Liberals Strom California's Bedrooms[W:57]

[Jack Hays]

Re: Liberals Invading the Bedroom

college students - Los Angeles Times

www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-affirmative-...Los Angeles Times


By The Times Editorial Board contact the reporter ... Sexual assault on campus: Is 'affirmative consent' the solution? Few people these days would disagree that ...

". . . Those changes, though well intentioned, merely underscore the complicated terrain that this legislation attempts to navigate. It's one thing for counselors or school administrators to teach students how important it is to have the consent of their partners. Students should understand about the confusion surrounding consent. They should know that drunk people are not in position to say yes. They should be aware that consent can be revoked at any time. They should be urged to be attentive to what their partners want or don't want.


But a state law is not the way to convey messages better imparted by experts. It's one thing for the government to say what people may not do, but it's more worrisome when politicians tell us what we must do. Yes, the new standard might help in the adjudication of sexual assault allegations, but its language still seems both vague — what exactly would constitute an unambiguous sign of consent? — and unnecessarily intrusive. . . ."

 

[Helix]

Re: Liberals Invading the Bedroom

Moderator's Warning:

Threads merged.

 

[Buck Ewer]

Re: Liberals Invading the Bedroom

The Lone Ranger wouldn't be pro-rape Jack...


Tonto wouldn't be either.

 

[matchlight]

I don't claim to have studied the question whether a law like this might raise constitutional issues. But I wonder about the general problem of boards at state-run colleges disciplining students for alleged sexual harassment, sexual assault, rape, and other crimes. If the protections the guarantee of due process would guarantee a defendant charged with a crime in a civil court are relaxed too far, I can see how due process might be violated. You know--kangaroo courts, and all that.

Redefining an important element of a crime to make that crime easier to prove--in this case, the element of consent in rape--can also raise a due process problem, if the redefining goes too far. I know that has come up in regard to felony-murder statutes, which make a killing murder, if it occurred in the course of certain listed felonies like burglary or robbery. Most states still have these laws, even though professional organizations have been recommending for decades that they be repealed. Where a felony-murder law applies, the prosecution doesn't need to prove all the elements of murder to prove the defendant committed murder. Roughly speaking, all it needs to do is prove he committed the underlying crime, burglary or whatever, and that proof makes the killing murder.

What if a state, to make murder easier for prosecutors to prove, changed its felony-murder law to add shoplifting to the list of underlying crimes that have been recognized for centuries? Now, if someone entering a market is so alarmed at seeing a teenager shoplifting a six-pack of beer that he keels over dead from a heart attack, all you have to prove is that the kid meant to take the beer out of the store without paying for it, did so, and that that crime led directly to the death. Just do that, and you make him a murderer the same as if you'd proven he lay in wait for the person who died and shot him in the head. Due process problem with that law, maybe?

Why not go further to protect female college students, and define consent to require not only that the woman affirmatively consent to the sex at every stage, but that the consent be in writing? Or, maybe a sort of "buyer's remorse" provision could be added, giving her two or three days to withdraw her consent after the fact. I don't think we should be too worried about fairness for the male predators in these cases.

 

[Jack Hays]

Re: Liberals Invading the Bedroom

The Lone Ranger wouldn't be pro-rape Jack...


Tonto wouldn't be either.

I don't believe we need government rules in the bedroom to affirm opposition to rape.

 

[rocket88]

So when Rocket says Republicans are pro rape, do tell me what that means other than what it simply says.

No sense of humor today? Or are you just making it about me again?

 

[ocean515]

First, let's get every one on the same page. Here is the law in question(as opposed to some one explaining what they think the law says): https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140SB967

Here is the relevant portion:



It goes on, but that is the heart of it. Note that this has no effect on state laws regarding rape, but only effect school disciplinary action and the standards for those. I am having a hard time seeing a problems with schools requiring that people agree to do something sexual before having it done to them. Liberals have not supported the idea that sexual assualt is ok simply because it happened in the bedroom(nor have libertarians for that matter). This policy simply defines what can be consiuderd sexual assualt for purposes of school disciplinary policy.

So basically once again this thread is a good example of what happens when people get their information for opinion pieces instead of from actual facts.

So the portion about consent being revoked at any time, and all state student financial assistance funding can be withheld unless the school not only adopts, but diligently, and without any prejudice, maintains and polices the standards has no meaning?

Guess not, since you've announced your take is the only valid one, and any other interpretation must come from the mind of uninformed people swayed by biased opinion.

 

[X Factor]

No sense of humor today? Or are you just making it about me again?

