Daf Ditty Eruvin 61: Drunken Brawl

If there is a four ‫ אמה‬wall to prevent people from falling off the cliff, we measure the ‫ תחום‬from
the edge of the city, because it has the Halachah of a city from which the ‫ תחום‬is always measured
from the edge of town.

1
Rav Yosef said that Rami bar Abba said that Rav Huna said: With regard to a city located on
the edge of a ravine, if there is a barrier four cubits high in front of it, one measures its Shabbat
limit from the edge of the ravine, as it is considered the border of the city. And if there is not a
barrier four cubits high in front of it, the Shabbat limit is measured from the entrance of each
person’s house, as the city is not considered a permanent settlement.

If there is no wall, we measure from the door of each person’s house. It is NOT considered a city,
because a significant area cannot be used safely. They are considered – ‫ יושבי צריפין‬people who
live in temporary huts, where each house is a separate entity.

2
Abaye said to him: You told us with regard to this case that a barrier four cubits high is
required. What is different about this case that it requires a barrier that is higher than all other
barriers, which must reach a height of only four handbreadths?

He said to him: There, use of the place is not frightening; here, use of the place is frightening.
Generally, partitions serve a symbolic function, and therefore it is sufficient for the partition to be
four handbreadths high. In this case, however, it is frightening to stand along the edge of the ravine
without a protective barrier, and therefore a barrier four cubits high must be constructed for the
safety of the residents.

3
Rav Yosef said: From where do I derive to say this halakha? As it was taught in a baraita:
Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permitted the residents of Geder, situated at the top of a slope, to
descend on Shabbat to Ḥamtan, situated at the bottom of the slope, but the residents of Ḥamtan
may not ascend to Geder. What is the reason? Is it not because these, the inhabitants of Geder,
constructed a barrier at the lower edge of their city, and these, the members of Ḥamtan, did not
construct a barrier at the upper edge of their city? Consequently, the residents of Geder measured
their Shabbat limit from their barrier, and Ḥamtan was included in their two thousand cubits. The
residents of Ḥamtan had to measure their Shabbat limits from their homes, and therefore Geder
was not within their two thousand cubit limit.

Rebbe allowed people from ‫ גדר‬,which was situated higher up on the mountain, to go down to the
town of ‫ חמתן‬,but did not allow the people of ‫ חמתן‬to go up to ‫גדר‬.

4
The Gemara relates that when Rav Dimi came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said: This
ruling was issued not due to their respective Shabbat limits, but rather because the residents of
Geder would assault [metatreg] the residents of Ḥamtan. And what does it mean that Rabbi
Yehuda HaNasi permitted the residents of Geder to descend to Ḥamtan, but not vice versa? He
instituted this. In other words, this was not a halakhic ruling, but rather an ordinance instituted to
protect the public welfare and prevent fighting.

The Gemara asks: What is different about Shabbat that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi instituted this
ordinance only for Shabbat and not for the rest of the week? The Gemara answers: Drunkenness
is common on Shabbat, when people eat to their heart’s content. Therefore, there is a greater
chance of violent behavior.

5
Summary

A town that is located at the edge of a stream and there is a narrow wall four amos high that
prevents people in the town from falling into the stream, we measure the techum of the town from
the edge of the stream.

A town that is located at the edge of a stream and there is a thin wall that is four amos high that
extends across the town to prevent the residents from falling into the stream, we measure the
techum of the town from the edge of the stream, as that is where the edge of the town is located.
If there is no wall between the town and the stream, then we measure the techum from each
person’s house, as the town is likened to temporary dwellings that we have learned previously
(55b) that the techum is measured from each dwelling.

The reason we require the wall to be four amos high as opposed to all other thin walls that are only
required to be four tefachim high is because normally the wall functions as a legal partition,
whereas here people are afraid of using the area because of the stream, so a higher wall is required.
(61a)

Rebbe permitted the residents of the town of Geder to descend to the town of Chamsan but
Rebbe did not permit the residents of Chamsan to ascend to Geder.

6
Rebbe allowed the residents of the town of Geder to descend to the town of Chamsan, but Rebbe
forbade the residents of the town of Chamsan from ascending to Geder. The Gemora assumes that
the reason that Rebbe drew a distinction between the two towns is because the residents of Geder
had constructed a thin wall at the edge of Geder so no one would fall down the slope, and since
Geder was considered a real town, they would then measure the techum from the edge of their
town.

