Certainly the argument can be made that if it's foreseeable that you're going to lose control.... If we believe the necessity of this defence, and the whole premise is that when you lose control, you lose control and there is no telling what you're going to do, then it seems sufficient to hold someone responsible if the intoxication was voluntary.
Perhaps one or the other could also be sufficient, but we feel that having to prove that beyond a reasonable doubt, with the concerns we have regarding how courts will interpret who this reasonable person is and what kinds of risks they take in a society where most of these intoxicants are legal but people still take it.... What does the reasonable person do in these circumstances?
These are very difficult questions, and the courts have not always seen eye to eye with women's organizations in terms of what kind of risk is reasonable to place women in.