I simply have zero reason to believe that you think in some way other than what you repeatedly post. /shrug

 

[Hard Truth]

So much for the ridiculous myth that liberals are socially libertarian; that liberals are “live and let live” types simply defending themselves against judgmental conservatives, the real aggressors in the culture war.

It always has been a silly concete. It runs counter to everything liberals take pride in. They can't be "agents for change" and not be aggressive in pushing their moral agenda. Many conservatives want to do likewise, of course, but when they do liberals screech and scream about theocracy and decry the Orwellian horror and moan and groan about conservatives forcing their values on everyone.

It will be a bit harder for liberals to keep a straight face when making that argument now that Jerry Brown signed a law that micro-manages sexual encounters in a way that turns most normal sex into rape. There must be an affirmative declaration of consent at each stage of the encounter according to the law, which applies to sex on campus. Of course, no one has sex like that.

Talk about using the blunt instrument of the state to intrude into people's sex lives and bedrooms. And based, at that, on a particular peculiar and extreme view of the morality of sex.

The upshot is that according to the liberals who supported this law the state is justified in regulating sex because some feminist writers are convinced some people are doing it wrong. One doesn’t have to take a position on that claim to wonder whether it’s the government’s place to tell people how to do it right.

Liberals Storm California's Bedrooms | RealClearPolitics

I have mixed feelings about this law, but this post is full of misrepresentation of the facts. The law applies only to college administrators discipline of students accused of rape. It does not apply to criminal law. It requires that both parties affirmatively consent when they have sex. It means that students can be disciplined with suspension or expulsion if they have sex with someone who says "no," is extremely intoxicated, or asleep/unconscious.

 

[Redress]

So the portion about consent being revoked at any time,

Yes, if she says "no, stop", you got to stop. Nothing new or shocking there.

and all state student financial assistance funding can be withheld unless the school not only adopts, but diligently, and without any prejudice, maintains and polices the standards has no meaning?

No one said this. How about arguing what is actually said.

Guess not, since you've announced your take is the only valid one, and any other interpretation must come from the mind of uninformed people swayed by biased opinion.

I posted facts, not opinions. What the law actually says is fact, not opinion.

 

[Hard Truth]

I find it quite troubling that in an environment that is supposed to be inhabited by adults, we treat them as if we expect less of them than we expect of kindergartners. Why does behavior on a college campus need to be codified? Can we not just tell college students, you are now of adult age. You will act of adult age or you will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law just like any other adult? No, that would make too much sense. College is a magical environment that removes all responsibility and judgment. Give me a break.

I guess you have never lived on a college campus. Because many college students are inexperienced at drinking, using drugs and having sex, there are many cases of alleged rape. Many victimized students have found local law enforcement uncooperative when they try to prosecute, so they try to get the perpetrator punished through the school's administration. The result is often ambiguous he said/she said situations. By requiring consent there should be less disagreement about what happened if the two parties are honest.

My concern is that women and girls are taught that openly enjoying sex will be punished with slut shaming. That makes many women reluctant to clearly and affirmatively consent or speak up or resist when they do not want to consent. The new rules may encourage women to be more assertive, but they may also result in men being wrongly punished because the woman didn't verbalize her choice, which was clear in the context of the situation. In my opinion, women (and men) have the responsibility to make their choice clearly known. It also raises the question of when someone is too drunk or high to consent. In my view, just a few drinks does not make most people incapable of making choices. A lot of people need or want some artificially enhanced courage to do what they want to do.

Getting rid of the double standard and sex negativity would make these rules unnecessary. Also, local law enforcement needs to be held accountable for enforcing the law when a rape happens on a college campus. College administrators do not have the skills, tools (ie. DNA testing) and due process protection to do it as well as the criminal justice system.

 

[Hard Truth]

I really think you're reading too much into this. All this law does is give everyone a good reason to videotape their sexual activity for evidentiary purposes.

Better get a signed release first.

"California has outlawed revenge porn, in a bill that was signed into law this week. It immediately serves to make this spiteful, harassing practice a crime.

As Reuters reports, the new law targets an increasing number of persons posting nude images of an ex-romantic partner online as "a way of exacting revenge after a breakup."...."
'Revenge Porn' Law Now in Effect in Calif. - FindLaw Blotter

 

[rocket88]

I simply have zero reason to believe that you think in some way other than what you repeatedly post. /shrug

So no sense of humor then. As usual.

 

[rocket88]

I really think you're reading too much into this. All this law does is give everyone a good reason to videotape their sexual activity for evidentiary purposes.

You should at least get a short video of consent. Then rape charges can't be proved.

 

[ocean515]

Yes, if she says "no, stop", you got to stop. Nothing new or shocking there.



