David Blunkett, in declaring war against the "thuggery and intimidation" of alcohol-fuelled violence, has targeted women drinkers as part of the problem.

While saying that, in the past, women have been a calming and civilizing presence in pubs, helping to calm the worked-up nerves of male drunks, Blunkett made clear his opinion that those days are, by and large, over.

"They [women drinkers] may be the ones who countenance it [violence] rather than calm it," he said.

Blunkett's war against drunken violence, which has taken a sharp rise all across Britain, shows that the government may finally be serious about tackling the considerable problem of youths drinking alcohol to excess. In that past, the British government was more concerned about drugs and focused their energy solely on tackling drug-related crimes - crimes that are mostly the result of the illegality of drugs, not drugs themselves.

The situation in Britain has moved beyond the occasional scuffle outside a pub. Drunken violence that targets innocent people beyond the borders of taverns is a problem that needs to be addressed. And Blunkett is of the opinion that if women are part of the violence caused by alcohol, if they are assisting in the aggravation of such violence-prone situations, then they should bear responsibility for it.

Conservative David Davis does counter Labour's claim to take alcohol-related violence seriously in light of the incumbent party's support of a 24/7 pub culture. "Does he know for sure that people will drink less?" he added. "Labour has lost its grip on fighting crime." Davis has a point. For Blunkett, Blair and the Labour party to decry the changing of pub culture for the worst, while supporting the increase of hours in which pubs can serve alcohol, is hypocritical.

But, nonetheless, Blunkett's point is taken. Youth culture and the prominence that alcohol has within it, is a major contributor to the increase of serious violent crime engulfing Britain.

I agree with Blunkett's position: he is right to target women drinkers as part of the problem. These are sad times indeed when women no longer see themselves as ladies but louts, on a par with men. Women who boast of drinking their male counterparts under the table, who shout and sing at the tops of their lungs, and are quick to let their arms fly at the slightest infarction are every bit as disgusting and horrible as men who do so.

Women drinkers are of the mind that Blunkett has got it wrong and that they only care about having "a good time," and that men are still the main problem when it comes to alcohol-fuelled crime. How typical. Women, in their fight for equality, have proven that they don't really care about equality. They want to have all the benefits and trappings that men enjoy - equal pay for equal work, equal voting rights, etc., and I stridently agree with sexual fairness - but they don't want to be made to pay the same price as men. They think that dispensations should be considered for the "fairer" sex.

Listen, if you commit a crime or encourage violence under the influence of alcohol, then you are responsible for it, female or not. End of argument.

Blunkett is right to target the despicable "lager loutette" culture run amok in this country. And they should pay the same price as men, whether that be fines or jail.