Colleges expand definitions of sexual misconduct to punish consensual sex

colourofawesome · 2011-09-09T17:59:08+00:00

One of the many problems with this is that nobody seems to be considering is that women are just as capable of abusing power as men are. If women are capable of ruining someone's life at the mention of "coercion," then some will do this when it is totally unjustified, whether for control, blackmail, or whatever else. Yes the number of women who would do this is very small, but so is the number of men who would actually commit rape. Both involve using a power the other doesn't have to control, manipulate and hurt. Both are wrong, but society is increasingly condoning one to combat the other.

It used to be the other way around, with women that have been sexually abused having no voice to speak out with. To flip it around doesn't right the wrongs of the past. Compensation by discrimination accomplishes nothing, and is an insult to everything the women's rights movement worked so hard towards. This isn't equality, it's just irresponsible.

firex726 · 2011-09-09T15:32:56+00:00

This sort of stuff is really going to hurt us as a country in the long run when men start not going to college or being punished for stuff like this.

thingsarebad · 2011-09-09T20:09:49+00:00

Han rapes Leia: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSHinT0i6G4

shady8x · 2011-09-09T18:13:12+00:00

Women aren't the only ones pressured into sex.

A study of 518 university students found that 38.8% of men reported being pressured into a range of sexual activity, from kissing and cuddling to intercourse and oral sex.

Will a woman ever be held to such an insane standard as to be punished for nagging a man into having sex with her? Yea, right.

So what is going on here? This is the continued criminalization of male behavior. Our society believes that unlike women that are just fine no matter what they choose to do in life, men need to be controlled and beat down as an example to all others when they step over some ever moving imaginary line.

cyber_rigger · 2011-09-09T16:35:46+00:00

Rape Scene:

"Let's have sex"

"No"

"Why not?"

"I feel tired"

"Come on"

"No"

"Don't I always leave you satisfied?"

"Hmm, I guess you are right..."

-Rape(?) occurs-

Ragnrok · 2011-09-09T16:50:23+00:00

So essentially if you convince a women to have sex through use of the English language and you continue when she does not immediately say "yesy" you are a rapist?

octoberose · 2011-09-09T19:40:33+00:00

Looks like we need a universal safe word to determine whether sex is ok. Suggestions?

Kuonji · 2011-09-09T19:57:43+00:00

We're slowly but surely traversing down the path that turns all males into criminals.

solinv · 2011-09-09T21:04:38+00:00

Coercion is rape. That is unquestionable. However, coercion is not nagging or pressuring. Coercion is specific threats that would be taken by a reasonable person to be threats.

'Lets have sex'
'No'
'Cmon'
...etc
sex occurs

Is not coercion and is valid consensual sex.

"Have sex with me or I will bash your face in then kill your puppy."
sex occurs

This is coercion and should be punished as rape.

kragshot · 2011-09-11T04:31:51+00:00

First off, we need to address one very simple thing; coercion is not what is going on when men try to wheedle women for sex. Feminist anti-rape advocates have twisted the definition of the term "coercion" until it means anything that they want it to mean.

The intellectual dishonesty that is involved in this is of the most heinous nature. How many other terms have they taken philosophical ownership of, in order to twist them for their own political ends?

These are the actual definitions of coercion:

the act of coercing; use of force or intimidation to obtain compliance.
force or the power to use force in gaining compliance, as by a government or police force.

or

(legal)

the use of express or implied threats of violence or reprisal (as discharge from employment) or other intimidating behavior that puts a person in immediate fear of the consequences in order to compel that person to act against his or her will

The male boss who tells a woman that if she doesn't have sex with him, he'll fire her or block her from getting a promotion is a rapist.

In "300," Theron who made Gorgo (King Leonidas' wife) have sex with him, in order to gain his support in the Spartan council is a rapist as he levied the life of her husband against her agreement to sex.

The captain of the football team who tells the head cheerleader that if she doesn't screw him, he will put naked pics of her on the web is a potential rapist if she agrees to it because she agreed to the sex under duress.

If a guy is "threatening" to break up or stop seeing a woman if she does not agree to sex and the girl agrees to sex to keep those consequences from occurring; then while that guy is a reprehensible human being, he is not a rapist.

If a guy begs or wheedles a woman into agreeing to have sex with him, then these people have to realize that the operative idea is that the woman agreed to have sex. That is not coercion. There was no force or implied threat of harmful consequences involved in the guy's begging/nagging.

This argument makes every guy who tries to convince a woman to agree to sex a rapist. That is a logical and sexist fallacy meant to demonize men.