The residents of Chamsan, however, did not construct a thin wall to safeguard its residents, so it
did not have a status of a town. The residents of Chamsan were thus required to measure their
techum from their respective houses. The residents of Geder were within two thousand amos of
their town, so they could walk into Chamsan, but the residents of Chamsan were not within the
town of Geder.

Regarding Rebbe’s ruling permitting the residents of Geder to descend to the town of Chamsan
and forbidding the residents of Chamsan to ascend to Geder, Rav Dimi explained that the residents
of Geder used to physically harm the residents of Chamsan, so Rebbe decreed that the residents of
Chamsan were not allowed to ascend to Geder on Shabbos, even though Geder was within the
techum. Rebbe specifically instituted this decree for Shabbos when the people of Geder were more
susceptible to rowdiness because it is more common for people to become drunk on Shabbos.

Rebbe allowed the residents of Geder to go to Chamsan, however, because a dog outside of its
town does not bark for seven years. This means that the residents of Geder were not so aggressive
outside their twin. Rebbe was not concerned that the residents of Chamsan would take revenge on
the residents of Geder, because the residents of Geder were not so timid when they were outside
their town that they would allow the residents of Chamsan to harm them. For this reason Rebbe
allowed the residents of Geder to descend to Chamsan.

Our Daf relates that the residents of the city of Gader used to strike and kill the residents of the
city of Chamsan so Rebbi enacted that it is prohibited for the residents of the city of Chamsan to
enter the city of Gader on Shabbos.

The reason why he imposed this restriction specifically on Shabbos is that on Shabbos they would
become intoxicated and that state of intoxication is what caused them to be argumentative. The
fact that it is common for people to become intoxicated on Shabbos is the rationale for the
enactment to recite ‫י‬‫ וא תפלתי‬in mincha on Shabbos afternoon.

7
During Minchah [we say ‫ אשרי‬and ‫ ובא לציון‬and ‫ואני תפלתי‬, etc] (Tur) we take out one Torah and
read three aliyot totaling 10 verses from the next week's parshah. And even when Yom Tov falls
on Shabbat we read the next week's parshah and not the one for Yom Tov.

Tur based on the Midrash notes the juxtaposition of the pasuk that discusses those who sing
taunting songs reminiscent of those who were drunk and the pasuk of ‫תפלתי י‬‫ וא‬.Dovid HaMelech
was noting to Hashem that the Jewish People are not similar to the nations of the world. Generally,
when people become intoxicated they debase themselves but when Jews become intoxicated they
direct their attention to Hashem and ask for their tefilos to be answered. Levush2 notes that on
Yom Tov we do not recite ‫תפלתי י‬‫ וא‬.He cites authorities who suggest that it is because we do not
read Torah on Yom Tov afternoon but rejects that position since ‫תפלתי י‬‫ וא‬is not related to the
reading of Torah. He suggests that the rationale why it is not recited on Yom Tov afternoon is that
in contrast to Shabbos which is entirely for people (‫ לכם כולו‬,(Yom Tov contains an obligation to
dedicate part of the day for Hashem ( ‫( לכם חצי 'לה חצי‬and as such people restrain themselves from
becoming intoxicated. For that reason it is recited only on Shabbos when there is a greater tendency
to drink to emphasize that when Jews drink they sing praises of Hashem. On Yom Tov when there
is less of a tendency to become intoxicated it is unnecessary to recite ‫תפלתי י‬

Drunkenness on Shabbos

Rav Avrohom Adler writes:1

The Gemora states that it is common to have drunkenness on Shabbos. Similarly, we find that the
Kohanim should bless the congregation in the Shacharis Tefillah on Simchas Torah, because it is
common for people to be drunk at the time of praying the Mussaf Tefillah. It is interesting to note
that the Gemora (Shabbes 86b) states that everyone agrees that the Jewish People received the
Torah on Shabbos.
Following the receiving of the Torah, it is said:

