• California Requires Students at publicly funded Universities/Colleges to acquire "Affirmative Consen
    34 replies, posted
[url]http://online.wsj.com/articles/california-lawmakers-pass-affirmative-consent-sex-policy-bill-1409330586[/url] [QUOTE]The California legislature has passed a bill requiring colleges and universities that receive state funds to adopt policies on sexual assault, including a first-of-its-kind mandate that students engaging in sexual activity obtain "affirmative consent"—commonly referred to as the "yes means yes" requirement. The State Senate passed a final version of the legislation Thursday, which would be included in the state's education code if approved by Gov. Jerry Brown. He has until Sept. 30 to act, and a spokesman said the governor hasn't taken a position on the measure. Those would include a standard of "affirmative, conscious and voluntary agreement to engage in sexual activity" that is "ongoing throughout a sexual activity and can be revoked at any time." California would be the first state to adopt such a policy. The move comes amid increased federal scrutiny of U.S. colleges and universities over their handling of sexual-assault claims and a growing movement of sexual-assault victims sharing their stories and filing federal complaints against their schools. The California bill specifies that in any disciplinary proceeding involving sexual assault allegations, the accused may not use intoxication as an excuse for believing the other person consented to sexual activity. The bill also calls for "victim-centered policies" that ensure victims' and witnesses' privacy as well as other support during an investigation.[/QUOTE] How exactly do you enforce a lot of this? I was originally thinking that this would be about written consent agreements when I saw the story. [url]http://time.com/3222176/campus-rape-the-problem-with-yes-means-yes/[/url] I guess it would be suicidal politically to oppose it but... [QUOTE]“if both partners were enthusiastic about the sexual encounter, there will be no reason for anyone to report a rape later.” But it’s not always that simple. One of the partners could start feeling ambivalent about an encounter after the fact and reinterpret it as coerced — especially after repeatedly hearing the message that only a clear “yes” constitutes real consent. [/QUOTE]
*Leaving a bar with a man/woman on your arm* "Just a second, let me find my lawyer so we can write up a sexual intercourse contract before we head to my place."
Yeah, some couples have trouble planning to use a condom in their sexual encounters. I doubt anyone is going to want to stop their moment to get a consent form. Assuming they did get affirmative consent, what happens when one of them decides they want to stop, but the other keeps going? Does "No" still mean "No"? How do you prove it? It is revocable, but still pretty flimsy.
[QUOTE=Foxtrot200;45842964]Yeah, some couples have trouble planning to use a condom in their sexual encounters. I doubt anyone is going to want to stop their moment to get a consent form. Assuming they did get affirmative consent, what happens when one of them decides they want to stop, but the other keeps going? Does "No" still mean "No"? How do you prove it? It is revocable, but still pretty flimsy.[/QUOTE] I don't want to imply one can't change their mind or anything but sadly all can be said then is "tough luck" to both parties involved. Adding this layer of officiality means people will have at least SOME degree of protection from possible confusion and being accused of "didn't stop having sex after I revoked consent I gave previously" is still better than "grabbed me in the alley and stuffed me full of fuck". It's a neat idea even tho it's sad somebody had to consider it.
don't talk to women at college anymore, it's dangerous to your social life/status. don't look at them, don't talk to them, don't even compliment them, they can retroactively call it harassment if you have a falling out.
[QUOTE=omggrass;45843222]don't talk to women at college anymore, it's dangerous to your social life/status. don't look at them, don't talk to them, don't even compliment them, they can retroactively call it harassment if you have a falling out.[/QUOTE] Wasn't4 t4hat4 already7 st4andard policy7 for all FP members?
Want to spice up your sex life but don't have any equipment to do so? Ask the cops to wait outside your room and as your man is pounding you, pull out your consent form and rip it! Free handcuffs AND he gets a ride home!
