Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Readers Write: Women As Club Commodities

By Heather Gehlert, AlterNet. Posted January 4, 2007.


AlterNet readers sound off about risks young women face in bars and nightclubs, the "she-asked-for-it" mentality, and who, if anyone, is a victim.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Heather Gehlert

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Most people would probably agree that women, particularly young women, face certain risks in bars and nightclubs. What they can't agree on is why this happens, how big the risks are, and what the solution is. Most of our readers would probably also agree that empowering women is a good thing, but they have drastically different ideas of what empowerment means.

An article published Tuesday called "How Bars Exploit Underage Women as Commodities" drew a wide range of responses -- some quite heated -- from AlterNet readers.

Written by Liz Funk, the article asserts that some bar and nightclub tactics such as admitting underage women, offering women free drinks, and using women to attract business can put them at an increased risk for harassment or rape. Funk, who considers herself a feminist, quotes a source who says this is exploitation.

To that, some readers gave applause, calling it "empowering," while others recoiled and said it "reinforces myths" and is a "disservice to women."

Below are excerpts of their comments, with a response from the 18-year-old author herself at the end.

Some of the early responses suggested that nothing is wrong with the "special treatment" women receive in bars and clubs.

Women can enjoy their cheap drinks "without becoming victims," wrote one reader under the name ladyoracle:

Yes, the point of these promotions is to attract men to the bar because there's practically a guarantee of finding lots of drunk women there, whether they are underage or not. If that marketing works, it's because men fall for it. If women are willing to take that risk for some cheap drinks, then that's their choice.

But women can take advantage of the offers without becoming victims. And men can find other clubs with gender-neutral drink specials and covers.

In my years of clubbing (and I look like a Barbie), I've never been come onto by a guy who pressured me, or even attempted to pressure me into anything beyond perhaps a pathetic attempt because he had nothing to loose. Sometimes after being refused they call me a name, but, whatever. That's part of bar and clubbing culture. The time I was slipped the date rape drug, yeah that guy was a friend, not a stranger.

Some readers say debating the ethics of drink specials misses the point.

"That young women are getting free drinks is not the problem or what makes them "victims," wrote one reader under the name Zenobia. "It is WHY they are getting the illusory special treatment that is the problem. A rat gets free cheese from a rat trap, and yet we don't say, "But why is the rat complaining? He's getting food."

Zenobia's post continues:

The larger question, though, is why do so many women not get the TOOLS they need NOT to be victims? Why don't both girls AND boys get the tools they need to treat all their brothers and sisters with dignity and respect? ...

[F]or girls and women to choose -- as active agents not victims -- how to make smart choices and how to recognize when they are being exploited, they need to learn how to read situations and how to analyze the media sources that try to brainwash them into being products for someone else to get rich. They need access to strong, self-aware role models as they form their identities. They need to be empowered enough to realize that they do not have to follow pack-herd mentality to have worth. ...

Maybe if girls and young women were inundated with as many images of females as astronauts, professors, heads of socially responsible companies making a difference, contemplative poets, and athletes (celebrated for their ability rather than for their ability to turn shallow men's heads) as they were innundated with images of bimbos jiggling for male approval, they would think about themselves a little differently, and make more empowered choices. Likewise, maybe boys would treat young women like something other than the sex objects they see everywhere, conditioning them to think of all "girls" as hunks of meat.

Girls need to speak up and assert themselves against their own exploitation for the situation to ever change, and I applaud Liz for being one of those who has the guts to do it. That is how you say NO to being a victim and YES to being empowered.

By contrast, some readers argued that articles like this one are not empowering -- they're a part of the problem.

"I am deeply troubled by the Liz Funk article," wrote karoblink:

The message and implication of the article was [that] women who go to bars and drink alcohol are putting themselves at risk for rape, period. I am astounded that a feminist website would be so irresponsible by reinforcing these rape myths.

I am a volunteer sexual abuse crisis counselor, and I can not tell you how many times women have been assaulted and blame themselves because they were at a bar drinking and felt that they were somehow responsible. Additionally, because fear of being blamed is common, the decision for a victim to report a sexual assault becomes more difficult. Ms. Funk's article only will confirm these fears by erroneously placing the fault onto to the victim.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: feminism, rape, underage, alcohol

Heather Gehlert is a managing editor at AlterNet.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
A Better Response is Required
Posted by: polyquat50 on Jan 4, 2007 3:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Come on, Liz. There are no editors to blame here. You can make a better attempt to answer your critics. Or can you?

Perhaps a mia culpa then?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Show responsibility and enforce the law.
Posted by: colinmeister on Jan 4, 2007 6:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If a woman over 21 years of age becomes intoxicated and is taken advantage of, it is her fault. Women are responsible for looking after themselves.

