We learned earlier today that evil females are trying to destroy one of the few remaining safe spaces for men in our culture – professional football. Now we learn that evil drunk females have their blurry sights set on another man space: College fraternities.
The brave soul bringing this crucial information to the men of the world? The impressively tan frat man Bill Frezza, who presented his case in a post on Forbes.com with the subtle title
Alas, the Femborg Collective must have caught wind of this little breach in security. The piece was quickly taken down, and Frezza was relieved of his duties as a contributor to Forbes. (You can still see the Google cache version here though.)
So what did brother Frezza argue? Basically, that drunken women are actively infiltrating American frats – and threatening to bring them down by being drunk and female. While frat brothers are carefully policed by well-meaning elders like Frezza – the head of the alumni house corporation for his MIT fraternity – the ladies are uncontrolled and uncontrollable:
Fraternity alumni boards, working with chapter officers, employ a variety of policies designed to guide and police member behavior. Our own risk management manual exceeds 22 pages. The number of rules and procedures that have to be followed to run a party nowadays would astound anyone over 40. We take the rules very seriously, so much so that brothers who flout these policies can, and will, be asked to move out. But we have very little control over women who walk in the door carrying enough pre-gaming booze in their bellies to render them unconscious before the night is through.
(Emphasis mine.)
Damn those drunk gals, all liquored-up on booze that our frat brothers didn’t provide, honest, come on we all know those bitches were drunk when they got here right fellas let’s keep our goddamn stories straight.
Yes, boozed up males also show up at parties, sometimes mobs of them disturbing the peace on the front steps. But few are allowed in, especially if they are strangers. … [I]t is … irresponsible women that the brothers must be trained to identify and protect against, because all it takes is one to bring an entire fraternity system down.
So how exactly do these terrible gals do their damage? A variety of devious ways.
Alcohol poisoning due to overconsumption before, during, or after an event. Death or grievous injury as a result of falling down the stairs or off a balcony. Death or grievous injury as a result of a pedestrian or traffic accident as the young lady weaves her way home.
That’s right. Some of these gals are apparently willing to give up their own lives in order to make frats look bad.
Oh, but some use an even more devious weapon:
False accusation of rape months after the fact triggered by regrets over a drunken hook-up, or anger over a failed relationship. And false 911 calls accusing our members of gang rape during a party in progress.
It’s gotten so bad that Frezza feels compelled to tell young frat brothers that maybe it’s not such a good idea to have sex with drunken women, or even to bring them to your room for a game of Jenga.
Never, ever take a drunk female guest to your bedroom – even if you have a signed contract indicating sexual consent. Based on new standards being promulgated on campus, all consent is null and void the minute a woman becomes intoxicated – even if she is your fiancée.
The solution? Lower the drinking age to 18. That’ll show ’em!
No, really.
Unless and until the drinking age is reduced to 18, students relearn how to pace themselves while drinking, and individuals are held responsible for the consequences of their own behavior, rather than blaming the institutions that house and educate them, the only defense is extreme vigilance.
This is how you can tell that Frezza really did go to MIT. Because this is STEM logic at its finest.
Oh, I noticed this at the end of his piece:
Bill Frezza is the President of The Beta Foundation, the house corporation for the Chi Phi fraternity at MIT.
Ha ha, what a beta. He’s so beta he’s the president of Betas.
Adrian: Why, why, why couldn’t you get to “that being said” and then go “Do I really need to say this next part?”
Men can be raped by women, Adrian. WTF?
@cloudiah, Adrian is here to tell us what ‘real’ rape is, and what’s not, bless zir heart…
Adrian acts like there’s an epidemic of people who consented while kind of drunk turning around and calling it rape, reporting it and that resulting in a conviction. Bullshit
.
@Adrian:
Get the fuck out of here. This statement makes you more retrograde than current rape law, that’s how bad it is.
@Adrian:
Nobody is arguing that. What the hell do you even mean by “not responsible for your words?” When are “words” relevant to the issue of rape? If you’re talking about consent, consent is not simply words. Consent is a mental state communicated by words, and drunkenness impairs that mental state to the point where you can’t safely trust the words.
Someone could write an essay on all the rape myths you buy into, all the memes you repeat, and all the basics you get wrong.
Consider it thrown, if you haven’t been banned yet. How is that scenario not rape, exactly?
I’ve reported Adrian to mods/David
Behold, an MRA flatly denying and ignoring men and boys who get raped.
Adrian, step on all the broken Legos. Or, bathe in skunk musk: it might make you less repellant.
I’ve put Adrian on moderation for rape apology. Adrian, if you can’t figure out what you said that was rape apologism, please read the comments from others here again.
On the issue of drunk sex: No, consensual sex doesn’t become rape if one or both of the partners has had something to drink. But in the context of Frezza’s victim blaming post, it’s clear he’s talking about women that are drunk to the point of incapacity — eg, they’re falling out of windows. Having sex with someone too drunk to consent is rape.
Alcohol is *so* problematic. It impairs judgment. While intoxicated, I’ve done things I otherwise wouldn’t have done—-including sexual acts.
And I’ve had sex while drunk with drunk partners…great, wild, Bacchanalian romps, with no regrets on behalf of either party.
I’ve also been pressured—harassed, actually—-to engage in sex while drunk, and said “No” (and had problems getting that “No” accepted at face value).
I’ve also been sexually victimized…as a teen, by an older individual who had gotten me drunk.