[url]http://www.cc.com/video-clips/jwmvxd/chappelle-s-show-love-contract[/url]
[QUOTE=ScottyWired;45843241]Want to spice up your sex life but don't have any equipment to do so? Ask the cops to wait outside your room and as your man is pounding you, pull out your consent form and rip it! Free handcuffs AND he gets a ride home![/QUOTE] You know, the point of these forms usually us that each party has it's own copy.
idk if you are serious but there is nothing at all about a consent form. the law says both people have to say yes and specifies that silence, lack of resistance, or being intoxicated does not imply consent and that a person's relationship with the alleged rapist means that non-consensual sex can still be rape. but I guess it's pretty easy to make jokes about signing a sex contract and pretty hard to make jokes about legislators updating the legal definition of rape.
If a person is drunk, it is now legally problematic to have sex with them. If a person is uncertain that they should have sex with you, it is now legally problematic to convince them.
[QUOTE=Winner;45843975]yeeaah both of those things have always been bad don't take advantage of drunk peope and don't pressure people into sex[/QUOTE] A lot of people disagree with this though, which is why this law was made.
[QUOTE=Winner;45843975]yeeaah both of those things have always been bad don't take advantage of drunk people[/QUOTE] However one thing I don't get. What if both parties were drunk? How does one determine who was more drunk? What if one person is better at controlling oneself when drunk?
[QUOTE=buro;45844487]However one thing I don't get. What if both parties were drunk? How does one determine who was more drunk? What if one person is better at controlling oneself when drunk?[/QUOTE] If fairly sure that technically, that would be some weird mutual rape going by the legal requirements of the crime. But its incredibly hard to prove either party had more control in that case, so it'd likely be thrown out due to the circumstances. Though I guess if you can get character witnesses to testify that one party is particularly hard to get drunk it could probably work as a case.
[QUOTE=buro;45844487]However one thing I don't get. What if both parties were drunk? How does one determine who was more drunk? What if one person is better at controlling oneself when drunk?[/QUOTE] Easy: Do not have sex while binge drinking.
[QUOTE=buro;45844487]However one thing I don't get. What if both parties were drunk? How does one determine who was more drunk? What if one person is better at controlling oneself when drunk?[/QUOTE] If there is ambivalence then it is up to the courts to decide, as with any other legal case.
[QUOTE=Kardia;45843778]If a person is drunk, it is now legally problematic to have sex with them.[/quote] It always has been...? Having sex with someone who is unable to make a rational decision because they are under the influence is sorta rape dude. Even more-so if one of the parties isn't drinking. It's called Hit N' Run sex for a reason. [QUOTE=Kardia;45843778]If a person is uncertain that they should have sex with you, it is now legally problematic to convince them.[/QUOTE] "Hey do you want to have sex, sweetheart?" "Nah not right now, babydoll" "Alright, some other time then" Is it really that hard..? If one party isn't really into it, sex would be pretty boring really. Why not just wait till when both parties are in a good and flirty mood, and go from there..?
People who have a problem with consent are usually entitlement queens who have some sort of belief that their target of interest (usually girls) owe them something. You have to be somewhat socially stunted not to grasp how the person you're with is responding to what you're doing. There is no moment in a sexual encounter in which you pass an event horizon of consent, you can change your mind at any point. This is elementary stuff but somehow not everyone can grasp it.
[QUOTE=omggrass;45843222]don't talk to women at college anymore, it's dangerous to your social life/status. don't look at them, don't talk to them, don't even compliment them, they can retroactively call it harassment if you have a falling out.[/QUOTE] [I]-Someone who is terrified of talking to a girl, 30/08/14[/I] [editline]30th August[/editline] For your information, [B][I]sir[/I][/B], I don't make eye contact with women because I believe that they are portals to a dimension of pure misandry, in which they steal men's souls and weave dreadful tapestries upon them. NOT because I'm a spineless, deeply paranoid husk who's horrified by the idea of social interaction. I fail to see where exactly in my posts on Facepunch subforum Sensationalist Headlines that you could have stumbled upon that impression!
