California activists seek to redefine quiet, consensual sex as rape through Senate Bill 967

PSIKOTICSILVER · 2014-03-10T15:53:23+00:00

The deaf community is going to love this bill.

darthfodder · 2014-03-10T15:22:44+00:00

[permanently deleted]

IMdub · 2014-03-10T18:15:36+00:00

Having to give consent before sex is gonna stop rape? GOD I'M SO STUPID, WHY DIDN'T I THINK OF THAT!

jseeley · 2014-03-10T17:21:39+00:00

Wait, so I'm confused.. in this case, if neither party says aloud "YES, let's have sex".. then who is to blame? who is the victim, who is the rapist?.. aren't they both rapists and both victims?

lowerthegates · 2014-03-10T14:45:24+00:00

How would they decide who is doing the raping? Can two people rape each other?

Tlcj · 2014-03-10T16:08:24+00:00

I took one look and this and immediately remembered this sketch. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuWGVmlkLKo&hd=1 It's sad that it could become fact in the future.

beatsdropheavy · 2014-03-10T17:37:34+00:00

We should just make sex illegal for men and just give half our shit to women at birth.

That way we could at the very least just skip the bullshit and try to live in peace.

Virulentt · 2014-03-10T21:48:57+00:00

Wait this is exactly how it is on my campus nowadays... Hell, my university's policy is that even if you get affirmative consent (aka a "yes let's have sex") it is not actually consent if the participant (mainly the woman) has ANY amount of alcohol in her system. Two beers? Can't consent. Doesn't matter if you have a video of her saying yes and acting completely coherently/sober. If she had alcohol then she cannot give consent. So I asked at a seminar thing we had if I can file a sexual assault report if a girl gives me oral sex when I'm drunk and they said no, because I consented. I said if I'm drunk I can't consent, but of course they realized the flaw in their logic and gave me the "that's not how it works" bullshit. In other words, you only can't give consent if you're drunk if you're a woman at my university.

Not-Now-John · 2014-03-10T15:56:40+00:00

Notable parts of the bill. Interpret as you will.

"Affirmative consent” is a freely and affirmatively communicated willingness to participate in particular sexual activity or behavior, expressed either by words or clear, unambiguous actions.

(4) In the evaluation of complaints in the disciplinary process, an individual under any of the following conditions is unable to consent to the sexual activity:
(A) Asleep or unconscious.
(B) Incapacitated due to the influence of drugs, alcohol, or medication.
(C) Unable to communicate due to a mental or physical condition.

geoboy1234 · 2014-03-10T18:31:37+00:00

Extended to ad absurdum you could not take consent from anyone who might (even theoretically) be intoxicated. This makes everything such as job interview practically impossible...

... and ultimately all women are in burkas... well done feminists :-(

deeptimeswimmer · 2014-03-11T00:56:09+00:00

I think it is important to reiterate this point here:

These laws were NOT made to prevent rape. Feminists don't care about actual rape.

These laws were made to allow women to PROSECUTE men for rape.

That's all. The goal of feminism has always been to expand female power. Therefore, they expand the definition of rape, because the rape-hammer is such a useful weapon for women! It can be invoked with just an accusation, and it can only hurt men! It also has the added bonus of making women feel afraid so they are more likely to give money to feminist causes.

All of the questions in this thread are pointless: The answer is ALWAYS "Whichever situation hurts men the most".

McFeely_Smackup · 2014-03-10T16:24:11+00:00

so if two people have sex without meeting this strict and arbitrary definition of "consent", did they rape each other? are both guilty of a crime?

think about what they're describing here. Two people have sex, there was no verbal consent given... but no force either, that's not what this bill is about. They've literally decided two consenting adults are now both guilty of a sex crime.

Except we know damn well that's not going to be the case. in 100% of the times this law is invoked, the male will be persecuted as a sex offender and the women will be called a "victim".

2014-03-10T18:24:12+00:00

What a surprise. I really have to get my shit together and get out of this country.

The MRM will never make a dent by relying on relaxed, rational, and respective discourse - though I give them credit for having the balls to try. I mean, who wants to become chronically unemployed by so much as publicly mentioning this type of idiocy.

Before long, the mission will be complete, and all the men of this country will be completely impotent. Perhaps then, when there is nothing to lose, they will fight back as one.

DolphinSixFive · 2014-03-11T00:44:09+00:00

All I could think about while reading this article

Long but worth it. Sorry for the shitty quality, couldn't find the original.

2014-03-11T01:46:50+00:00

I'm quiet. I must've been getting raped my whole life. Oh wait, I'm a guy, I can't be raped. Silly me!

kaluh_glarski · 2014-03-10T20:32:19+00:00

Man California sucks. Gun laws suck, now I must create a verbal contract to have sexy times? I'm outta here

Casemods · 2014-03-10T22:21:32+00:00

Women are unable to make decisions for themselves.

