# Yes means yes = less sex for timid men



## VanGogh (Jan 13, 2013)

That's basically what the result of this will be. Men who are going to rape will still rape, men who are sexual objects to women will still easily get sex, but guys who are too timid, hesitant, shy or anxious will basically now be shut out of sex - at least on college campuses where they have the best chance at sex in their early 20s.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way...cts-yes-means-yes-law-defining-sexual-consent

Almost every time I have ever had sex with a girl for the first time, I didn't ask "Hey, do you want to have sex now?" What a great way to not get sex. The new law further requires continual consent, so every time you change up what you're doing you need to ask for consent again. Good luck with that.

This kind of thing, also known as communication, probably works great in established sexual relationships, but the first time having sex with someone is usually a mess and and adding the clinical Q&A process of continual consent will not result in any less rapes happening but will result in a certain type of subset of men getting even less sex than before.


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

I honestly don't understand why timid men would be trying to get casual sex anyway. Unless they can get over that timidity, enough that asking that question wouldn't be a problem certainly. Casual sex does not favour shy guys. Shy guys will always be better off trying to get into a relationship and then get sex through said relationship. Unless their shyness is something they want to try and overcome so they are no longer shy - in this area.

Truth is, if you're a shy guy who's desperate for casual sex and doesn't want a relationship, this will be the least of your worries quite honestly.

That being said the law does make no sense anyway, but yeah.


----------



## VanGogh (Jan 13, 2013)

Persephone The Dread said:


> I honestly don't understand why timid men would be trying to get casual sex anyway. Unless they can get over that timidity, enough that asking that question wouldn't be a problem certainly. Casual sex does not favour shy guys. Shy guys will always be better off trying to get into a relationship and then get sex through said relationship. Unless their shyness is something they want to try and overcome so they are no longer shy - in this area.
> 
> Truth is, if you're a shy guy who's desperate for casual sex and doesn't want a relationship, this will be the least of your worries quite honestly.
> 
> That being said the law does make no sense anyway, but yeah.


Most relationships don't really start until sex happens.


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

VanGogh said:


> Most relationships don't really start until sex happens.


Whatever you want to call it, if the other person is interested in you for something other than sex, they're going to be more accommodating and understanding.


----------



## Waifu (Jul 21, 2014)

Good people should stop having sex. Wait a year at least and make sure you truly love them before committing such an intimate act.


----------



## TobeyJuarez (May 16, 2012)

Persephone The Dread said:


> I honestly don't understand why timid men would be trying to get casual sex anyway. Unless they can get over that timidity, enough that asking that question wouldn't be a problem certainly. Casual sex does not favour shy guys. *Shy guys will always be better off trying to get into a relationship and then get sex through said relationship. *Unless their shyness is something they want to try and overcome so they are no longer shy - in this area.
> 
> Truth is, if you're a shy guy who's desperate for casual sex and doesn't want a relationship, this will be the least of your worries quite honestly.
> 
> That being said the law does make no sense anyway, but yeah.


**** it, im done


----------



## plarp (Sep 29, 2014)

The law is just one of those perversions of 3rd wave feminism, soon people will have to carry around written consent cards before engaging in intercourse.

That being said, its not something you or anyone should really worry about. First off, its a university law (not an actual law) an any girl who would take such a law seriously is someone you should stay very very very very very very far away from anyways.


----------



## Waifu (Jul 21, 2014)

plarp said:


> The law is just one of those perversions of 3rd wave feminism, soon people will have to carry around written consent cards before engaging in intercourse.


Or just stop having sex without being in love which is wrong and harmful to your body and mind anyway.


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

TobeyJuarez said:


> **** it, im done


...? If you don't want to there's always the option to pay for sex I guess. Or as I said, work on becoming more confident/charismatic.


----------



## Just Lurking (Feb 8, 2007)

'Timid' men are going to have a difficult time getting casual sex regardless of what the law says.

As for the law itself, maybe see how the law is put into practice before judging it. The current conviction rate for rape cases is pretty bad, and the law is meant to improve that.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/california-is-first-u-s-state-to-adopt-yes-means-yes-law-1.2029247


> The legislation says silence or lack of resistance does not constitute consent. *Under the bill, someone who is drunk, drugged, unconscious or asleep cannot grant consent.*
> 
> Lawmakers say *consent can be nonverbal*, and universities with similar policies have outlined examples as a nod of the head or moving in closer to the person.


----------



## TobeyJuarez (May 16, 2012)

Persephone The Dread said:


> ...? If you don't want to there's always the option to pay for sex I guess. Or as I said, work on becoming more confident/charismatic.


that's not what urked me about the post. Its just that so many of the people here act like wanting a relationship because of the sex is being sleazy and then to hear that advice its justs... its bleh


----------



## diamondheart89 (Mar 21, 2011)

It's not that hard to ask "is this okay?". If you're not shy about getting naked with someone, you can take 3 seconds to ask that.


----------



## plarp (Sep 29, 2014)

Waifu said:


> Or just stop having sex without being in love which is wrong and harmful to your body and mind anyway.


 You are absolutely correct.

literally the only reason i have sex is because when u save it it makes it into a big deal. That it depresses me because then i think of all the times the chick i'm with has had sex before meeting me. So i just do it and its not a big deal anymore.

****t up world innit?:|


----------



## Waifu (Jul 21, 2014)

plarp said:


> You are absolutely correct.
> 
> literally the only reason i have sex is because when u save it it makes it into a big deal. That it depresses me because then i think of all the times the chick i'm with has had sex before meeting me. So i just do it and its not a big deal anymore.
> 
> ****t up world innit?:|


Hopefully this law really will discourage sex so that more people make it through college pure and wholesome and then us honest and innocent people don't get stuck with them after being all used up.