[QUOTE=omggrass;45843222]don't talk to women at college anymore, it's dangerous to your social life/status. don't look at them, don't talk to them, don't even compliment them, they can retroactively call it harassment if you have a falling out.[/QUOTE] This feels... familiar: [video=youtube;SScWv0b1wVg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SScWv0b1wVg[/video]
[QUOTE=demoguy08;45844630]People who have a problem with consent are usually entitlement queens who have some sort of belief that their target of interest (usually girls) owe them something. You have to be somewhat socially stunted not to grasp how the person you're with is responding to what you're doing. There is no moment in a sexual encounter in which you pass an event horizon of consent, you can change your mind at any point. This is elementary stuff but somehow not everyone can grasp it.[/QUOTE]Or maybe some people just have an issue with people who withdraw consent (or deny they gave it despite clear evidence to the contrary, same thing) in some weird power-fetish/revenge plot... thing. Saying "Fuck, I changed my mind buddy! Get off, please," is fine, and if the other person continues then that's [i]wrong,[/i] but going, "nice job on that RAPE, monster!" the next day is retarded and should probably be a crime.
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;45845038]"nice job on that RAPE, monster!" the next day is retarded and should probably be a crime.[/QUOTE] And of course nobody can prove anything. You can prove that there was sex but you can't really do much for finding evidence of consent.
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;45845038][B]Or maybe some people just have an issue with people who withdraw consent (or deny they gave it despite clear evidence to the contrary, same thing) in some weird power-fetish/revenge plot... thing.[/B] Saying "Fuck, I changed my mind buddy! Get off, please," is fine, and if the other person continues then that's [I]wrong,[/I] but going, "nice job on that RAPE, monster!" the next day is retarded and should probably be a crime.[/QUOTE] And how many victims of this vicious hyperbolic rape plot do you think there are?? I know the specific situation you're describing is a recurring fantasy that some people like to imagine is commonplace, [I]but that just isn't the case[/I]
[QUOTE=demoguy08;45844630]People who have a problem with consent are usually entitlement queens who have some sort of belief that their target of interest (usually girls) owe them something. You have to be somewhat socially stunted not to grasp how the person you're with is responding to what you're doing. There is no moment in a sexual encounter in which you pass an event horizon of consent, you can change your mind at any point. This is elementary stuff but somehow not everyone can grasp it.[/QUOTE] The problem is the societal attitude that says "a no is just a yes that needs a little convincing"
[QUOTE=demoguy08;45845639] I know the specific situation you're describing is a recurring fantasy that some people like to imagine is commonplace, [I]but that just isn't the case[/I][/QUOTE] It really is impossible to get statistics on that. Proving consent in a situation like that is basically impossible.
[QUOTE=demoguy08;45845639]And how many victims of this vicious hyperbolic rape plot do you think there are?? I know the specific situation you're describing is a recurring fantasy that some people like to imagine is commonplace, [I]but that just isn't the case[/I][/QUOTE]-snip, not important- I never said it was common at all but it doesn't have to be because [i]it's still wrong.[/i]
[QUOTE=Cone;45844655][I]-Someone who is terrified of talking to a girl, 30/08/14[/I] [editline]30th August[/editline] For your information, [B][I]sir[/I][/B], I don't make eye contact with women because I believe that they are portals to a dimension of pure misandry, in which they steal men's souls and weave dreadful tapestries upon them. NOT because I'm a spineless, deeply paranoid husk who's horrified by the idea of social interaction. I fail to see where exactly in my posts on Facepunch subforum Sensationalist Headlines that you could have stumbled upon that impression![/QUOTE] sitting here reading this with my girlfriend of 1.5 years next to me. nice personal attack though, 4/5
if two drunk people have sex, are they raping each other
Require all condoms in California to have two signature lines to indicate both parties consented when the condom was used
[QUOTE=DeEz;45846827]if two drunk people have sex, are they raping each other[/QUOTE] On one hand, two wrongs don't make a right, but on the other hand, a double negative is a positive. [IMG]http://fi.somethingawful.com/images/smilies/confused.gif[/IMG]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.