Two questions about affirmative consent

shoup88 · 2016-10-12T22:18:13+00:00

This would be ridiculous over policing for a problem that barely exists. But for the sake of debate, I have some questions about your proposals.

Why not simply have a law (both for colleges and for the general public as a whole) which criminalizes sexual contact (including, but not limited to, sexual intercourse and sexual penetration) with people who are high, incapacitated (as in, being unconscious, sleeping, et cetera), "frozen," and/or excessively drunk (as in, too drunk to rationally and sensibly answer basic questions) while otherwise (as in, when the above criteria aren't met) continuing to rely on the "No Means No" standard for sexual assault?

If I understand you correctly, you're saying a law that prohibits sex with someone too incapacitated to consent, but requires the "no means no standard" for other situations? Is that not exactly the way it already exists in USA, save an individual state or two? What's the difference?

What do you mean by "frozen"? Are you referring to the freeze response? How would an individual be able to tell when someone is experiencing the freeze response vs just not being super enthusiastic about the sex?

If campus sexual assault is such a serious problem to the point that we currently have a crisis on our hands, why not reintroduce total sex segregation at universities?

No, for multiple reasons. For one, if your only effort to combat sexual assault is to segregate the genders, how does that prevent those behaviours from spilling into the real world following graduation? Do you just segregate men and women forever?

Secondly, the USA does not have the money for something like this. Do you have any idea how expensive it would be to require every state school to essentially double it's funding?

Littleknownfacts · 2016-10-12T22:01:48+00:00

I suggest you check out /u/wingnut 's thread here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/RedPillWives/comments/51twe4/we_fought_for_the_freedom_to_risk_rape/

Where we discuss the original fight for the freedom to risk rape specifically on college campuses. It's a great video in general.

antariusz · 2016-10-12T22:01:41+00:00

2 reasons.

There is not really a sexual assault crisis. But women benefit from making it seem that there is.

Women do not benefit from segregation. So there isn't. (Mostly).

The current situation is ideal as far as women go. Maximum safety while maintaining the illusion of risk to attain the most benefits.

TW_CountryMusic · 2016-10-12T22:16:45+00:00

You realize most campus rapes aren't happening in class, right? Students will still go to bars and parties and socialize with the opposite sex. This is where (accusations of) rape is taking place.

HailMahi · 2016-10-12T23:57:10+00:00

We do, in fact, have that law. The law defines rape as sex without consent, and consent isn't legally possible in cases where the other party is unable to give it because they are high, drunk, passed out, mentally impaired, etc.
College is preparation for the real world, the real world is not (well, depending on where you live) segregated. The problem with segregation, further, is that is implies a person is not entitled to safety if they are outside of their defined area. Like, if a girl walks onto a male campus, is she then asking for it? It would be much easier if we just taught people both how to defend themselves AND how to treat other people with respect.

SkinnySweaty · 2016-10-12T21:55:55+00:00

If campus sexual assault is such a serious problem to the point that we currently have a crisis on our hands, why not reintroduce total sex segregation at universities?

Or... guys could stop raping women.

Crazy thought, I know.

AutoModerator · 2016-10-12T21:46:09+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair, just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

thenoorys · 2016-10-13T00:04:21+00:00

All of your solutions are dependent on laws and state dependence. You r tag is Futurist101 so this shouldn't be a surprise, but I know a lot of people that are going to bitchslap that shit right outta here on that basis alone.

Essentially all that will happen is that these laws will only be enforced selectively for political character assassinations that benefit state ideologies.

Futurist110 · 2016-10-13T06:39:01+00:00

Because that would be a restriction of everyone's liberty.
There is no sexual assault epidemic. There's been a calculated play for power by a sexist movement called feminism who want to oppress men.

daveofmars · 2016-10-13T13:29:40+00:00

1: Because the question always comes down to: what's the difference between being drunk and too drunk, high or too high? No one can truly know, because even when you are too drunk you're usually too drunk to know it.

2: Segregation is already in place with male/female dorms, and sometimes male/female colleges. How has it helped? Guys sneak out, girls sneak out.

Title	Two questions about affirmative consent
Author	Futurist110
Upvotes	3
Comments	109
Date	October 12, 2016 9:46 PM UTC (9 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/576qbo/two_questions_about_affirmative_consent/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/two-questions-about-affirmative-consent.272449 https://theredarchive.com/post/272449

Comments