No one said this. How about arguing what is actually said.



I posted facts, not opinions. What the law actually says is fact, not opinion.

Yes, stop means stop. As the law states, the participants better be sure all the factors contained in the legislation have not be breached, otherwise someone is in trouble. Probably should stop drinking or doing any drugs while screwing because one could become unable to properly give consent to continuing any thing.

Then there are these factors that you left out and claim don't have any meaning, or are at least, are not facts:

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

(b) In order to receive state funds for student financial assistance, the governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the California State University, the Regents of the University of California, and the governing boards of independent postsecondary institutions shall adopt detailed and victim-centered policies and protocols regarding sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking involving a student that comport with best practices and current professional standards. At a minimum, the policies and protocols shall cover all of the following:

(1) A policy statement on how the institution will provide appropriate protections for the privacy of individuals involved, including confidentiality.

(2) Initial response by the institution’s personnel to a report of an incident, including requirements specific to assisting the victim, providing information in writing about the importance of preserving evidence, and the identification and location of witnesses.

(3) Response to stranger and nonstranger sexual assault.

(4) The preliminary victim interview, including the development of a victim interview protocol, and a comprehensive followup victim interview, as appropriate.

(5) Contacting and interviewing the accused.

(6) Seeking the identification and location of witnesses.

(7) Providing written notification to the victim about the availability of, and contact information for, on- and off-campus resources and services, and coordination with law enforcement, as appropriate.

(8) Participation of victim advocates and other supporting people.

(9) Investigating allegations that alcohol or drugs were involved in the incident.

(10) Providing that an individual who participates as a complainant or witness in an investigation of sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, or stalking will not be subject to disciplinary sanctions for a violation of the institution’s student conduct policy at or near the time of the incident, unless the institution determines that the violation was egregious, including, but not limited to, an action that places the health or safety of any other person at risk or involves plagiarism, cheating, or academic dishonesty.

(11) The role of the institutional staff supervision.

(12) A comprehensive, trauma-informed training program for campus officials involved in investigating and adjudicating sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking cases.

(13) Procedures for confidential reporting by victims and third parties.

(c) In order to receive state funds for student financial assistance, the governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the California State University, the Regents of the University of California, and the governing boards of independent postsecondary institutions shall, to the extent feasible, enter into memoranda of understanding, agreements, or collaborative partnerships with existing on-campus and community-based organizations, including rape crisis centers, to refer students for assistance or make services available to students, including counseling, health, mental health, victim advocacy, and legal assistance, and including resources for the accused.

(d) In order to receive state funds for student financial assistance, the governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the California State University, the Regents of the University of California, and the governing boards of independent postsecondary institutions shall implement comprehensive prevention and outreach programs addressing sexual violence, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking. A comprehensive prevention program shall include a range of prevention strategies, including, but not limited to, empowerment programming for victim prevention, awareness raising campaigns, primary prevention, bystander intervention, and risk reduction. Outreach programs shall be provided to make students aware of the institution’s policy on sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking. At a minimum, an outreach program shall include a process for contacting and informing the student body, campus organizations, athletic programs, and student groups about the institution’s overall sexual assault policy, the practical implications of an affirmative consent standard, and the rights and responsibilities of students under the policy.​

But then again, all those words mean nothing, since you've already stated the above doesn't really exist. As you wrote, "This policy simply defines what can be consiuderd sexual assualt for purposes of school disciplinary policy."

Got it.

 

[Buck Ewer]

Re: Liberals Invading the Bedroom

I don't believe we need government rules in the bedroom to affirm opposition to rape.

Apparently we do need them in the dorm room.
Rape is a big problem on our nations colleges campuses and unless you like the idea of collage students being raped you would support this progressive legislation that gives every collage boy a reason to think before he acts on his baser instincts.
You have made your position very clear Jack.
You believe that the current frequency of rape is OK with you.

 

[ludin]

Re: Liberals Invading the Bedroom

Apparently we do need them in the dorm room.
Rape is a big problem on our nations colleges campuses and unless you like the idea of collage students being raped you would support this progressive legislation that gives every collage boy a reason to think before he acts on his baser instincts.
You have made your position very clear Jack.
You believe that the current frequency of rape is OK with you.

appeal to emotion
strawman arguments
and a whole list of other logical fallacies.

we already have laws on rape on the books. they apply equally even to college students.
the problem exists is that girls or whatever get drunk say yes then don't remember and make an assumption based on them not remembering.
the guy gets put on the hook and labeled a rapists for no reason. he is marred for life with his name drug through the mud.

if you read the law the OP is not far off neither is the article by this little statement right here.