1
http://dafnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Eiruvin_61.pdf

8
 ;‫ ל ֹא ָשַׁלח ָידוֹ‬,‫ֲאִציֵלי ְבֵּני ִיְשָׂרֵאל‬-‫יא ְוֶאל‬ 11 And upon the nobles of the children of Israel He laid
{‫ }ס‬.‫ ַו ִיְּשׁתּוּ‬,‫ ַויּ ֹאְכלוּ‬,‫ָהֱא„ִהים‬-‫ ֶאת‬,‫ַוֶיֱּחזוּ‬ not His hand; and they beheld God, and did eat and
drink.
Ex 24:11

that the great people saw Hashem and they ate and they drank. This is difficult to understand,
because how is it possible that the Jewish People received the Torah and then acted in such a
brazen manner?

To answer this question, we must understand what occurred at Sinai. The Medrash (Shir HaShirim
Rabbah 6:3) states that the Jewish People were so overwhelmed with the revelation that their souls
left them.

The Gemora (Berochos 17a) states that in the future there will not be any physical consumption of
food and drink. Rather, the righteous will sit with crowns on their heads and bask in the Divine
Presence. We also find that it is said (Gen Rabba 48:14) regarding the angels who visited Avraham
that they ate.
‫ַהָבָּקר ֲאֶשׁר‬-‫ וֶּבן‬,‫ ח ַו ִיַּקּח ֶחְמָאה ְוָחָלב‬8 And he took curd, and milk, and the calf which he had
‫ֹעֵמד ֲﬠֵליֶהם‬-‫ ִלְפֵניֶהם; ְוהוּא‬,‫ ַו ִיֵּתּן‬,‫ ָﬠָשׂה‬dressed, and set it before them; and he stood by them under
.‫ ַויּ ֹאֵכלוּ‬,‫ַתַּחת ָהֵﬠץ‬ the tree, and they did eat.
Gen 18:8

The Medrash states that it only appeared as if they were eating. We can therefore suggest that when
it said by Sinai that the great people ate and drank, it means that that they were like angels and it
only looked as if they were eating and drinking.

(The Gemara in Berachos mentioned above proves that the righteous will not actually eat and
drink from this verse by Sinai where it is said that they ate and drank.)

Similarly, on Shabbos, one receives an extra soul, and it is because of this soul that it appears that
one is intoxicated, when in reality one is conducting himself on a higher spiritual level.

The Gemara in Berachos mentioned above proves that the righteous will not actually eat and
drink from this verse by Sinai where it is said that they ate and drank.

9
Rabbi Mark Washofsky writes:2

Judaism does not condemn the use, in moderation, of alcoholic beverages. On the contrary: the
Bible speaks in praise of wine as a substance that “gladdens the human heart” (Psalms 104:15 ).
Wine has always played a visibly central role in Jewish religious culture. This is evident in the fact
that the tradition ordains special blessings to be recited prior to and following its consumption, just
as it does for bread. The use of wine is required in such ritual practices as Kiddush [a declaration
of the sacredness of a Shabbat or festival, recited over wine], the “four cups” at the Passover Seder,
and the celebration of weddings and brit milah [ritual circumcision of a boy]. Other intoxicants
can serve in place of wine under certain conditions in some (but not all) of these settings.

At the same time, however, we must treat alcoholic beverages with the utmost caution, since they
can be a source of pain as well as joy. Wine may serve as an important element in our ritual, but it
is by no means indispensable; one who for medical reasons is unable to drink wine or liquor is
allowed to substitute non-intoxicants for ritual purposes, including the Passover Seder. We are told
to beware of “wine when it is red,” for the color and smoothness hide the reality that “in the end,
it bites like a snake” and distorts the workings of the human mind (Proverbs 23:31-32 ).

A tradition which values clear thinking and responsible conduct cannot but view drunkenness as
an evil. The shikur, the drunkard, may be the butt of many jokes, but he is in an essential way held
separate from the community: he or she may not perform religious, legal, or political functions and
is even forbidden to pray until sober. The clear implication of these sources is that should we
decide to use alcohol we must strictly control our consumption of it.

2
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/smoking-alcohol-and-drugs/

10
Once again, we are reminded that Judaism holds us responsible for failure to treat our health with
care and respect. This point is driven home with special urgency given our awareness of the
destructive nature of alcoholism, a disease of which our ancestors were but dimly aware. The costs
of alcoholism, measured by the personal and social wreckage it leaves in its wake, require that we
confront this disease openly and directly, doing whatever we can as a community for those who
come to us in their struggle for recovery.

