The issue is whether, bad judgment or no bad judgment, she consented to sex. That’s it.
“Go along willingly” may work in some circumstances we can imagine. But it’s not enough for what prove to be troublesome situations. And it’s the complaint situations that bite.
Really TV4, next we’ll have to define “willingly.”
awc, are you saying then that colleges should abandon disciplinary procedures entirely? They should never suspend or expel students for anything? It’s impossible for colleges to operate disciplinary hearings?
If they are ever suspending or expelling students for any reason, they’re already opening the door to lawsuits. Not handling sexual assault cases won’t change that. Students sue colleges and universities when they get disciplined for plagiarism, too.
There are 20 cases running in the United States right now?
There are more sexual assaults at fraternities in 2014. I guess we better close fraternities down.
The last company I worked with fired a guy who we suspected was a rapist.
Awc, your firm doesn’t do that? You wait for a conviction?
No, I’m not asking you to accept the argument that the mere exercise of bad judgment constitutes consent to sex. See my first sentence above?
PG, OK, I thought you had something relevant to contribute to the discussion about whether sharing a bed with someone of the opposite sex constituted consent to sex, but now I realize you just wanted to engage in drive-by character assassination. Keep it to yourself next time.
[/quote]
^^I think this is an excellent argument for affirmative consent.
The second grader stealing kisses grows up to be the boy you have to slap in the back seat of the car, the boy trying to take the same liberties he was denied last weekend. I never found these “God’s gift to women; of course they want me” kind of men at all appealing. It seemed to me an adversarial relationship where the best I could hope for was somehow “losing” by capitulating. I preferred the sweet talking men to the grabby men. It seemed they saw “me” more clearly. I wasn’t just a body there for the taking if I didn’t resist.
Learning to navigate work and life with different personality types is another life lesson. People make conscious or unconscious decisions about the personality types they find most appealing and often young people “try on” different personalities in settings as they form into the mature adults they will become and people reach that self awareness at different points. That is why sometimes the best path in some cases, not all of course, is counseling.
i hadn’t really thought of that but I can see how it would help in some instances. I also believe it won’t do any good in many cases. The woman who doesn’t really want to have sex but never speaks up to say no is the same woman who is going to be the one to say yes because she doesn’t want to (cause a scene, make the guy feel bad, etc.)
@pizzagirl, of course you didn’t consent to having your stuff stolen. But it was stolen - or do you consider it a gift because you foolishly made it easier for the thief? I think it was still stolen.
The more appropriate point is that you made it easier to steal so you became a target. There’s been a lot said of younger, more naive, more trusting, less vocal students being the ones who are more likely to become victims.
Young freshman for sure, but also students suffering from mental disorders are especially vulnerable.
Apropos of the binge watching thread, on season two of the Fall, Stella quotes Margaret Atwood: Men are afraid women will laugh at them. Women are afraid men will kill them.
It is important we understand how to protect ourselves. In my opinion, it is even more important to try and change society so we aren’t in as much daily danger. Affirmative consent changes a norm. It makes women safer. imho
CF: The difference with your bike tour scenario or a boy girl sleepover as friends is that these are not people that were in some way having a physical interaction prior to getting into bed. I would think it is pretty explicitly understood that these are platonic relationships and the boundaries are set.Personally, I would not, however, share a bed naked with a naked man that was not my husband. Not because I thought he would rape me, just because it doesn’t feel right. My kids have done boy-girl sleepovers for various groups but I believe they all sleep with their clothes on.
To me, that is different than two people dancing, kissing, petting (with the girl is not incapacitated) who voluntarily goes back to the boy’s room where the girl agrees to take off her clothes and continue the activity enthusiastically, gets into bed with him and continues, without being restrained in any way at all, and never says no, never tries to get up, never objects, even if she is thinking in her head “Gee maybe I don’t want to be doing this”, but does not tell the boy that she wants to stop. Seems to me that is pretty clear affirmative consent. If she later decides she never wanted to do it, but agreed in action to go along, I would not find that was rape. If she was restrained in any way, if she said no to any particular activity, if she said OK when asked (even if she was thinking she really didn’t want to), if she tried to get out and was pulled back and forced to continue, then yes it is rape.
I wish people on this thread would assume that the poster’s are really trying to understand the issues. Nobody would be here if they didn’t think this was a real problem that needs to be addressed. However, there are murky areas when the alleged crime happens behind closed doors and is something that is not illegal if done voluntarily. Trying to sort them out here does not equate to not supporting victims.
I think affirmative consent is important, but will not solve the problem of proving consent. I still think women have a voice and should say no and mean it when they change their mind or something is happening that they don’t like. In addition to teaching our son’s that only yes means yes, we have to teach our daughters the power of saying no.
I was sort of thinking this morning we all deserved a round of applause. Two months and 105,000 views and we are still going. We haven’t managed to implode and be shut down. That is pretty amazing to me.
Sorry too late to edit, but mean to say she said it was NOT OK when asked. Not that she said OK. And should be posters not poster’s.
Alh, this attempt, though frustrating, is way better than the last two threads on this topic.
I wish people on this thread would assume that the poster’s are really trying to understand the issues. Imo, the challenges is all the left-field examples. Eg, so much attention, for all this time, on what you call, “something that is not illegal if done voluntarily.” Right, not illegal if so voluntary that no one complains. But we get a wrapped up in what “voluntarily” means. Who interprets what, despite no affirmative consent. Or, “Well, her clothes were off, doesn’t that stand as immutable consent?” No.
I wonder if what we need to do is stop all the projecting and simply focus on this: Did she say yes? And was she in a condition where she was able to rationally and reasonably say Yes? Skip all the stuff about how maybe she was hanging on him or maybe she took her wet clothes off or maybe she texted someone. Or that maybe he thought, despite drinking, that she was in fine condition to make the decision.
I think that if we could start (re-start) there, forget Alaskan rules or who’s suing or how expulsion harms, and just start at the beginning, it might be clearer.
I wonder if what we need to do is stop all the projecting and simply focus on this: Did she say yes?
Why would we do that? That is not the law everywhere.
It seems to me we are discussing two very simple concepts:
Is anyone in disagreeing with those statements? Once we are in agreement with those basic ideas, we can think about how they they play out in real life situations.
I really hope Cardinal Fang hasn’t left the thread. I have learned a lot from her. She went to the law library for us.
marie: At this point are you supporting affirmative consent? I am not asking you if it will work in a court of law. I am asking you if you support the idea someone should ask before touching?
^ …and that the asked party should be capable of giving an answer. No assumptions, no comparing the question here to what happened at some particular college or how awful to get sanctioned or what we did in college or whether there are witnesses or it’s a frat or a dorm…or whatever. No “Yes, but” or “No but.”
As, an idea or a societal nicety it’s fine, as a law it has issues. And, as a campus rape tribunal standard it seems to increase the ease of getting to guilty but I don’t like anything about tribunals for felonies. My problems with yes means yes in a nutshell are…
The force and drug situations are apple and oranges to the making out couple who gets undressed together and the guy doesn’t notice she’s apparently become disinterested. I guess we are assuming that if he asked she would speak up. But, I’m not so sure about that, either. And, calling two young men rapists when one is intentionally drugging and committing a felony and one is communicating poorly with a date while drunk as though they are anywhere near the same thing is madness.