Affirmative consent must be ongoing throughout a sexual activity.

so guys on campus will have to have a standard form of contract.

can i take off your shirt check yes or no
can i take off your pants/shorts/skirt
can i take off your underware if any is present
am i able to kiss you on the lips
am i able to kiss your body in various places that would be considered erotic
am i able to engage in oral stimulation of various parts on your body
am i able to engage in cloitus


signed sheldon cooper.

all this will end up in doing is getting a lot of guys in trouble with no way to defend themselves.
duke cases will pop up all over campus.

these schools are going to spend way more money in legal cases that is for sure.

 

[sangha]

I don't claim to have studied the question whether a law like this might raise constitutional issues. But I wonder about the general problem of boards at state-run colleges disciplining students for alleged sexual harassment, sexual assault, rape, and other crimes. If the protections the guarantee of due process would guarantee a defendant charged with a crime in a civil court are relaxed too far, I can see how due process might be violated. You know--kangaroo courts, and all that.

Redefining an important element of a crime to make that crime easier to prove--in this case, the element of consent in rape--can also raise a due process problem, if the redefining goes too far. I know that has come up in regard to felony-murder statutes, which make a killing murder, if it occurred in the course of certain listed felonies like burglary or robbery. Most states still have these laws, even though professional organizations have been recommending for decades that they be repealed. Where a felony-murder law applies, the prosecution doesn't need to prove all the elements of murder to prove the defendant committed murder. Roughly speaking, all it needs to do is prove he committed the underlying crime, burglary or whatever, and that proof makes the killing murder.

What if a state, to make murder easier for prosecutors to prove, changed its felony-murder law to add shoplifting to the list of underlying crimes that have been recognized for centuries? Now, if someone entering a market is so alarmed at seeing a teenager shoplifting a six-pack of beer that he keels over dead from a heart attack, all you have to prove is that the kid meant to take the beer out of the store without paying for it, did so, and that that crime led directly to the death. Just do that, and you make him a murderer the same as if you'd proven he lay in wait for the person who died and shot him in the head. Due process problem with that law, maybe?

Why not go further to protect female college students, and define consent to require not only that the woman affirmatively consent to the sex at every stage, but that the consent be in writing? Or, maybe a sort of "buyer's remorse" provision could be added, giving her two or three days to withdraw her consent after the fact. I don't think we should be too worried about fairness for the male predators in these cases.

Ummm, this has nothing to do with criminal laws.

 

[Buck Ewer]

Re: Liberals Invading the Bedroom

appeal to emotion
strawman arguments
and a whole list of other logical fallacies.

we already have laws on rape on the books. they apply equally even to college students.
the problem exists is that girls or whatever get drunk say yes then don't remember and make an assumption based on them not remembering.
the guy gets put on the hook and labeled a rapists for no reason. he is marred for life with his name drug through the mud.

if you read the law the OP is not far off neither is the article by this little statement right here.

Affirmative consent must be ongoing throughout a sexual activity.

so guys on campus will have to have a standard form of contract.

can i take off your shirt check yes or no
can i take off your pants/shorts/skirt
can i take off your underware if any is present
am i able to kiss you on the lips
am i able to kiss your body in various places that would be considered erotic
am i able to engage in oral stimulation of various parts on your body
am i able to engage in cloitus


signed sheldon cooper.

all this will end up in doing is getting a lot of guys in trouble with no way to defend themselves.
duke cases will pop up all over campus.

these schools are going to spend way more money in legal cases that is for sure.

Either you are OK with the frequency of rape in our nation's collage campuses or you are not.
Ludin has made his position quite clear.
As long as the rapists don't get their names drug ( dragged) through the mud everything is AOK.

 

[Redress]

Then there are these factors that you left out and claim don't have any meaning, or are at least, are not facts:

No one said that the claims you listed(that I cut out for reasons of length in my quote of your post) did not have meaning or where not facts. You are simply making **** up there. I in fact linked to the law in question, I certainly did not hide anything. Those aspects had nothing to do with the claim I was responding to. They where irrelevant to what I was responding to, the idea that liberals where "stroming(sic) California's bedrooms). I would add that requiring universities to have written policy for disciplinary actions is not some big controversial thing.

 

[ludin]

Re: Liberals Invading the Bedroom

Either you are OK with the frequency of rape in our nation's collage campuses or you are not.
Ludin has made his position quite clear.
As long as the rapists don't get their names drug ( dragged) through the mud everything is AOK.

again strawman non-arguments.
we already have laws on rape or do you not understand that already?

rape no matter if it is on campus or off campus is already illegal or are you just being obtuse on purpose?

you have to prove they are rapists. you are automatically assuming because a girl cry's rape that the person is guilty.
the duke case is the perfect example of why your type of character assasination is not what we need.

so you have no idea what my point is because you have no idea what the argument is.

all you can do is scream EMO arguments that are worthless.