It also makes a flawed assumption that women are people who have no personal strength of will. If a woman does not want to have sex, unless there is a genuine threat or fear of harm (which is the whole point of this discussion), then she should have the sense of will to hold to her "no."

By this same argument, if a woman goes to a car dealership with the sole intent to only look at cars and a salesperson talks her into buying a one, has that woman been robbed by being convinced into buying that car? That is the exact thing with sex. If a woman goes on a date with a guy with the intent of not having sex with him and through the course of the evening, he talks her into having sex after all; how is it that she has been raped?

People get talked into doing things that they initially didn't want to do all the time. Cajoling, wheedling, or even begging does not equal the application of force or the threat of force to convince somebody to have sex.

The overall problem with all of this is that "alleged feminists" have altered the language surrounding the politics of sex between men and women in order to demonize male sexuality towards women. The biggest thing we can do to combat this is to try to force a reversal of their corruption of language.

*(edited for grammar)

Offensive_Brute · 2011-09-09T15:46:24+00:00

I'm so glad I moved far far away from Liberalshitburg USA.

TheRealPariah · 2011-09-09T22:55:55+00:00

It's funny because feminists push an agenda that makes the entire gender seem like pathetic and helpless children constantly being molded and pushed by males. Hoho, nothing funnier than self-insults.

Guy51234 · 2011-09-10T00:54:50+00:00

Young men. Your reading correctly. What is your conclusion? Can you not see that this is no place to find your future.

I am writing this because I wish I had read it when I was young.

Expat...do it now....things will get much much worse.

2011-09-10T00:55:28+00:00

Look America is on the decline in almost every facet. This is just another drop in the bucket that is about to spill over. I love my country, but every day it turns more and more into a toilet.

KMFCM · 2011-09-09T21:58:22+00:00

I'm sure thier excuse for this is to "eliminate distractions from schoolwork"

PierceHarlan · 2011-09-09T15:38:18+00:00

To achieve this goal, colleges employ fuzzy and legally questionable sexual misconduct policies that punish males for engaging in even consensual sexual behavior obtained by emotional or verbal "pressuring" (e.g., cajoling, coaxing, or nagging) if a woman complains about it.

Well, to be perfectly honest ... nobody should be pressured into having sex. If they don't want to have sex, respect their decision.

Added: To clarify, I don't condone what they're trying to do, because in the end - the acts were consensual by both parties. My point is that the original response of "no" should be respected.

EatSleepJeep · 2011-09-09T16:45:20+00:00

"Pride of the Port Chester sports program, Tom; Hippie Olympics. Doesn't matter who wins 'cause they're all losers. You know, it's sad, really. This school used to be a bastion of rich, white elitism. And now... now they let homosexuals on the football team. Whining minorities run the student government. And you can't even coerce a woman into having sex with you without being brought up on charges."

jondiggity · 2011-09-09T16:25:54+00:00

look I know a lot of you are going to be upset but...

If you have to nag, cajole, convince, verbally coerce, anyone to have sex with you, then i'm inclined to believe that maybe you're not a sexual offender, but definitely an asshole.

seriously. if i were to go around annoying girls until they gave me a handy i'd be known as that asshole guy THAT ANNOYS GIRLS TO GIVE HIM HANDJOBS.

the way it should be is: bill meets amanda, is super charming and confident and awesome, asks her if she wants to go up to his room, one thing leads to another and he gets a handjob. everyone is happy. OR bill meets amanda, is super charming and confident and awesome, asks her if she wants to go up to his room, tries to kiss her/whatever, amanda says no, bill says OH OK I UNDERSTAND. LETS PLAY CARDS THEN and that's that!

believe me, in scenario 2, if amanda likes bill, she will come back the next day or the next week or whenever and bill will get his handjob and maybe even more because he acted like a GENTLEMAN.

tl;dr: if you need to annoy a girl into doing stuff with you, you're a fuckin dick and don't deserve a handjob

edit: clarity edit: i don't see why I'm being downvoted...i'm just pointing out that having sex isnt a debate or argument that you somehow can "win". its not like you need to say "hey my penis is good for you because of a, b and c." wouldn't you rather have sex with someone that totally wanted to the whole time rather than someone you had to convince or annoy into doing it? It's not like there's a shortage of college girls who are down to fuck

Title	Colleges expand definitions of sexual misconduct to punish consensual sex
Author	PierceHarlan
Upvotes	169
Comments	131
Date	September 9, 2011 1:59 PM UTC (14 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/ka18b/colleges_expand_definitions_of_sexual_misconduct/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/colleges-expand-definitions-of-sexual-misconduct.1034858 https://theredarchive.com/post/1034858

Comments