If a woman under 21 years of age becomes intoxicated in a bar or club, the law should be enforced, and the liquor license of the establishment in question should be removed for anything more than one isolated incedent. The threat of being put out of business should focus the minds of bar and club owners on the risks of having underage drunken women in their establishments.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Nice sentiment!! Posted by: russianblue1
» See "Nice Sentiment" . . . Posted by: russianblue1
A NOT SO BAD IDEA-(no need to beat up on me)
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Jan 4, 2007 7:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just a thought - Check out www.cbc/consumer/story. it's short and to the point. It addresses the problems this article talks about. It is from Quebec, Canada and concerns the perception of women and alcohol . No one is trying to ruin anyone's good time. Just a few good ideas. Advertising is a big consideration here. Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Congratulations Heather!
Posted by: faultroy on Jan 4, 2007 7:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I guess one must have female anatomy to understand what the hell you are talking about. Your commentary makes no sense to me. As a matter of fact your analogy in referencing Maureen Dowd doesn't even remotely make any sense. You use bizarre analogies. And from a journalistic standpoint: too bad you didn't have another Alternet writer "edit" this part of your commentary--it certainly would have made it less abstruse. I notice you only commented on the "touchy feely" aspects of the article: it would have been more professional of you to have also addressed it's inherent bias and inaccuracies. This was also brought out by a number of Alternet commentors but you chose to conveniently gloss over them.
And while you define other comments as "mean spirited," I think every Alternet reader would agree a published writer has an inherent responsibilty to be fair, accurate and honest. In this context, nothing is "mean spirited." Either the article was accurate and balanced or it wasn't.
Funk wrote an article-- not an opinion piece. If she wants to say: "In my opinion...." then anyone criticizing her personally(including me) would indeed be "mean spirited," but in this case she was presenting a feature article and in this context if she can't stand the heat, she should go into another line of work.
And if there really are three "editors" at Women's eNews, that rewrote the piece )as you imply) and changed the nature of what Funk said and meant, then why not tell Alternet readers what specifically was left out and how specifically this changed the nature and scope of the article?--rather than you becoming a PR Flack for and an official spokesperson of both Funk and Women's eNews--I hope you are being compensated because it certainly makes one take pause as to your impartiality and
editorial good judgement.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Congratulations Heather! Posted by: Heather Gehlert
» RE: Congratulations Heather! Posted by: Heather Gehlert
Wow
Posted by: chaoslegs on Jan 4, 2007 8:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Apparently Colinmeister is a complete ass. Blame the victim for being taken advantage of. I hope all the women in your life know how little you think of their rights to not be victims regardless of their state of being.

As a man, my question is why aren't we doing more to keep the assholes around us from taking advantage of those with less wisdom to keep themselves out of risky situations. But I guess you get this as it becomes more and more of a "I got mine" society.

Even in college I would not have sex on the first night I met a woman, especially if alcohol is involved, because I wanted neither of us to have regrets about questionable judgement. This surprised some women who became my girlfriends, but I will stick by my morals (and I am an atheist :)

Remember, just because they have increased the ability of someone to take advantage of their intoxicated state, it is the taking advantage that is wrong.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Wow Posted by: jaby
» RE: Wow Posted by: TerryS
» RE: Wow Posted by: jaby
» RE: Wow Posted by: TerryS
» RE: Wow Posted by: jaby
» RE: Wow Posted by: TerryS
» RE: Wow Posted by: planet doomed
» RE: Wow Posted by: jaby
» You are a compassionate-less Posted by: russianblue1
Let’s be straight
Posted by: jessica@feministing.com on Jan 4, 2007 8:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First let me say that I’m grateful to Alternet for providing a space for discourse on these issues, and this article in particular.

But I think that characterizing the responses to the articles as feminist infighting, personal animus, or even the varied ideologies of the Third Wave is misleading and just straight up wrong.

The blogger responses to Funk’s piece were not “vengeful” or filled with “malice,” they weren’t a reflection of feminists tearing each other down because they feel “threatened.” The concerns over the article were much simpler than that—and the majority of the responses addressed the same three things:

Women’s eNews and Funk characterizing this piece as objective, rather than an opinion piece.

The use of an extremely dubious source.

And finally (most offensively, in my opinion) the publishing of a piece in a feminist media source that explicitly makes the argument that if women stayed at home they wouldn’t be attacked.


This isn’t about arguing whether or not going to bars is safe; this isn’t about different ways of viewing feminist thought. This is about an article that posits itself as an objective news piece being anything but and a feminist news source publishing a piece that blames women for getting raped.