 

[ludin]

No one said that the claims you listed(that I cut out for reasons of length in my quote of your post) did not have meaning or where not facts. You are simply making **** up there. I in fact linked to the law in question, I certainly did not hide anything. Those aspects had nothing to do with the claim I was responding to. They where irrelevant to what I was responding to, the idea that liberals where "stroming(sic) California's bedrooms). I would add that requiring universities to have written policy for disciplinary actions is not some big controversial thing.

they already have these things. so the law is worthless in general.
also you missed the point i pointed out above.

Affirmative consent must be ongoing throughout a sexual activity.
which is what the OP of the article is talking about.

which basically means you need a spreadsheet checklist every time you want to do something you have to ask permission
that would include every time you want to insert into a women.

any touch any kiss any other thing that you want to do you have to have at this point documented or recorded permission to do it.
since according to this all it takes is for her to say no i didn't and you are basically screwed you have 0 defense which is illegal and against the law.

this flys in the face of innocent until proven guilty.

 

[US Conservative]

Re: Liberals Invading the Bedroom

Rape is a big problem on our nations colleges campuses and unless you like the idea of collage students being raped you would support this progressive legislation that gives every collage boy a reason to think before he acts on his baser instincts.

This should go in the authoritarian thread. :doh

 

[Redress]

Re: Liberals Invading the Bedroom

appeal to emotion
strawman arguments
and a whole list of other logical fallacies.

we already have laws on rape on the books. they apply equally even to college students.

Colleges and universities also have policies for rape and this deals with those.

the problem exists is that girls or whatever get drunk say yes then don't remember and make an assumption based on them not remembering.
the guy gets put on the hook and labeled a rapists for no reason. he is marred for life with his name drug through the mud.

The standard for some one being charged with rape legally is entirely unaffected from this. It affects only school policy, so that whole "marred for life" thing, it is what you refer to earlier as an "appeal to emotion".

if you read the law the OP is not far off neither is the article by this little statement right here.

Except for misinforming people as to what the law says.

Affirmative consent must be ongoing throughout a sexual activity.

so guys on campus will have to have a standard form of contract.

can i take off your shirt check yes or no
can i take off your pants/shorts/skirt
can i take off your underware if any is present
am i able to kiss you on the lips
am i able to kiss your body in various places that would be considered erotic
am i able to engage in oral stimulation of various parts on your body
am i able to engage in cloitus

Wrong. The law in no case states that. That is entirely made up. That is why the opinion piece in the OP is so misleading.

signed sheldon cooper.

all this will end up in doing is getting a lot of guys in trouble with no way to defend themselves.
duke cases will pop up all over campus.

these schools are going to spend way more money in legal cases that is for sure.

All any one has to do is ask first of some one capable of giving consent. It does not have to be ongoing. If a guy says "hey, wanna ****?" and the girl says "sure", the guy is covered in most cases.

This has no effect on any legal cases. This does not change any law regarding rape. Please read the law, it is linked here in this very thread.

 

[Redress]

they already have these things. so the law is worthless in general.
also you missed the point i pointed out above.

Affirmative consent must be ongoing throughout a sexual activity.
which is what the OP of the article is talking about.

which basically means you need a spreadsheet checklist every time you want to do something you have to ask permission
that would include every time you want to insert into a women.

any touch any kiss any other thing that you want to do you have to have at this point documented or recorded permission to do it.
since according to this all it takes is for her to say no i didn't and you are basically screwed you have 0 defense which is illegal and against the law.

this flys in the face of innocent until proven guilty.

Here, let me quote once again what the law actually says:

(1) An affirmative consent standard in the determination of whether consent was given by both parties to sexual activity. “Affirmative consent” means affirmative, conscious, and voluntary agreement to engage in sexual activity. It is the responsibility of each person involved in the sexual activity to ensure that he or she has the affirmative consent of the other or others to engage in the sexual activity. Lack of protest or resistance does not mean consent, nor does silence mean consent. Affirmative consent must be ongoing throughout a sexual activity and can be revoked at any time. The existence of a dating relationship between the persons involved, or the fact of past sexual relations between them, should never by itself be assumed to be an indicator of consent.

Notice your claim is not contained in there. All the law requires is that the school policy as to what is rape involves asking before sex, and stopping when told to stop.