Regarding the Stanford rape case, the National Review analysis is quite good. It finishes with this valid complaint about the so-called hook-up culture.
"Turner is a criminal, something liberals as well as conservatives should be able to agree upon. One can understand the judge taking the defendant’s age and lack of priors into account in sentencing, but to cite his drunkenness as a mitigating factor is peculiar. Oh, you were drunk when you robbed the liquor store? Reduced sentence. It may not be a crime to get blind drunk at a bar or party — but it’s reckless.
Here is the truth that the Left will never acknowledge — the hook-up culture they celebrate and defend is the greatest petri dish for enabling rape and sexual assault imaginable. It does women no favors to tell them that the way they drink is irrelevant. It may not be a crime to get blind drunk at a bar or party — but it’s reckless. The Stanford woman’s blood-alcohol level was three times the legal limit. Again, that doesn’t make her a criminal, but who can doubt that, but for that, she would not have become a victim? Here is what the Right must come to grips with: Some of the women “crying rape” were truly raped, even if their attackers were not knife-wielding assailants jumping out from behind trees. The anti-constitutional adjudication system erected by universities to hear sexual-assault cases is a disgrace. The judicial system isn’t the whole answer either. Most cases of rape have no witnesses. They reduce to he said/she said. Those who care about innocent young people of both sexes whose lives have been blighted by the current mess need to step back. The problem is hook-up culture."
I made a similar argument in a thread here.