There is a line that cleaves. On one side is “Omg, I *really* wish I hadn’t done *that*”…and on the other is sexual assault or rape. I think it’s entirely possible that it can be difficult to know exactly where to draw that line before one reaches a certain level of maturity and experience. Speaking from my own experience as a victim, I know *intellectually* that I wasn’t capable of *real* consent—besides being impaired, I was below the legal age of consent. I also know that I was young and horny and *aching* to have sex with someone besides myself…so much so that it’s possible to parse the incident so that *I* could appear to have been the instigator. But the perpetrator, being older and more experienced, knew the situation and took advantage of my youth and my hormones and my drunken state. Even now, decades later, I have to underscore those facts to remind myself that I was not the one at fault.
One must trust one’s judgment, and the agency of one’s (potential) partner.
If one is not in a position to do that, one should keep one’s pants on and one’s junk to one’s self.
The whole needing to lower the drinking argument is actualy pretty valid. The core problem is that pretty much all these parties feature underaged drinking which puts them outside the law and thus makes it harder to control other issues. If you have a bunch of underaged drinkers you can hardly hire say a couple of “security” people to make sure that people don’t climb on the roof and fall off or disappear off into rooms together if one of the parties is clearly in no state to do so.
My impression was that this blog was supposed to be about “misogyny” in society.
If the post was pulled immediately and the man was fired, how is this “misogyny”? It’s evidence against it.
Why was I put back on moderation?
xXX360noscopeXXx: I don’t get that argument at all; if the problem is with underage drinkers, why not go the other way and not serve alcohol at all?
Serve alcohol? I hope (given how libel laws work) you aren’t suggesting that a frat house would serve alcohol to under-aged drinkers. That would be highly illegal and frat houses have been dragged through the courts often enough that they aren’t for the most part going to do something that stupid. Of course a certain amount of alcohol may find its way onto the premises and be consumed by under-aged drinkers but it certainly wasn’t served by what passes for the fraternity authorities.
As for why fraternities don’t stop that its because 18 year olds want to drink and fraternities want to have members.
Woody, you’re on moderation because your comments continue to be incredibly boring. But I guess I’ll let through those that aren’t knee-jerk defenses of AVFM.
Except the part, where, you know, the whole post was massively misogynistic.
Enjoy the Hoary Netherworld of moderation, you nitwit.
The collective drinking age was upped to 21 in the US because the USA became a very car-centric culture. Studies seem to show that a drinking age of 18 meant even MORE drunk drivers.
I’m not sure it’s fair.
Woody has MRX-Ray glasses on. They screen out all evidence of misogyny.
@leftwingfox – the argument for lowering the drinking age is that if it was legal for all students at a college to drink, they could go to bars or other public venues where there are people keeping an eye on how much they’ve consumed because of liability, etc. Because it’s illegal, you get a lot more “house parties” and lots more dodgy behavior by underaged people on campuses trying to drink and keep it hidden so nobody gets into legal trouble, which leads to a lack of supervision and more abuse of alcohol. It’s similar to the argument for legalizing other drugs.
And bullfuckingshit frats don’t give alcohol to underaged guests. They know they’re not supposed to and it happens anyway.
I would point out to Adrian if he’s still lurking that if you convince someone who is drunk to sign a contract, the law already states that the contract can be nullified because the drunk person was incapacitated, especially if the other person was not drunk. So this idea that the law would have to be changed is also bullshit. You are responsible for your own actions when drunk, but that doesn’t make it okay for another person to prey on your incapacitation. (Drunk drivers are not being preyed upon, before any other trolls bring that up.)
RE: Adrian
A few years ago it occurred to me that only men could commit rape
You’re wrong.
(please don’t throw some viagra or using tools scenario at me here)
Why not?
rape is the worst crime because it is the only one that is a one way street.
No, you’re wrong. You’re flat out wrong. I know men who have been raped by women. You’re wrong. Offensively wrong. Horrifically wrong. You’re so wrong, I can’t even begin to tackle the level of wrong. I’m a male rape survivor, and you are wrong wrong wrong WRONG.
I’m sorry if I offended you in any way.
I’m sorry you believe such horseshit.
First of all: women can have penises. Second of all: even a woman does NOT have a penis, she can still rape someone. If I shove my fist up a guy’s ass without his consent, my gender is irrelevant: it is rape. If I force him to perform sexual acts upon me, that is rape. There are PLENTY of sexual acts that require no penis.
Jesus Christ, I know men who were raped by their fucking mothers as children, and you have the GALL to come here and tell me what rape is when you admit you haven’t spoken to survivors on the subject? You have the chutzpah to come here and tell ME, a rape survivor, what rape is, and who can and can not perpetrate it?
Get out.
One of the nastiest myths about rape is that arousal during rape means the victim wanted it. Absolutely not so.
Arousal and orgasm can happen to the victim against the victim’s will. (cisgender) Men can be forced to penetrate against their will.
The assailant may deliberately do this.
Even more triggers in the article:
http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2013-05/science-arousal-during-rape
Adrian is terrible. Brain bleach for anyone who needs it:
PSA: when someone’s trolling or being terrible, folks, contact the mods and David. There’s no guarantee we’ll see requests for modding/banning in general thread comments. Don’t hesitate to use the Great Big Kitty Head, or worry that something’s too minor, or that someone else will have done it. Speak up! This is why David went with having moderators in the first place.
Also, can’t believe I’m having to say this AGAIN but here is how it works.
If you are shoving drinks down someone’s throat because you know they won’t fuck you sober, you are being a douche, regardless of how many drinks you consume.
If you take advantage of someone’s drunk state, you are being a douche, regardless of how many drinks you consume.
If you are not sure if someone will fuck you sober because the first time it comes up is when they’re drunk, you probably should not have sex with them.
This isn’t fucking rocket science, guys. It’s not like someone drinks one drop of alcohol and magically becomes another species. People can have consensual drunk sex; they do all the time. The key is not to take advantage of them.