The Demon Drink and the Demonized Woman: Socio-Sexual Stereotypes and Responsibility Attribution in Rape Trials Involving Intoxicants
| Published date | 01 December 2007 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0964663907082737 |
| Date | 01 December 2007 |
| Author | Vanessa E. Munro,Emily Finch |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
THE DEMON DRINK AND THE
DEMONIZED WOMAN:
SOCIO-SEXUAL STEREOTYPES
AND RESPONSIBILITY
ATTRIBUTION IN RAPE TRIALS
INVOLVING INTOXICANTS
EMILY FINCH AND VANESSA E. MUNRO
Brunel University, UK, and University of Nottingham, UK
ABSTRACT
Previous studies have illustrated the existence of a double standard in the attribution
of responsibility in contested sexual consent scenarios whereby intoxicated defendants
tend to be held less responsible for subsequent sexual events than their sober counter-
parts while intoxicated complainants tend to be held more responsible. This study
examined the extent to which the means by which the complainants’ intoxication was
secured would influence this process.1Mock jurors, having been exposed to a trial
reconstruction in which intoxicated sexual consent was at issue, deliberated towards
a unanimous, or failing that, majority verdict on whether rape had occurred. Across
the trial scenarios, the only variables related to the type of intoxicant ingested and the
means of its administration. In a context in which the Sexual Offences Act 2003
purports to restrict reliance in the jury room on questionable stereotypes about socio-
sexual behaviour, this article considers the extent to which participants’ views about
responsibility for intoxication shaped their conclusions on the occurrence of, and
liability for, rape. It also examines the ways in which the social acceptability of some
intoxicants (alcohol) and the social unacceptability of others (Rohypnol) supported
the construction of ‘drug-assisted rape’ as distinguishable from more mundane
instances of intoxicated sex.
KEY WORDS
attribution of responsibility; consent; intoxication; rape; Sexual Offences Act 2003
SOCIAL &LEGAL STUDIES Copyright © 2007 SAGE Publications
Los Angeles, London, New Delhi and Singapore, www.sagepublications.com
0964 6639, Vol. 16(4), 591–614
DOI: 10.1177/0964663907082737
GETTING DRUNK AND GETTING RESPONSIBLE: ATTRIBUTIONS
FOR SEX AND FOR INTOXICATION
There is a well-established link between the use of commonplace intoxicants
like alcohol and sexual assault. Estimates vary between studies, but it is
generally accepted that alcohol has been consumed by one or both parties in
a high proportion of rape cases. In a recent Home Office study, for example,
it was estimated that the complainant had ingested alcohol in 34 per cent of
reported rape cases, although the authors of this report also drew attention
to the existence of data which in fact indicated a higher incidence of 56 per
cent (Kelly et al., 2005: 96).2Recently, it was also reported that the Forensic
Science Service had detected the presence of alcohol in 81 per cent of samples
taken from victims of sexual assault, with 60 per cent of these containing
alcohol levels of nearly double the drink-drive threshold (Scott-Ham and
Burton, 2005). In addition, research suggests that the majority of convicted
rapists have drunk alcohol in the six hours preceding the incident (Finney,
2004: 2), although this in itself does not establish a causal link, since the
intoxication may simply provide ‘dutch courage’ for an already intended
assault (Abbey et al., 2001).
The involvement of alcohol in sexual assault scenarios may, of course, form
part of a broader pattern of dependent or regular drinking behaviour by the
parties involved. Certainly, research indicates that a high percentage of rape
perpetrators have a drinking problem (Grubin and Gunn, 1990)3and that
victims of sexual assault are more likely than their non-victimized counter-
parts to be in the habit of excessive drinking (Corbin et al., 2001). In addition,
however, the issue of intoxication (either of the defendant or of the
complainant) may arise quite independently of any background of drinking
dependency. Given the pervasive use of alcohol in contemporary social inter-
action and the reality that sexual assaults involving intimates or acquaintances
are far more common than those involving strangers, the existence of this link
may be unsurprising. Muehlenhard and Linton, for example, having asked
male and female college students about any incidents of unwanted sexual
activity that they had experienced, concluded that this was significantly more
likely to occur in dates involving intoxicants, speculating that ‘alcohol reduces
men’s inhibitions against violence, provides an excuse for sexual aggression,
and reduces women’s ability to resist’ (Muehlenhard and Linton, 1987: 194).4
Alcohol has thus been suggested to be both a precipitant of, and an excuse
for, sexual aggression by men (Richardson and Campbell, 1982; Richardson
and Hammock, 1991). In addition, alcohol use has been studied as a risk
factor for sexual victimization, since it lowers awareness of risky situations
and impairs the ability to resist assault (Abbey, 1991; Berkowitz, 1992). As a
result, it is perhaps not surprising to find evidence that the involvement of
intoxication in sexual consent scenarios often influences the way in which
observers assign responsibility to the parties involved. In a recent, and highly
publicized, report, for example, 30 per cent of respondents indicated that they
would hold a complainant who was intoxicated at least partially responsible
592 SOCIAL & LEGAL STUDIES 16(4)
To continue reading
Request your trial