Young People's Views of the “Gray Areas” of Sexual Consent While Drinking: Implications for Sexual Violence Prevention

Background & Purposes: Alcohol related sexual violence is a major problem for youth and emerging adults, with far-reaching negative consequences (Harrington and Leitenbert, 1994). Between 25-50% of all women report experiences of sexual assault, approximately half (30-74%) of which involve alcohol (Koss et al, 1987; Abbey, 2002). Sexual violence prevention programs emphasize the message that alcohol intoxication precludes one from being able to consent to sexual activity. Recent research on changing patterns of sexual activity among adolescents and emerging adults (Adams-Curtis & Forbes, 2004), coupled with our lack of knowledge about processes of sexual consent, challenge whether messages provided in sexual violence prevention programs are consistent with the lived experiences their target audience. Thus, in this study I ask: 1) How is consent to sexual activity communicated? And 2) How do participants make meaning about their experiences with consent to heterosexual sexual activity while drinking?

Methods: 87 male and female white and Asian American undergraduates aged 19-24 who self-identified as frequent binge drinkers (Weschler et al, 1994) were recruited via fliers and emails and offered $20 incentives for an in-depth interview. Participants were largely middle and upper-middle class and heterosexual. Interviews were conducted by someone of the same gender and based on a semi-structured schedule covering three major topics; 1) Race and gender differences in experiences of heavy drinking; 2) Heterosexuality and hooking-up; 3) Sexual violence and alcohol use. Interviews, lasting 1- 1 ˝ hours, were recorded and professionally transcribed. Additional data were collected during 40 hours of participant observation at bars and clubs and recorded in extensive field notes. Interview and observation data were entered into NVIVO for analysis. Open and focused coding, combining both inductive and deductive analysis, followed by thematic and integrative memo-writing (Emerson, Fretz & Shaw, 1995) were used to analyze these data.

Results: Major findings are threefold: First, participants described the processes of initiating and consenting to sexual activity as primarily non-verbal, and provided many examples of “gray areas” in which interest and consent might be misunderstood. Second, they described circumstances in which alcohol was used to manipulate people into sexual activity and “take advantage” of their intoxicated state. Finally, participants described themselves as able to give or deny consent to sexual activity while drinking, and did not necessarily consider this sexual assault. These findings show that participants experience heterosexual encounters while drinking as complicated, and sources of both agency and exploitation.

Conclusion & Implications: This study suggests that major messages about alcohol and sexual violence in prevention programs may not reflect their target audiences' lived experiences with heterosexual encounters while drinking. Thus, sexual violence prevention programs need to revisit their messages around sex, alcohol and consent, and engage with both the complexities of alcohol and sexuality and the related, simultaneous contradictions around agency and exploitation. Specific recommendations are to institute open dialogues around sex, communication, consent and alcohol within prevention programs and to expand both research and interventions to include younger adolescents, non-heterosexual populations, and heavy drinking communities of non-college students.