So why are they allowed to vote, drive, have jobs, etc, if they can't? Makes no sense.

All this is, is a way to justify frivolous rape accusations based on the fact that they got drunk and regretted it in the morning - which, btw, as others have mentioned, was simply shrugged off as a bad life choice and taken as a lesson learned.

MattClark0994 · 2014-03-10T15:21:14+00:00

And again this is why I don't vote Democrat. They are the party that has no qualms about throwing half the population under the bus, especially if they think it will win them a few more votes.

So I guess it is fitting that the first anti-male, due process trampling rape law that adopts the "dear colleague" letters anti-male policies, would be passed by the liberal of liberal states.

Downvote all you like, it won't change the fact that you know I am right and are just too stubborn and liberal to want to agree with me.

danpilon · 2014-03-10T20:53:54+00:00

So the problem is that nonverbal consent is sometimes ambiguous and might lead to some rapes. Ok, in that situation, people not receiving verbal consent are sometimes rapists. The clear solution to this problem is to make everyone not receiving verbal consent a rapist. Yay we just increased the number of rapists out there by 10000%. That'll look good on our feminist handouts!

miroku000 · 2014-03-10T22:29:52+00:00

If both of the people didn't discuss it, then wouldn't they both be guilty of rape? I would think that many rape victims might be afraid to come forward under that circumstance.

jonnytechno · 2014-03-11T00:45:48+00:00

For arguments sake, I wonder, should this somehow pass as a law 'somewhere' whether it may have aternate effects in that by making an open conversation / descision to have sex will more often that not be followed by an affirmation for it not to result in children ... with such a law we as a society will be forced into performing what could be a legally binding agreement?

hardly romatic but in these misandric times I'll take legal security over romance

TheLonelySnail · 2014-03-11T02:52:33+00:00

As a Californian next time I have sex, I'm just going to invite my lawyer. Seems like it would save some time and possible jail sentencing.

aussietoads · 2014-03-11T03:50:54+00:00

Feminists redefine oral sex as "talking about it"!

NemosHero · 2014-03-11T11:56:34+00:00

I just don't see what this bill would accomplish. Does this someone create evidence? How are you going to prove something like this? The accusation has turned from:

"Did you rape her?" "No."

to

"Did she consent to sex?" "Yes."

Tell me what is different, somebody.

JakeDDrake · 2014-03-11T13:27:24+00:00

Wow, Feminists will succeed where The Church has not, in keeping the government firmly in the bedroom.

I hate to be pessimistic, but it feels like this one's a lost cause to us. No amount of campaigning with our resources could overturn the likely outcome of this bill at this point, unless we lit fires under the collective asses of each delegate in California.

Given the nature of the "progressive" air to the goings-on in that state, I bet all we'll be able to do is document the absurd repercussions that will ultimately occur, to weaken the position of our opponents.

That said: "Verbal, enthusiastic consent"? Has to be proven by witnesses? Well, there goes the sex life of every shy person, ever.

mrohm · 2014-03-10T20:19:16+00:00

I always make sure that I get a signed consent form that has been notorised, and the consent has been viewed by at least two witnesses, if not more, and that the forms are in triplicate.

Aaron565 · 2014-03-10T21:13:56+00:00

Its funny because they wont admit that the woman is also raping the man. Oh so you got raped because he didnt ask you? Well did you ask him?

anonymous11235 · 2014-03-10T22:44:26+00:00

Yeah, this is nothing less than legislating how two people must show affection to one another.

This is just as ridiculous government-in-the-bedroom nonsense as trying to legislate the legality of homosexual sex.

2014-03-11T04:06:36+00:00

That is most ridiculous thing I have heard all year.

Also, ableist as fuck. How are deaf or mute people supposed to have sex?

vgmaster831 · 2014-03-11T04:07:18+00:00

This title is inflammatory and does not give an honest account of the legislation. Honestly, I think vocal, affirmative consent is important. ALL parties in ANY sexual arrangement should vocally consent before any sex. This bill is not the problem, the problem is the biases in rape cases, for OR against women.

wwwhistler · 2014-03-10T22:53:54+00:00

so guys, i guess the only response to such a law would be to video (with audio) record ALL sex and All conversations alluding to sex and keep them on file until needed. i do not see how you would otherwise prove that “Affirmative consent" was given.

ankensam · 2014-03-10T23:27:53+00:00

Thank you feminism! Just what I've always wanted, everything I do to a girl is rape, where would I be without you? /s

Title	California activists seek to redefine quiet, consensual sex as rape through Senate Bill 967
Author	SupGermany
Upvotes	373
Comments	113
Date	March 10, 2014 2:07 PM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/201q0r/california_activists_seek_to_redefine_quiet/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/california-activists-seek-to-redefine-quiet.1002938 https://theredarchive.com/post/1002938

Comments