Targeting Drunk Women Accounts for Sexual Aggression, Not 'Blurred Lines'

[ismnotwasm]

We told you so you creepy fucks.

Crossed signals from alcohol-impaired perception do not cause unwanted come-ons, new research suggests. Instead, aggressors simply target women who appear inebriated
Mar 7, 2014 |By Roni Jacobson

When alcohol is involved, people are more inclined to view sexual aggression as morally ambiguous. New research, however, suggests that men who harass women in bars and clubs aren’t misinterpreting women’s signals because they are drunk. Rather, they may be singling out women who appear intoxicated as easy targets.

In a study of sexual aggression in bars researchers have found that the invasiveness and persistence of unwanted come-ons is not correlated with how much the perpetrator has had to drink, but is instead related to how drunk the person on the receiving end seems to be. The paper, aptly titled “Blurred Lines? Sexual Aggression and Barroom Culture,” after the summer hit by Robin Thicke, was published earlier this week in the journal Alcoholism: Clinical & Experimental Research. “Its not a blurred line, its a pretty easy line,” says Kathryn Graham, senior scientist at the Center for Addiction and Mental Health in Toronto and co-author of the paper. “The whole culture that thinks blurred lines is some kind of truth or inevitability, from our data, is a little bit astray.”

The researchers hired and trained pairs of observers to go into bars and record every incident of sexual aggression that they witnessed. In about 90 percent of the 258 cases they documented the person on the receiving end of the sexual aggression was a woman and the aggressor was a man. The other 10 percent of incidents split about evenly between female on male, male on male and female on female aggressions. Because these situations occurred infrequently, the researchers decided to analyze only the interactions between heterosexual couples in which the male was the perpetrator.

Sexually aggressive behaviors ranged in terms of invasiveness from suggestive and harassing remarks to groping and grinding up against strangers. “Invasiveness in particular was related to how intoxicated the woman was, not how intoxicated the man was. That provided further evidence that it probably wasn’t misperception,” Graham says. “There isn’t much question if someone comes by and anonymously grabs a woman’s breast and then disappears into the crowd that he really thought she wanted it. I mean that’s just for his own gratification,” she adds.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/targeting-drunk-women-accounts-for-sexual-aggression-not-blurred-lines/

[chervilant]

1. We feminists have addressed this

MULTIPLE times now, and we'll continue to do so, despite the sexists and misogynists herein.

[ismnotwasm]

4. It is self-evident

Despite the whining of MRA's or your average creep-at-the bar. I do like that it's in Scientific American, although if there is a comment section I wouldn't want to Read it.

[malthaussen]

2. What always intrigues me about these kinds of studies...

... is the fact that they have to be done at all. Anyone with the brain-capacity of an avocado should be able to figure out that aggression has nothing to do with the target. Yet somehow, such ridiculous claims gain credence and have to be refuted. Somebody is really good at the Con.

-- Mal

[ismnotwasm]

3. +1000

[Common Sense Party]

5. Plus the pervs are buying drinks for the women, trying to get them inebriated.

Dude, if that's your romantic M.O., you're a complete loser and you might as well go have a date with your hand.

[ismnotwasm]

6. ...

Exactly

[malthaussen]

7. Or as I like to say...

The only real "love potion" is chloral hydrate.

Of course, these days they use some other compound. It really is hard to understand why somebody would want to have sex with an unconscious woman. Why not go all the way to necrophilia?

-- Mal