In light of the current situation with ongoing rape law reform, I admit it was also refreshing to read an opinion from another woman blogger on the issues.

Ellee presents some interesting research below. Its good to know that this issue is not simply a cause for the Left, or 'traditional' feminists per se. It is an issue many women I know do regard as such - an issue - because we do live in a society where we socialise more often and more frequently and we all drink. Fact.

"...researchers have found that jurors often took the view that it was ‘reasonable’ for a man to assume that silence represented sexual consent, even if the silence was due to the fact that the woman was totally intoxicated.

Because it is unlawful to conduct research with real juries, researchers from The Economic and Social Research Council used trial and jury room simulations to find out how the legislation was working. These are its main findings, showing that gender stereotyping is very much evident:

In situations where the woman had become involuntary drunk, many jurors continued to hold her partially responsible for what took place - either because she accepted drinks from the defendant, failed to stand her ground against pressure to drink more or did not take adequate care to ensure that her drinks were not ’spiked’ (by either extra alcohol or drugs) .

Even when a woman had unknowingly drunk spiked drinks, juries were reluctant to convict defendants of rape unless they were convinced that the drink had been spiked with the specific intention of sexual assault, as opposed to ‘loosening up’ a reluctant partner.

It also emerged that jurors were less inclined to equate ‘taking advantage’ of a drunken women with rape in situations in which the woman’s normal behaviour was to drink heavily in the company of men.

By contrast, in cases where the date rape drug - Rohypnol - had been used, jurors were more inclined to hold the defendant responsible for rape, even though the effect of the drug on the woman was the same as if she were very drunk.

We live in a society where women do go out and socialise as i said and most will take reasonable precautions to keep themselves safe. They remain vulnerable. Even a few glasses of wine can have an effect. Excusing rapists first by suggesting women need to do more is a bit rich, as is suggesting they are all de facto drunken slags or liars who deserve to be taken advantage of - but that attitude seems to be out there.

Distinguishing violent assault rape from date rape and classifying the two seperately would help. Challenging attitudes in young males and making it clear date rape is a crime not a rutting right would help, eg men accepting some responsibility in their behaviour and that there are limits. Challenging public attitudes to rape generally would help since they make up the juries. Tackling the drink industry and its targeting of young people - for a broad number of reasons not only rape. Keeping anonymity all round. But ultimately where assault is concerned it rests with the law to make the impact - somehow or other the law has to change. And likely will. I agree with Ellee that 'the jury is guided on matters of law at the end of the day, and as the law stands, it does not help the alleged victim'.