<p>If there is such a thing anymore?</p>
<p>Well, yes there actually is and that’s why the Rolling Stone story got discredited after the WaPo decided to start poking around. But, way too many people can’t tell fact from fiction. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As Gaiman said:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
Proust</p>
<p>Since I’m pretty sure I’m not looking at this through fundamentalist Baptist fire and brimstone eyes, I really hope I haven’t become my parents.</p>
<p>As Camus said:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If you achieve this culture shift by changing the legal or campus definition of consensual sex, the current situations which become he-said she-said cases may decrease. However, there will then be he-said she-said cases near the new border you have just defined. In fact, since you have moved the line of illegality further toward the ethical end of the spectrum of behavior, I suspect you would have more people caught near this borderline. </p>
<p>The bottom line is that if you are to create a campus rule whose violation carries such dire consequences as expulsion, you cannot make ethical conduct a violation in the hopes of scaring people away from the truly unethical, illegal activities. It’s going to be a disaster. </p>
<p>It seems too many young people have not learned two basic principles of leading a moral life.</p>
<ol>
<li> Treat others as you would wish to be treated.</li>
<li> Tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.<br></li>
</ol>
<p>I would not blame them as adults rarely follow those two principles.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>(I edited the above to fix what I’m sure was a typo. I’m assuming that collegealum intended to say that we cannot make conduct illegal just because we think it is unethical. I agree.)</p>
<p>Has anyone here said that the legal or campus definition of consent ought to be enthusiastic consent? If so, I missed that post.</p>
<p>On the other hand, the ethical definition of consent should indeed be enthusiastic consent. It shouldn’t be illegal to be a selfish jerk, but selfish jerks are selfish and selfish sex is skeevy and creepy and the kind of behavior than an ethical person ought not to engage in or approve. We need a cultural norm that disapproves sex where one person barely consents and then regrets the sex the next morning. It’s not and shouldn’t be illegal to have sex with someone who isn’t interested, provided they consent, but it is selfish, and we should manifest our disgust. </p>
<p>If a person has sex with another person who barely consents, and who regrets the sex the next day, the person ought to be ashamed. It’s not an act of honor to persuade a friend to do something you believe they will regret.</p>
<p>Eh. I think eventually it will be seen the same way as any con job is seen. But, we aren’t there yet.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>collegealum: As usual, I’m sort of just posting on a thread that exists only in my own head. I am not that interested in the legal rules and consequences as most of you. I dropped out of law school for a reason. I’m definitely not interested in scaring people into correct behavior (however we want to define it) through threat of legal consequences. I’m okay with pressuring them into correct behavior through fear of societal disapproval. My hope is that correct behavior would be the result of education and understanding. </p>
<p>I am still hung up on JHS’s post about different courts. I don’t have time to look up the post number again.</p>
<p>Dstark: Your presence on this thread has certainly been constructive to me 
So thanks!</p>
<p>Poetgrl is back. She’s the expert. I think I’m finished.</p>
<p>adding:
and cross posted with another two of my favorite posters</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I absolutely, categorically agree with this. </p>
<p>However in today’s world where 40-50 percent of marriages end in divorce and a much higher percentage encounter routine conflict between the couple I do not think the kids have any good role model to learn from when it comes to the above. Solve that and you come closer to solving the issue with the kids’ behavior. But it starts with the parents role modeling and selflessly putting their spouse/SO/partner before themselves.</p>
<p>How many parents can honestly claim that they always do that? I know I can’t. We are all selfish and the kids see that and learn.</p>
<p>We all like sheep have gone astray. </p>
<p>We make mistakes, we don’t live up to our own ideals. But in my lifetime, I’ve seen that certain kinds of (what I think of as) unethical behavior used to be socially acceptable, and and now isn’t. We can change social consensus.</p>
<p>“Second, the fact that it’s so hard to get convictions in such cases in criminal court is what led (in my opinion) to the effort to get around the issue by telling the colleges to pursue the cases, but using a much reduced standard of proof and reduced procedural protections.”</p>
<p>I probably would have agreed at the outset that having the colleges handle rapes more seemed like a good idea.</p>
<p>After some experience, though, I’d say that policy idea has pretty much failed. Everyone (DOE, accused, accusers) think colleges are terrible at this. Everyone sues the colleges – sometimes for not doing a good job for victims, sometimes for not doing a good job for accused, sometimes for just looking after their own selfish interests. You can only serve one master.</p>
<p>As some advocates (like RAINN) suggest, I think the college resources and effort would be better channeled into (i) awareness/prevention and (ii) supporting and coordinating with real law enforcement. The effort to create thousands of parallell CJ systems diverts crimes away from where they should be handled. College rape victims (with good support from the colleges) should be reporting much more often to police, not less. </p>
<p>While some kind of college conduct tribunals are unavoidable, they really need to be de-emphasized. They should clearly be secondary and ancillary.</p>
<p>I do not think it’s a good idea to attach an adjective to a term that has potential legal ramifications. It’s either consensual or not , the adjective just muddies already muddy water. If we’re having trouble determining what consent is…and clearly we are having trouble with that, adding an adjective doesn’t help. Most rational people would say if you don’t want to consent to something just don’t do it. But now we have people saying well yes but, I didn’t “really” consent and now you want those same ambivalent people figure out what is enthusiastic? I wouldn’t go there. If they are they are taking off their clothes instead of walking out the door, that’s pretty much consent…now to make it enthusiastic they need to dance while their doing that???</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well it takes two to tango.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Social change rarely comes from lectures. It comes from role modeling of behavior.</p>
<p>Luke 4:23:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How do kids learn to put on seatbelts? Because parents do.</p>
<p>How do kids learn to not drink and drive? Because parents don’t.</p>
<p>How would kids learn to selflessly put the best interests of their spouses/SO/partners before their own? I think the answer is rather simple.</p>
<p>PS: </p>
<p>How would kids learn to drink responsibly? If parents teach them to do so. JMHO.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>All right, let’s get down to cases. Let’s take the sex act described by the sorority girl, taking her at her word. It’s not clear what she did to indicate her consent, but let’s assume that she did some tiny thing. She then just lay there, hoping it would be over soon, while he pumped. Do we say that there is nothing wrong with what he is doing? If it was your son who was having sex with women who barely tolerated it, would you be proud, yay! He scores! My son, the stud! Or would you think, ugh, I raised him to be better than that?</p>
<p>The issue isn’t them taking their clothes off versus walking out the door. The issue is when no reasonable person would see consent- and progresses up to levels of defined sexual assault. </p>
<p>It’s important to discuss the gray, sure. But more important not to confuse some level of free will with lack of free will, whether that’s incapacitation, other inability to resist, or force, threat, or intimidation.</p>
<p>Honestly, CF, I’d say its none of your business. Nor mine, as the parent of an adult. This analyzing of hypothetical peoples’ movements during their sex acts is sounding “skeevy” (to use your terminology) to me.</p>
<p>Some tiny thing? She was naked in bed with him by choice and stayed there voluntarily. I think we also need to remember that in some of these cases neither of these two people know what they are doing or supposed to be doing or what would be normal for their partner to be doing at any given part of the process. There’s a learning curve involved and no-one here seems to call that example one rape. But, there are those who do and this stuff does find it’s way into the college tribunals who can’t make heads or tails of it, either. They really shouldn’t have to and how we got to this point is actually quite incredible.</p>