Subject: Discussion List for campus-based and allied personnel working to end gender-based violence on campus.
List archive
- From:
- To: Megan Elizabeth Selheim <>, Mahri Irvine <>, "'Crocker, Patricia King Williams - crockepk'" <>, "" <>
- Subject: Re: intoxication and intent
- Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2013 09:27:46 -0700 (PDT)
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=Mz6EPQP/kgui9NOOKxoJE4ABBi9qo/e3EJjJw4sXVa/cpdR0XndYq6xERPwmYGWvQaZaB94VDyeeOn1OduwiYq3xu+eK5qqg/I9EPan415mwtkKGwuZzIXQP/scYX3m7KEDWs5rETkOER9qdiE/ax8L69ri7qW1yo7Q2/U2m/1Q=;
We also get this question quite a bit in our "Understanding Consent" sessions with students on campus. Im sure many of you have used this but I thought I would share it for the folks who may be new to this work.
We use the analogy of a drunk driver... if a person is driving drunk and hits a pedestrian, we would never ask whether the pedestrian was drunk too. The victim's level of intoxication would be irrelevant. And, even if the pedestrian WAS also drunk, it wouldnt minimize the
responsibility placed on the drunk driver for breaking the law.
I realize this analogy isnt a perfect fix, but we find that using an analogy outside of the context of sexual violence helps students wrap their mind around perpetrator responsibility. Again, we mainly use this in large group education sessions when the question about victim intoxication has the potential to derail the session.
Just thought I'd share...
Monica Rivera
Assistant Director for Prevention and Education Programs
& Victim Advocate
Women and Gender
Advocacy Center
Colorado State University
112 Student Services
970-491-6384
"The truth is on
the side of the oppressed" -MX
Please be aware that electronic mail is not a confidential or secure means of communication, therefore your privacy cannot be guaranteed. If you would like to convey personal information, please contact me in person or by phone. This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this email in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Please do not copy, disclose or distribute the material in this e-mail.
From: Megan Elizabeth Selheim <>
To: Mahri Irvine <>; "'Crocker, Patricia King Williams - crockepk'" <>; "" <>
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 9:46 AM
Subject: RE: intoxication and intent
I come across this far more in public educational settings than with clients. Usually, when I encounter this question/debate with students, it’s along the vein of “… but the victim is also responsible, right?”
even if that’s not what’s being said. In those cases, I use David Lisak’s (2002) and Stephanie McWhorter’s (2009) research to redirect the conversation, and point out that while yes, on very rare occasions that may be the situation, the overwhelming number
of sexual assaults are committed intentionally and with full knowledge of the perpetrator, and alcohol is a tool used to incapacitate the victim.
This almost always gets us back on track, and blows a couple minds in the process. I don’t think this would work in a one-on-one client setting, but like I said, it hasn’t really come up for me in client conversations
so far.
--
Megan Selheim
STOP Violence Program Coordinator
Dean of Students Office
Dept. 3135, 1000 E. University Ave., Laramie WY 82071-2000
118 Knight Hall
307-766-3296
www.uwyo.edu/stop
From: Mahri Irvine [mailto:]
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 3:25 PM
To: 'Crocker, Patricia King Williams - crockepk';
Subject: RE: intoxication and intent
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 3:25 PM
To: 'Crocker, Patricia King Williams - crockepk';
Subject: RE: intoxication and intent
Hi Everyone,
I would also be really interested in your perspectives on this, because this is a (hypothetical) scenario that often comes up when I’m talking to people about sexual violence and I do not feel I am educated enough
about this particular issue to respond (in terms of statistics, etc). I have heard that in situations when both victims and perps were drinking/using drugs, the perpetrators tended to use fewer drugs, plying their victims with alcohol/drugs while they consumed
smaller amounts so that they were still in control. But I don’t actually have any articles/research to back up this statement – it’s just something I have heard.
So I really appreciate Patricia’s question about this!
Sincerely,
Mahri
Mahri Irvine
PhD Candidate ("Rape Culture and the Legal System: Women’s Pathways to Prison in Washington, D.C.")
American University Department of Anthropology
From: Crocker, Patricia King Williams - crockepk []
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 4:42 PM
To:
Subject: intoxication and intent
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 4:42 PM
To:
Subject: intoxication and intent
Hi everyone,
Forgive me for asking what has likely been discussed before, but I’m new to the listserv…
As I’m sure many of you have also found, many students I see as clients in our counseling center are struggling to come to terms with sexual experiences they have had where both they and their partners were intoxicated. The questions I
always feel stumped by when working with these clients relate to consent and intent. Specifically, if both parties are intoxicated, is either considered capable of giving or getting consent? And secondly, does someone have to
intentionally take advantage of a person’s incapacitation in order for the act to be considered sexual assault? In less formal language, can someone ‘accidentally’ perpetrate sexual assault if they engage in sexual activity without consent but also
without malicious intent?
Your thoughts are much appreciated as well as any relevant resources that address this unfortunate scenario.
Patricia K. W. Crocker, Ph.D.
Staff Psychologist & Coordinator of Sexual Trauma Empowerment Program
James Madison University
Counseling and Student Development Center
Varner House
800 South Main Street, MSC 0801
Harrisonburg, VA 22807
Phone: (540) 568-6552
Fax: (540) 568-8096
Because of the high value we place on the privacy of our clients, staff members of the CSDC do not use email to provide counseling services. Further, because
we cannot guarantee that messages will be read regularly, information regarding emergency situations should not be transmitted to us via email. All communication about matters other than scheduling should occur either in-person at Varner House or by phone
(540.568.6552). For mental health emergencies occurring after working hours or on weekends, please contact the Office of Public Safety (540.568.6911) or go to the Emergency Room at Rockingham Memorial Hospital, 2010 Health Campus Drive, 540.689.1414.
This message is intended for designated recipient(s). It may contain confidential or proprietary information subject to confidentiality protections. Any
review, retransmission, dissemination, or other use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender by reply email and delete this message.
- intoxication and intent, Crocker, Patricia King Williams - crockepk, 08/20/2013
- Re: intoxication and intent, Brett Sokolow, 08/20/2013
- RE: intoxication and intent, Morey, Patricia L, 08/20/2013
- RE: intoxication and intent, Mahri Irvine, 08/20/2013
- RE: intoxication and intent, Megan Elizabeth Selheim, 08/21/2013
- Re: intoxication and intent, monicahcollins, 08/21/2013
- RE: intoxication and intent, Megan Elizabeth Selheim, 08/21/2013
- Re: intoxication and intent, Brett Sokolow, 08/20/2013
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.