Rabbi Eli Brackman writes:3

One of the major problems facing British society is the excessive consumption of alcohol. Even in
a respectable place like Oxford, the problem of alcohol cannot be underestimated.

The problem of drinking is not the unsightliness of the phenomenon as much as the serious health
risks involved with young people drinking beyond their limits. At the end of last term, I saw a
student being carried out of a vehicle onto the street almost completely lifeless. When I asked if
she was okay, it became clear that the girl had lost consciousness due to over drinking. I
immediately made sure that an ambulance was called and she was safely transported to receive
urgent medical help.

The problem of drinking in Oxford reflects the problematic drinking culture around the UK.
According to statistics in 2007, forty two percent of men and thirty six percent of women aged
between sixteen and twenty four drink above the recommended daily intake. In 2005, there were
187,640 hospital admissions among adults aged sixteen and over with either primary or secondary
diagnosis specifically related to alcohol, compared to less than half that figure in 1995.

In 2005, over six and a half thousand people died from causes directly related to alcohol
consumption, and of these just under two thirds died from alcoholic liver disease. Considering the
above, should alcohol be further regulated or even prohibited, as certain religions stipulate?

Health Benefits

The problem is complicated by the fact that in small quantities alcohol can be beneficial for health.
In fact, men may enjoy two drinks per day if they wish and a woman one drink. The benefits from

3
https://www.oxfordchabad.org/templates/blog/post_cdo/aid/708481/PostID/14287

11
moderate consumption of alcohol are decreased risk of cardiovascular problems, reduced risk of
stroke, it diminishes the possibility of gallstone and it may reduce the danger of diabetes.

This is in contrast to the consequences of excess alcohol, which can cause cancer to the pancreas,
mouth, pharynx, oesophageal, breast and liver, and there are a number of other health risks,
including cardiovascular and mental problems, not to mention the increased risk of accidents,
suicidal tendencies and depression.

This conflict between the benefits and dangers of alcohol is also found within Judaism. What does
Judaism say about alcohol consumption? Is it encouraged or sinful? Many of the sources seem
outright negative.

Problems with alcohol in Judaism

Genesis (9:18), relates that Noah, upon leaving the ark, planted a vineyard, drank of the wine,
became drunk and debased himself inside his tent. It continues that his son Ham, the father
ofCanaan, saw his father’s nakedness and told his two brothers outside. Shem and Japheth took a
garment, laid it upon their shoulders, walked backwards and covered their father’s nakedness. It
concludes that when Noah awoke from his wine and realized what his son had done to him, he said
‘Cursed is Canaan: a slave shall he be to his brothers’, and he blessed Shem and Japheth.

The commentaries discuss the actions of Ham that provoked Noah to curse him, some saying that
Ham castrated his father to prevent him from having more children. He was concerned that Adam
and Eve had two children and Cain killed Abel. Noah should therefore certainly not be allowed to
have more than three children.

It is clear that Torah portrays drinking alcohol negatively. It can cause unethical consequences
where the drinker loses control. This ethical reason is justified even if one were unaware of the
health consequences related to alcohol consumption.

In the book of Leviticus (10:9) it states that ‘you should not drink intoxicating wine when you
come into the Tent of Meeting (sanctuary), lest you die. This according to one opinion in the
Talmud is the reason why the two sons of Aaron died at a young age.

12
The reason indicated here seems to be respect. One should treat the Temple with respect. Drinking
alcohol however is a debasement of the self and therefore debases the sanctuary.

A more practical reason to condemn alcohol is raised by King Solomon in Proverbs, where he
explains that a person who consumes excessive alcohol is destined to poverty.

Solomon writes (23:20), ‘do not be among the guzzlers of wine, among the gorgers of meat for
themselves, for the guzzler and the gorger will be poor, and slumber will clothe you in tatters’.

