California Adopts 'Yes Means Yes' Sexual Assault Rule

[Person Man]

Of course the consent has to be at the time of the contact and doesn't cover them if they say "if I pass out, you can do what you want". That's an escape clause for at least one middle age "pickup artist" I used to know.

[Person Man]

Personally I'm not big on the whole "drunk sex=rape" thing. Now if you get someone drunk to have sex with you, that's one thing, but if you're both drunk and you both decide to go at it, that's not rape. To quote an article in Time Magazine, "I'm not as concerned for my daughter being assaulted on a college campus as I am for my son having his life ruined when he has sex after a party."

There is a problem when you are more concerned about "buyer's remorse" than date rape. And everyone involved seems to be responsible.


This is another big issue. Kids need to be more aware of the heuristics of the party. Is there someone who has had only one or two drinks macking on someone who is obviously intoxicated? It might seem like it is unreasonable but there must be a way to legislate around common sense. We won't be able to get rid of all "date rape" and "buyer's remorse" situations, but I think we can have a lot fewer than we do now and handle them a lot better.

Excellent news.

I like this in principle, but just how clear does the confirmation have to be? Will one have to literally ask "Are you willing to engage in sexual activity in accordance with California §....?"?

I'm sure "Wanna fuck?" will be accepted as well.

or when making out becomes "something more"
 "wanna go watch TV?" or "wanna go back/upstairs?" works as well.

[Person Man]

Personally I'm not big on the whole "drunk sex=rape" thing. Now if you get someone drunk to have sex with you, that's one thing, but if you're both drunk and you both decide to go at it, that's not rape. To quote an article in Time Magazine, "I'm not as concerned for my daughter being assaulted on a college campus as I am for my son having his life ruined when he has sex after a party."

I think that's just an argument based on the ambiguity with the word drunk.  There's drunk and there's drunk, right.  I think a reasonable interpretation would be intoxicated to the point where you can't truly consent.  So, being tipsy is obviously not drunk for these purposes.  Unable to stand up, slurring your words, being unresponsive, vomiting, eyes glazed over, that's drunk and no decent person would accidentally have sex with someone in that position.  A person with a moral compass takes care of that person, makes sure they drink some water and potentially seeks medical attention for them.

So, there is no mutual drunk sex by that definition.  Just think about when you've been seriously, blind drunk.  You're in no shape to have sex, the only physical urge you have is to void the contents of your stomach and get the room to stop spinning. 

Its common sense and very simple. Someone has taken advantage of a helpless victim or not.

[Person Man]

I know it seems weird but my friends post articles on Facebook all the time, I see comments on Jezebel and other websites.

At first I thought they were poorly constructed parodies but everyone appears to be taking them at face value. If anyone is even mildly critical, they are shouted down.

The story is always the same: Girl in college. Guy asks her out. She doesn't want to but agrees out of pity. She allows herself to get drunk. She agrees to go back to his place. She makes out with him even though she doesn't want to, again out of pity. They have sex. She doesn't say "no" but she either doesn't move or she says something like "slow down" or "please wear a condom" It's rape. After the rape, she may agree to hang out with him several more times, again apparently out of pity. She may even get "raped" a couple more times. The writer will then make clear that the worst part is this person doesn't even know he's a rapist! But they are!

I've seen variations on that story so many times over the past couple years.

Also, just to be clear, nothing like that has ever happened to me. I always wait for enthusiastic consent and use a safe word even when I'm not doing anything particularly kinky, just because I'm terrified of these chicks being out there.

Have you ever been with or know someone who seems uncomfortable during but claims they really are?

So ummm...what eventually happen s in this situation?  This slant of the story seems to imply that many people, especially male "pick up artists", have social skills good enough to have sex but not good enough for anything else.

[Person Man]

I know it seems weird but my friends post articles on Facebook all the time, I see comments on Jezebel and other websites.

At first I thought they were poorly constructed parodies but everyone appears to be taking them at face value. If anyone is even mildly critical, they are shouted down.

The story is always the same: Girl in college. Guy asks her out. She doesn't want to but agrees out of pity. She allows herself to get drunk. She agrees to go back to his place. She makes out with him even though she doesn't want to, again out of pity. They have sex. She doesn't say "no" but she either doesn't move or she says something like "slow down" or "please wear a condom" It's rape. After the rape, she may agree to hang out with him several more times, again apparently out of pity. She may even get "raped" a couple more times. The writer will then make clear that the worst part is this person doesn't even know he's a rapist! But they are!

I've seen variations on that story so many times over the past couple years.

Also, just to be clear, nothing like that has ever happened to me. I always wait for enthusiastic consent and use a safe word even when I'm not doing anything particularly kinky, just because I'm terrified of these chicks being out there.

Holy hell. This is monstrous.

Like I said, some of these guys just think they're alpha males entitled to sex. They're rapists. Others are just average awkward guys who don't know they're intimidating and not connecting the dots.

Back to TOD, does this law have criminal penalties or is it "if you're too sexually aggressive,  you get kicked out of school? "

[Person Man]

No.  It does not stipulate expulsion from school, and it does not specify criminal penalties.  It doesn't need to, as california state statue (penal codes 261-269) already does this. 

