Julia, such recordings will be inadmissable because they suggest women are to be held responsible for their actions - and that can NEVER happen in misandrist Britain.

Budgie said...

No wonder Mrs Bercow is now a Labour candidate (in waiting) - she was a victim all along.

Anonymous said...

nice post. thanks.