Another source states (Proverbs 23:31), ‘do not look at wine becoming red, for to one who fixes
his eyes on the goblet all paths are upright. His end is like that of one bitten by a snake, like one
dispatched by a serpent. Your eyes will see strange things and your earth will speak duplicities.
You will be like one who sleeps in the heart of the sea, like one who lies on the top of a mast. In
your drunkenness you will say, they struck me, but I did not become ill; they beat me, but I was
unaware. When will I awaken? I will continue asking for more wine.’

This source seems to approach the problem of alcohol consumption from an ethical perspective,
indicating that alcohol can cause a person to lose awareness of the difference between right and
wrong; truth and falsehood.

A final problem from a Jewish point of view is violence due to alcohol consumption. On the Jewish
festival of Purim there is a custom to drink alcohol to celebrate the occasion when the Jews in the
Persian exile in 352 BCE were threatened with collective annihilation across the Persian
Empire for not agreeing to abandon their faith and assimilate. The anniversary of the miraculous
survival from this threat is marked in the Jewish calendar as a day of major celebration.

However, the tradition to drink alcohol on this festival led to a violent episode between two rabbis,
related in the following reading of the Talmud (Megillah 7b): ‘Rabbah and Rabbi Zeira had the
Purim feast together and they became intoxicated. Rabbi arose and slew Rabbi Zeira. The next
day, Rabbah prayed for mercy on his colleague’s behalf and revived him. The following year,
Rabbah asked Rabbi Zeira: ‘Let my master come and we will have the Purim feast together.’ Rabbi
Zeira answered him: ‘Not every time does a miracle occur.’

13
The problem of drinking to excess from the perspective of the Talmud has thus another dimension:
the propensity to violence, not necessarily against oneself - which might be considered less
problematic, as in suicide - but towards another person.

The above story from the Talmud is indeed difficult to understand. How are we to understand that
Rabbah, who was considered one of the leading rabbinical figures of his generation, stooped so
low, to the level of violence in the form of manslaughter through slaying? It is also difficult to
fathom how a person who has been decapitated becomes revived through prayer.

The son of Maimonides, Rabbi Abraham (introduction to Ein Yaakov), quotes this passage as a
classic example of the Talmud’s occasional use of hyperbole in cases where it is clear that the
literal meaning is not intended. He explains that actually Rabbah dealt his colleague a blow that
wounded him grievously. Due to the seriousness of the wound and possibly because it was located
in the neck, the Talmud describes it as ‘slew’ from the verb to slay, which usually connotes the
fatal slitting of the throat, but in this case is not actually what happened.

Another commentary (Maharsha) maintains that Rabbah did not physically attack his colleague
but forced him to drink an excessive amount of wine from which Rabbi Zeira became deathly ill.
Rabbah then prayed that Rabbi Zeira should not die from this illness and he recovered.

Another commentary (Meiri) explains that the Hebrew word used for ‘slew’ can also be read in a
way that in Hebrew it would mean he merely ‘squeezed’ him.

There is a final commentary (Lekutei Sichot) that explains the whole story as a spiritual experience.
The two rabbis had a mystical journey through the esoteric teachings of the Torah and while
Rabbah was able to remain physically intact, Rabbi Zeira, who was on a lower spiritual level,
departed. He needed a miracle to bring him back to life.

Aside from the latter commentary, they leave the basic concept intact that violence as a result of
alcohol consumption took place during the Purim feast of two great rabbis.

Based on the majority of sources there is a common negative approach towards drinking alcohol;
it can be a cause of debasement, loss of sense of ethics, poverty and possible violence. This is in

14
addition to the harmful effect excessive alcohol consumption has on one’s health, which suggests
that it should be prohibited according to Jewish law.

Encouragement to drink alcohol in Judaism

In contrast to all the above there is the clear encouragement stipulated by Jewish law towards
drinking wine. At nearly every significant stage of life in Judaism, including circumcision and
marriage a blessing is made over wine. Almost every special day in the Jewish calendar, every
Shabbat and Festival, is marked by a blessing over wine, including the festival of Passover when
there is a custom to drink four cups of wine at the Seder night.

Furthermore, the Talmud (Megillah 7b) writes regarding the festival of Purim that one is obligated
to become intoxicated on Purim until one doesn’t know the difference between ‘cursed is Haman’
and ‘blessed is Mordechai’.

How is this consistent with all the above sources that imply an extremely negative attitude towards
alcohol consumption?