I understand that it’s not easy or pleasant to have attacks on your writing—believe me, I understand. But I think it’s important to be able to back up your work, arguments, and sources without pooh-poohing valid criticisms by saying that they are malicious or personal, or that the piece was heavily edited.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Women, just don't leave the house!
Posted by: vangogh69 on Jan 4, 2007 9:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not to belittle the serious issue of violence against women (something I'm a staunch advocate of doing away with) but I can't help but think this article is merely furthering the myth that all men are rapist and in fact, secretly desire nothing more to rape! Jesus Christ, can't we get a new hook on this song ladies!? Some of us men get so tired of getting "that look" from every woman, as if they all were a stack of free money. I understand that in a patriarchical society, men wield the power and determine the politics but isn't throwing all the responsibility for rape onto (all) men both disempowering women, stopping the dialogue, and taking us in circles?

And really, at a time when the US had just illegally executed a head of state (Hussein), shouldn't we be talking about more important things???

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Grrr....YOU'RE ONLY 18?!?!?! And WE JUS JELLUS!?!?!
Posted by: mmeetoilenoir on Jan 4, 2007 11:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First off...funny that THIS article, too, didn't mention very good responses by myself, a club dancer, and another gentleman that worked as a bouncer. Go figure. What they don't want to hear won't be reported, I suppose...

...and this little 18 YEAR OLD who probably hasn't even BEEN to a club is writing about this stuff? How would she know? Can we say fake ID? I think we can!

Also, kid- AND I DO MEAN KID!- you're not going to make it anywhere with that fucking cocky attitude of, "Well, if they don't like what was said, then tough! They're just hAtErZ! And, yeah, it's not my opinion, anyway!!!!"

Like I asked in my original comments...

ALTERNET, WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU!?!?!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Get a clue
Posted by: Donna_Darko on Jan 4, 2007 1:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Liz Funk said she thinks the wide range of comments are "very indicative of what third wave feminism is": "I think the malice in regards to this article is reflective of the sad truth of feminism that we've hashed out over and over; women -- even feminist women -- seem quick to tear other apart, especially when they feel threatened. This is by no means to say that I haven't participated in this bashing, but I think the success of the November 2006 elections said something on the value of cooperating with people you aren't crazy about rather than wasting entire days trying to tear them down."

A low blow straight from anti-feminist playbook. The Third Wave is about in-fighting? Nice misogynist statement there. Feminists didn't "tear you apart" because they felt "threatened". You are simply mimicking the behavior of misogynists and anti-feminists. Get a clue.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So what are you proposing?
Posted by: Logic's Edge on Jan 4, 2007 3:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As in so many of these articles, the author presents what she sees as a problem, but offers no solutions for it.

When some point out that there are steps a woman can take to ensure her safety, such as going with female friends and taking cabs home, they just get yelled at "sure, blame the victim", again without offering any ideas for improving the situation.

It's as though the goal is simply to piss on men rather than to accomplish anything constructive.

Do you want the drinking age of 21 to be strictly enforced?

Do you want a safety bus service to be provided to the club district of a city?

Do you want all drinks to be served closed, with straws, to make adding drugs a lot more difficult?

Or do you just want to complain about men, and how tough and unfair life is in general?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Yep Posted by: MartianBachelor
» Why does there have to be a proposal? Posted by: stormchilde1975
Geez Liz
Posted by: Virg on Jan 4, 2007 3:23 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Okay Ms. Funk I agree with your defense of your writing vs. your personal opinions. But you still attacked "third-wave feminism" which wasn't necessary. All that the feminists are saying is that women are human beings, and the article YOU wrote puts them in the comprimising and objectified position of victim. Women are not just some drunken helpless objects that are easily taken advantage of. Nor are men all rapists or all clubowners slimeballs (although this could be argued:)). As (a female) someone who frequents bars and gets drunk I feel like I make enough other intelligent choices to ensure that I get home safely. There is still risk, but there is always risk no matter what precautions you take. I don't think that women that go out to have fun are so stupid or innocent that they don't know the risks involved. Same goes for guys. I've known plenty of guys who've gone out alone and gotten drunka and gotten their asses kicked. Maybe they were "asking" for it (by talking shit or hitting on some other guy's girlfriend) but it still doesn't exonerate the perps who beat them --they committed an act of violence and are responsible for their own actions.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Fact is, women *do* ask for it
Posted by: MartianBachelor on Jan 4, 2007 5:02 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now before you all froth at the mouth, the following really did happen to yours truly within the last year:

On my way home around 10PM some weeknight after working late I decided to detour off the interstate and stop at a downtown bar and grill for something to eat. I had to walk about three blocks from where I could park. Along the way, there was a sobbing young woman standing on the sidewalk in the shadows. I happened to know there was one of the clubs the 20-ish crowd like to go to around the corner, but there was no one else in sight. I asked what was wrong. Long story short: her boyfriend/fiance was apparently dancing with another girl in the club, and she was so distraught she wanted to be raped and murdered. I'm not making this up. That's really what she said.