Here's the text of the bill:

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140SB967

It only affects Cal State, U of Cal, and community college districts.  What this bill does is specify that these educational institutions establish policies, including outreach programming in student orientation, and require state and local governments to provide funding for protocols.  It also potentially sets bad precedent, increases the societal acceptance of an increasingly Napoleonic code of justice, and probably scares the hell out of young people. 

It's also very bizarre.  I've been an old boring married guy for a long time, but I still remember being single.  I cannot imagine a typical situation being calibrated as,  "May I do this?"  "Oh yes, you may."  "May I do that?"  "Oh, no, I am not ready to do that but the other is okay."  "Did you say 'okay' or did you say 'yes'?  I need clarification."  "Oh, I said yes to the first item.  You may proceed."  "May I now proceed to do this a little harder or a little softer?"  ...

George Washington University law professor John Banzhaf points out that under this law "a guy who is lying back and enjoying oral sex, one assumes enjoying it--or at least tolerating it--is not consenting simply by doing that, but under that definition if he didn’t say 'yes,' he is being violated." 

The bill is at best an overreaction, at worst an invitation to litigation.

But mainly what this legislation does is allow legislators to feel good about themselves. 

So does this allow prosecution by criminal court or just subjects students to discipline by the Dean of Students?

[Person Man]

It usually happens but just because its happens 90% of the time doesn't mean it will 100% of the time. I can't remember when it didn't happen at all but there are times where either you or her won't ascend to "full intercourse". Oh. There was one time when I just was broken up in a really bad way and she just agreed to literally sleep naked. 

[Person Man]

Like Angus, I can testify that someone inviting someone up for a drink does not always lead to sex and does not have to mean that.

I was thinking about this last night.  One time, long before I was married (I was probably about 30, living in Boston) a couple of friends and I went to a bar--a drinking bar, not a dance club--where one of the guys recognized some women he knew.  One of them is from Italy, a couple of years younger than I, and very attractive.  We went over to them and started chatting them up.  Very soon I was getting on well with the Italian chick.  Soon enough it became clear that we were going home together.  We indicated to our friends that we'd be leaving, and we went on our way.  She said we could go to her place, and the mood was good.  We were swapping spit and rubbing noses all the way back to her place.  She had two roomies, but we only spent about a microsecond getting acquainted with them, after which she led me into her room, closed the door and plopped on the bed.  I had no doubt she wanted me to do her.  She kept putting my hand up there on her beautiful woman breasts during the obligatory tongue-wrestling contest, and giving me the eyes-wide-open "C'mon already.  Is this happening or what?" stare. 

But I wouldn't.  Or I didn't. 

All the way back to her place, on the subway, I started thinking more and more about how I'd hang out for a while but politely refuse.  She was very attractive--pretty face, nice build, smart, and lively--and under most circumstances I'd have been a sporting fellow, but as it turns out I had a huge hemmorhoid on my ass.  It had grown to about the size of my pinkie finger.  I've only had 5 of those in my life, and this was the biggest and most painful one I'd ever had, and because of it I had very little desire to let my pants down.  It would have been awkward and painful at best, and at worst totally freaked her out if the stress caused a bleeding rupture.  No doubt I was thinking that a week or so later, after my embarrassing condition had subsided, I'd instigate a rendezvous with the intention of getting more intimately acquainted with her. 

Eventually, after about an hour in her room, enjoying her company, and unceremoniously changing the subject during her more aggressive advances, I told her that I need to leave, indicating that I'd call her (we had previously exchanged telephone numbers.)  As you might imagine, she never returned my calls.  I don't think I'd have returned them either.  In fact, when I've been in similar situations--having brought a woman to my bed and been rejected at the last minute--I generally don't call back either.  Who needs that frustration?  Who needs the hurt feelings?  Ah, a bigger man would have been honest about the situation.  People develop minor, non-communicable illnesses all the time, after all.  Perhaps she'd have been understanding about it and suggested we wait a week, or that I simply lie back, close my eyes, relax, and receive a thorough undercarriage waxing sure to ease my pain.  Well, I'll never know.  After that episode I become more understanding upon being rejected at the last minute, even so far as to start call the woman a couple of days later to schedule.  In many cases, those follow-up appointments worked out very well. 

Anyway, the point is that I can relate to the person who comes home with someone, even knowing that the person is horny and ready, but with no intention of going all the way.  Probably we all can.  Something similar has happened to you, maybe.  I say this for Mortimer's benefit:  It isn't coy to follow someone home even if you're not determined to have sex with that person.  There are a million reasons why one might not go all the way, and one must realize that it's not necessarily a slight or a tease or a game. 

Yeah. That's how I feel. I once settled for sex but not full intercourse because I wanted to try to get to know someone better after taking them to their car after a night at a party at community event on Tampa's only 42nd floor. I went to a date at the local Greek restaurant two nights later and she was just too conservative.  The point is that even when Obama was up big the afternoon of  Election Day in 2008 didn't make him President-elect yet. In fact, I saw how badly he was doing in some of the first precincts and had some doubt.

[Person Man]

This thread reminds me of this from Family Guy:

http://youtu.be/lt8UnS2ns6s