The fact that there are two seemingly contradictory sources in Jewish thought illustrates that they
both must be true. There are indeed severe moral concerns regarding drinking alcohol. If a person
drinks excessively for the wrong purpose it can cause immoral conduct and destitution.

If however one drinks alcohol in moderation and with the right intentions, it can make the person
more moral, become more aware of other people’s needs, and heighten the intellect.

Most things in this world, from a Jewish perspective, are neither good nor bad. It is within the free
choice of the person to decide whether to utilise the world for constructive or destructive purposes.

Furthermore, the Talmud (Shabbat 70b) says that everything is the world is created with an innate
purpose. This includes even gnats and flies. Creatures and other manifestations of the corporeal
world must fulfil their purpose to justify their existence.

What is then the ideal purpose of wine and alcohol?

15
The Psalmist (104:15) writes that G-d brings forth ‘wine that gladdens man’s heart, make the face
glow from oil, and bread that sustains the heart of man’.

Psalms, in contrast to Proverbs, does not imply any possible negative effects of alcohol but rather
focuses on the positive; it has the ability to allow a person to be happy. This is echoed in the
Talmud that says ‘there is no happiness (to compare with that is brought about through) wine’.
This is the reason why most Jewish ceremonies are accompanied with cup of wine, indicating that
it is a happy occasion and we thank G-d with a blessing for the celebration.

This positive aspect of wine is further explained from a mental and spiritual perspective by the
great grammarian and scholar Rabbi Dovid Kimchi (1165-1235), who comments on the above
passage in Psalms, ‘G-d creates the grapes from which wine is pressed and when drunk in sensible
proportions, wine gladdens the heart and drives away melancholy. It heightens the intellect and
even prepares the mind for prophecy.’

This commentary reconciles two opposing potentials in wine. When boundaries on not set, it
causes corruption and immorality. If however it is taken in sensible moderation, and for the right
purposes, not only is it physically healthy, but from a Jewish point of view, one fulfils the purpose
of the existence of wine and alcohol – to bring about happiness and draw a person closer to the
spiritual.

Jeremy Brown writes:4

In Ketubot 65a, the Talmud is discussing the provisions that an absent husband must
legally provide for his wife, at least until his return home. Wine is not to be provided - unless the
woman is used to drinking it (‫)רגילה שאני‬. In this case, she may be given a single cup of wine, even
though her husband is not at home. And then comes this teaching:

‫ארבעה אפילו חמור תובעת בשוק ואינה מקפדת‬, ‫שלשה תובעת בפה‬, ‫שנים ניוול הוא‬, ‫כוס אחד יפה לאשה‬: ‫תנא‬

One cup of wine is good for a woman; two is a disgrace; if she drinks three cups of wine she will
verbally demand marital relations. And after four cups of wine a woman will solicit even a
donkey in the marketplace, and she could not care...
4
http://www.talmudology.com/jeremybrownmdgmailcom/2015/4/6/ketuvot-65a-too-drunk-to-say-no

16
THE EFFECTS OF ALCOHOL ON SEXUAL DESIRE

The pharmacological effects of alcohol have been extremely well studied.5 Although in popular
culture alcohol is thought to be a sexual stimulant, its physiological effects actually reduce sexual
arousal. Alcohol also causes disinhibition, making those who have been drinking more likely to
engage both in sex, and in sexual risk-taking. Alcohol has depressant effects and caused its
disinhibition all the animals models in which it has been tested, including, most recently, the
nematode, c. elegans. It is these effects that the Talmud is referencing here, in so far as they effect
only women. (Men's sexual desire and sexual performance is also affected by alcohol, but since
this is not the subject of the discussion in the daf, we won't go there.)

TOO DRUNK TO SAY NO

The Talmud describes an effect of too much alcohol: it causes such a degree of sexual disinhibition
that an intoxicated women looses all sense of propriety. In fact, she gets so drunk that she is
prepared to commit bestiality. In the United Kingdom three high profile court cases (the Dougal
case-November 2005, the Hagan case-November 2006, and the Bree case-December 2006)
illustrated the talmudic supposition in today's daf. In all cases the women who were raped were
heavily intoxicated and the defendants, who admitted having had sexual intercourse but denied
rape, were acquitted. If a woman is drunk, her no doesn't mean NO.

