Letters to the Editor

Letters posted here are associated with the following article:
Proposed legal reforms could bring the Land of Cakes "into the 21st century."
The letters thread is now closed.
  • thank you, thank you....

    Dear Ms. Harris,

    Thanks for the excellent, informative article.

    I had just posted my umpteenth complaint about Broadsheet's "journalism", so it's nice to be immediately presented with an opportunity to send a compliment.

    I agree with you....the gender-neutrality bidness is going to send some folks nuts over there....

    thanks,

    David Terry

  • Probably won't do much in the majority of cases

    The criteria for consent are only going to clarify the instances where there's an obvious way to measure - someone is mentally challenged, or they are not.

    However, the problem with the question of being too drunk to consent is that it's very hard to prove, and subject to "morning after" regrets. Anyone who spends time with drunks can usually eyeball when they are past their best, but absent a breathalyzer test result, who's to say what's too drunk? We're not talking about a place where a couple of white wine spritzers is a zany night out, after all.

    I'd say it's a bit like porn in that "you know it when you see it" but 1) that requires the corroboration that you weren't too interested in, and 2) since apparently a blurry view of one of a 17 year old's breasts is pornographic, maybe I don't know it when I see it after all.

    If these kinds of laws cleared up rape as a crime, we'd have seen it happen in the US already. The sad reality is a lot of these cases are going to come down to human frailty - the transgressions of some men, the deceptiveness or fear of some women, and the prejudices of some juries.

    Oh and thanks for the patronizing start re: the Picts. I'm sure that people in the cradle of the Industrial Revolution and the Enlightenment will appreciate that from someone in a country where more than one presidential candidate refuses to accept evolution.

  • Sad, just sad

    So women cannot be held accountable for anything they do sexually if theyve drank alcohol but the other party can if they drank as much or more?

    So is that because youre mentally incapable or half-witted?

    This is crazy talk.

    Ladies you need to grow up and accept some responsibility.

  • I'm curious

    Why would the gender neutral terminology piss off the Scots? I mean, do they think they are so manly that they can't be raped or something? Or do they really enjoy forcefully buggering each other and would be mad that the party is over?

    Pray tell, folks who know more of that culture (I'm of Scottish descent like quite a few folks from my part of the south, but I really don't know much about it.)

  • Point on language

    "Until 2002, defendants were permitted to question their accusers directly in court; there was no rape shield law."

    According to Wikipedia, a rape shield law is "a law that limits a defendant's ability to cross-examine rape complainants about their past sexual behaviour."

    That's very different than "permitted to question their accusers directly in court".

    The latter would seem to be in direct conflict with the sixth amendment to the Constitution, which ensures that "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right...to be confronted with the witnesses against him".

    Not to nit pick, but I think language around these issues is really important. Thanks for your good work.

  • This is completely unfair

    I'm male. Let's say I go out and have fifteen drinks and get behind the wheel of a car. And get pulled over. At the time I behind the wheel, I was presumably too drunk to know what I was doing. However, I'm going to get nailed anyway. The fact that at the time I actually committed the crime I was incapable of understanding what was happening doesn't matter. Jail, here we come. The decision is going to be based on the fact that before I started drinking, I knew the law, and I'm responsible for everything I do while drunk.

    I'm female. I hitch up my skirt, go to the pub and get blasted. I get picked up, I have a lot of drunken sex, and then the next morning, I wake up and decide that I didn't like Angus, or whoever I slept with. I claim that I was raped. If I want to pursue it, Angus goes to jail. If, on the other hand, I decide I like Angus, and the sex was great, I can choose not to pursue the jail option and life goes on.

    In the first case, the man is responsible because he supposedly made the decision to drink, and he's responsible for everything that happens. In the second case, the woman makes the decision to drink, but she's not only not responsible, but Angus, who may have had no idea she was really drunk and wasn't consenting, goes to jail. This is the equivalent of requiring other drivers to stay out of the way of someone who's drunk and driving.

    If the world were fair, then if you're female and go to a bar and get so loaded that you're incapable of consent, or nonconsent, then whatever happens after that (we're not talking about violence here, we're talking about situations where the man thinks there's consent and it turns out that legally, his date is incapable of providing it, no matter what she says or does at the time) should be her problem.

    Moral: in any case, if you drink, you have to live with the consequences, and it shouldn't be the job of the justice system to clean up your mess. Just don't drink. Either that or have the law require that you wear a button all night saying "Incapable of Consent -- Stay Away."

  • accountable for what?

    So women cannot be held accountable for anything they do sexually if theyve drank alcohol but the other party can if they drank as much or more?

    So is that because youre mentally incapable or half-witted?

    Actually it's because the only person who committed a crime is the rapist. The rape victim didn't do anything they need to be held accountable for. Being drunk isn't a criminal act, even if you're a woman. Neither is being raped, although you wouldn't know it from the commentary here. But raping someone, even if you're drunk when you do it, is. We don't excuse people from committing criminal acts just because they're drunk, or because their victim is. Unless you think it should be okay to rob people who are passed out because you know, they didn't say I couldn't take their money...