Needless to say, I figured even if I got it in writing and notorized that it would never stand up in court... Just kidding!

There have been so many incidents of petty crime in the area recently (there are several other clubs nearby) that the police maintain a visible presence, so I was able to hand the matter over to one who was at the door of the club around the corner. Murder/rape just wasn't on my mind that evening as much as a beer and something to eat.

The moral of the story kiddies:
"If there be women who want to be raped and whose desires are fulfilled, they do not report the act to the police. Only the undesirable rapes get reported."
- Helen Hazen

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» All one can safely conclude... Posted by: stormchilde1975
Tough one
Posted by: Blue Heron on Jan 4, 2007 5:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's not easy to make comments on this topic when the majority of men can't seem to admit that rape is wrong in the first place.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Ok, I'll bite Posted by: MartianBachelor
» RE: Ok, I'll bite Posted by: Blue Heron
» RE: Tough one Posted by: H_H
What I'd really love to see?
Posted by: keshmeshi on Jan 4, 2007 6:06 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
An article advising men on how to identify consent vs. non-consent, even, or especially, when they (men, not women) have been drinking.

It's long past time for the onus to be on men to back off if there's any hint of lack of consent, not on women to wear chastity belts, burkas, or be confined to their homes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What I'd really love to see? Posted by: Logic's Edge
» Logic's edge Posted by: Donna_Darko
» RE: Logic's edge Posted by: H_H
» It's very hard for me to believe... Posted by: stormchilde1975
What IS the real issue?
Posted by: Steven Wanzell on Jan 4, 2007 11:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Equality. We're still mired in the illusion that the "modern" American woman is, in fact, free. I wonder how long it will take women to figure out something that seems ovbious to me:

Barbie and freedom simply cannot coexist at this point in history.

The over-feminized girls and the testoserone-soaked boys were well indoctrinated into this puritanical early (cultural) influence. On top of all of Barbie's baggage, we've got a full array of other isms most of us don't care to see in ourselves.

Steven Wanzell
wanzellarts.com.ar

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Victim responsibility
Posted by: stormchilde1975 on Jan 5, 2007 12:02 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't see how anyone can claim that the victim of a crime of convenience bears no responsibility. I'm not talking about moral blame, here, but come on:

If you leave the keys in your car in a bad neighborhood, how can it be the case that you didn't contribute to the virtually inevitable theft?

If you go on vacation and let your mail pile up, leave your blinds open so all your valuables can be seen from the street and don't lock your doors, can you claim with a straight face that you're totally non-responsible for the ensuing burglary?

If you go with a complete stranger to an isolated, private location while in an impaired and vulnerable condition, can you sincerely say you've made no mistakes?

There's crime (like rape), and that's morally wrong; you might even say evil. But enabling criminals, making oneself an easy target: where I come from, we call that stupid. Stupidity may not be a sin, but it can and should be recognized, pointed out and condemned.

Failure to take reasonable precautions is neglect - neglect of the value of one's property, one's freedom, one's life. And the fact that it isn't precisely morally wrong to be reckless with one's safety should come as little comfort to the one who suffers the consequences.

Sure, it'd be nice if we lived in a world free of evil. But we don't. There's nothing hateful about suggesting that it is stupid to behave as though we do. If it soaked in how damn stupid it was, maybe people would think it over and be a little more cautious.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Victim responsibility Posted by: Ambrose Pare
This "club girl problem" thing is so twisted.
Posted by: hujo on Jan 7, 2007 10:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think feminists have to start treating women like free competent sentient beings that are responsible for their own choices. Just like a man raping a drunk girl is responsible for that crime, women are responsible for going to places where they do in fact know the object of the evening for the men is to score with them and putting free alcohol in their mouths and belly with their own hands and arms of their own free will(if you look around you can witness this phenomenon). You act as if going out and getting laid is not the intention of club girls, that they have been forced into some viscous plot designed by the predatory men(tm). Women can CHOOSE not to attend ladies night. If they are raped that is only the fault of the rapist, it would also be nice to consider if they falsely accuse they should be responsible for that crime, in time perhaps. Besides we ignore the overall most important issue, where the hell are my free drinks? Feminism, the need for marriage and women’s dependency of men is all gone yet men still pay the bills. Inequality is ok when it’s convenient and yes that is a cliché for a reason. Only feminists can find oppression in privilege or is it just that that third wave feminism is defined as finding oppression in privilege? Amusing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

HA
Posted by: hujo on Jan 9, 2007 6:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I hope someones still reading, look at what i just found! It is SOOO relevant.

http://tinyurl.com/y8jd56

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]