Stanford

A previous article presented four types of guys to watch out for regarding sexual assault. One of them was opportunists and they were highlighted this week at a trial held at Stanford. We’re not going to talk about this particular case, but let’s dig deeper into the circumstances surrounding opportunistic sexual assault and then make some observations.

We must first answer three questions:

  • Who are the victims?
  • How often does this happen?
  • Who are the perpetrators?

Victims

The Stanford case, and most situations like it, involves a girl who got passed out drunk. So let’s talk about passed out drunk. When it comes to young people, there are four types of drinkers:

  • tea-toddlers
  • social drinkers
  • party animals
  • piss-tanks

Squeaky clean tea toddlers don’t drink; social drinkers have a few but don’t get drunk; party animals get drunk often; and piss-tanks get hammered all the time, many times to the point of passing out.

As a result, party animals and piss-tanks make up the bulk of the victims. But social drinkers can also cross the line, albeit unintentionally.

Frequency

It’s estimated that opportunistic sexual assault occurs 2-300 times per week in North America (Canada and the US), which equals 10-15,000 times per year.

Perpetrators

Perpetrators are young men with medium to high sex drives, who are usually also intoxicated.

Medium to high-drive men who drink beyond the “social drinker” level make up 30-50% of the population. As a result, approx. 40% of young men are potential offenders. Because of these high numbers, they can’t all be classified as monsters.

Nature

By nature, every weekend thousands of young girls get passed out drunk, and by nature, a large percentage of boys have high sex drives. Combine these two with opportunity and you get a crime that has been occurring for centuries.

Usually girls travel in packs—ensuring that if one gets drunk, a friend is there to care for her. But sometimes the drunken wildebeest gets separated from the herd.

Feminists believe that drunk, horny men will act responsibly if we throw some of them in jail. That the threat of punishment will override their naturally raging hormones into not committing a crime that their uninhibited drunken selves believe is easy to get away with.

Anti-feminists say we should just teach young girls never to get drunk.

Conclusion

People often have strong opinions without proper knowledge. Knowledge that is sometimes denied because certain topics are labeled as taboo (therefore, not socially discussed).

Everyone has to accept the truth about the male sex drive and that opportunistic sexual assault can be carried out by almost anyone. Then we need to acknowledge that young girls naturally get drunk as much as young boys do—so stop saying it’s their fault.

Feminists have traditionally focused on educating males about the severity of the crime with little mention about prevention. But perhaps some of the solution lies in adapting social behaviour to reality. For example, Mabel, Betsy, and Inga go to a party and Inga gets wasted. Derrick tells Inga she can sleep in his bed. When the two remaining girls have their conversation, it could go like this.

  • Mabel: “Do you think Inga is going to be okay?”
  • Betsy: “Ya, Derrick said she could sleep in his room.”
  • Mabel: “Maybe we should take her home.”

Also informing young people about reality is a better approach than denying it. Because a well-informed Mabel can access that though Derrick may seem like a fine young man—40% is a high number.

In mathematical terms:  Passed Out Girl + Drunk Horny Guy + Opportunity = Potential Foul

We can’t stop young people from getting drunk and we can’t change the male sex drive, but we can consciously try to remove opportunity. This way, Mabel and Betsy get to go to heaven, Derrick is potentially saved from himself, and Inga doesn’t have to write a 12-page letter.

Note: Lack of prevention doesn’t make sexual assault any less of a crime (if you forget to lock your doors, someone taking your stereo is still stealing) and the actions taken at Stanford were definitely at the deviant end of the 40%, but the point remains—if a girl passes out at a party, take her home.

Leave a Reply