Writing in the Stanford Law Review, Karen Kramer outlined ways which cultural myths
surrounding alcohol and the place of men and women in society converge to produce a double
standard. If the rapist was drunk, it reduces his culpability; if the victim was drunk,
it increases her culpability.

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/54694fa6e4b0eaec4530f99d/t/5523dbb7e4b09b97d69b9c59/1428413367710/Influence+of+
alcohol+on+sexual+desires+of+women+.pdf

17
Expectancy beliefs about alcohol - which include the beliefs that alcohol increases sexual arousal,
loosens women's sexual inhibitions and increases men's feelings of power and dominance -
interact with traditional notions of male aggressiveness and female submission to set the stage for
acquaintance rape. When a woman is visibly intoxicated a man may interpret friendly or flirtatious
behavior an invitation to have sex. Believing that alcohol reduces a women's inhibitions, the man
may read her behavior as a demonstration of her true but disguised
desire for sexual activity. Even if she fails to become physically affectionate, since alcohol is a
depressant, the woman may be less able to resist unwanted sexual advances. Her lack of resistance
may sound like a resounding "yes" to a man who subscribes to the tradition model of male
aggression and female submission. Moreover, if the man is drinking as well, he may feel safe
disregarding her will, because he knows that he can blame his aggression on the alcohol. This is
not to say that any sexual interaction between intoxicated individuals constitutes rape,
but drinking does enable a man to overpower an unwilling woman while feeling confident that he
can blame his own actions on the alcohol.

Over twenty years ago, the journalist Helen Benedict in her book Virgin or Vamp6 described the
myth of our culture in which women who drink too much are "asking for it." I had no idea that
the myth could also be found embedded in our Talmud.

Aggression and Alcohol in Males:

Original Articles

6
In Virgin or Vamp Benedict examines the press's treatment of four notorious sex crimes from the past decade--the Rideout marital
rape trial in Oregon, the Big Dan's pool table gang rape in Massachusetts, the "Preppy Murder" in New York City, and the Central
Park jogger case--and shows how victims are labelled either as virgins or vamps, a practice she condemns as misleading and
harmful. Benedict also looks at other factors that perpetuate the misunderstanding of rape. For instance, she shows how the New
York press presented the Central Park jogger rape case as motivated by racism because of its unwillingness to consider rape an
issue of gender. She also addresses our inherent language bias, the press's tendency to use sexually suggestive language to describe
crime victims, and its preference for crimes against whites. In conclusion, Benedict offers a number of solutions that will help
reporters cover these increasingly common crimes without further harming the victims, the defendants, or public understanding.

18
Is It a Fight or Are They Just Drunk? Attributions about Drunken Behaviour in a
Hypothetical Male-to-Male Aggression Scenario

Kalle Tryggvesson writes:7

Objective. This paper examines the excuse-value of alcohol in a hypothetical provoked male-to-

male violence scenario. There are two main questions. Does intoxication result in decreased
blame? Does intoxication lessen the propensity to call the police?

Methods. 1004 random digit dialing (RDD) quantitative telephone surveys were completed with
Swedes aged 16–25. The response rate was 73.8%. Besides the aggressor's intoxication, severity
of the outcome, the victim's intoxication and the respondent's hypothetical relationship to the
aggressor or to the victim were also randomly manipulated. Whether the police should be called
and the attribution of blame to the aggressor have been analysed using ANOVA in SAS.

Results. Analyses were stratified by sex. For male respondents, the aggressor's intoxication
interacted (four-way) with all the manipulated variables in predicting the attribution of blame. In

the more severe act, intoxication tended to reduce blame; the least amount of blame was assigned
when both the aggressor and the victim were intoxicated. For female respondents, the aggressor's
intoxication was involved in a three-way interaction. For them also, intoxication decreases the

blame for the severe acts but not for the less severe acts. The aggressor's intoxication had very
little effect on whether the police should be called or not.

Discussion. Intoxication provides some excuse from blame but only for certain acts and under
certain circumstances. It also changes the way people perceive acts of violence.

7
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14043850500404205: Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology and
Crime Prevention Volume 7, 2006 - Issue 1

19
I will return to this topic and the addiction aspects in Eruvin 65

20