----------



## plarp (Sep 29, 2014)

Just Lurking said:


> 'Timid' men are going to have a difficult time getting casual sex regardless of what the law says.
> 
> As for the law itself, maybe see how the law is put into practice before judging it. The current conviction rate for rape cases is pretty bad, and the law is meant to improve that.
> 
> http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/california-is-first-u-s-state-to-adopt-yes-means-yes-law-1.2029247


The conviction rate for provable rape (with dna evidence, sign of struggle, witnesses) is actually quite high.

Rape lawsuits that comes down to he said she said should not have a high conviction rate. First off, the difference between consensual sex and rape is not 1 word, and secondly such a biased rape law would be much too exploitable #Brianbanks


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

TobeyJuarez said:


> that's not what urked me about the post. Its just that so many of the people here act like wanting a relationship because of the sex is being sleazy and then to hear that advice its justs... its bleh


Oh if that's _all_ you want from them you're going to have problems yeah, if they're looking for someone who wants them for more than just sex.

Let's be honest here, men and women don't want the same thing as a whole.

There are men who want a relationship + sex, and women who want a relationship + sex and they're in the best group to be in. You still will face numerous issues getting into a relationship if you're not seen as widely appealing to the opposite gender for whatever reason, but it's the safest route if you can get into a relationship.

Then there are guys who don't want a relationship but want sex, and there are women who don't want a relationship but want sex and that's not a good group to be in for men. There are less women than men who are looking for 'just sex' and for a number of reasons I can't be asked going into here they are much fussier than the average man when it comes to 'just sex' partners.

Now some people are interested in multiple genders, or the same gender and this effects numbers a little, but things are still far from balanced in this area.

This sucks for men who just want to get laid, but not much can be done about it.


----------



## extremly (Oct 25, 2012)

diamondheart89 said:


> It's not that hard to ask "is this okay?".


Lol. Oh man this is too much


----------



## xxGODDESSxx (Sep 15, 2014)

VanGogh said:


> That's basically what the result of this will be. Men who are going to rape will still rape, men who are sexual objects to women will still easily get sex, but guys who are too timid, hesitant, shy or anxious will basically now be shut out of sex - at least on college campuses where they have the best chance at sex in their early 20s.
> 
> http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way...cts-yes-means-yes-law-defining-sexual-consent
> 
> ...


*My suggestion:* Make sure she has all of her marbles together before you jump into bed with her. 
Don't bed crazies and you'll be fine.


----------



## extremly (Oct 25, 2012)

xxGODDESSxx said:


> Don't bed crazies and you'll be fine.


I wish they came with a label :| not everything that glitters is gold.


----------



## TobeyJuarez (May 16, 2012)

Persephone The Dread said:


> Oh if that's all you want from them you're going to have problems yeah, if they're looking for someone who wants them for more than just sex.
> 
> Let's be honest here, men and women don't want the same thing as a whole.
> 
> ...


I was talking about it being perceived as immoral or conniving, not about the practicality


----------



## plarp (Sep 29, 2014)

diamondheart89 said:


> It's not that hard to ask "is this okay?". If you're not shy about getting naked with someone, you can take 3 seconds to ask that.


If i felt like i had to ask something that before having sex with a girl i would simply not sleep with her. I would actually avoid her. You have no idea how pathetic and weird those words sound in a normal persons brain.

Also i think society needs to stop infantilizing women. I don't think there are many women in America who are so spineless than they need a man to ask before deciding if they are getting raped or not. I mean come on, this isn't 1565, we all agree that women are just as smart an capable as men right?


----------



## Shameful (Sep 5, 2014)

Persephone The Dread said:


> Oh if that's _all_ you want from them you're going to have problems yeah, if they're looking for someone who wants them for more than just sex.
> 
> Let's be honest here, men and women don't want the same thing as a whole.
> 
> ...


Useless nitpicky post incoming - I think it's important to remember that those aren't strict categories and a lot (maybe even most) men and women looking for relationships could be open to sex outside of relationships while still looking for a relationship. So really the people who just want sex don't actually have that small of a group to get it from as it first appears.


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

Shameful said:


> Useless nitpicky post incoming - I think it's important to remember that those aren't strict categories and a lot (maybe even most) men and women looking for relationships could be open to sex outside of relationships while still looking for a relationship. So really the people who just want sex don't actually have that small of a group to get it from as it first appears.


Oh sure, yeah the groups do overlap. But even factoring in that fact there are still less women who are willing to have casual sex than men, and their standards are higher than men's typically for casual sex.



TobeyJuarez said:


> I was talking about it being perceived as immoral or conniving, not about the practicality


I think what people find immoral is the idea of someone leading someone else on - pretending you really care about them just to get sex. If you have some kind of arrangement where by they have sex with you, and you pretend to have feelings or some crap and they're seriously OK with it (I really can't see that happening lol, maybe if what they really want is a guy's attention no matter the reason like being in a relationship with a golddigger but where the currency is sex) then I don't see the problem with that.


----------



## extremly (Oct 25, 2012)

^ Same way shy/timid man can't have it both ways (remain honest, hyper-consent seeking, integral human beings that ALSO demand girls to be turned on based on these qualities), girls can't have it both by rewarding the charming and smooth "predators" manipulate and play all the "games" and also cry hate when these same individuals are successful at getting rewarded by woman with sex.

The truth is these are very conflicting ideas. Kinda how overnight Sam pepper a pretty smooth individual became a "predator" in the eyes of many for doing the things girls reward in the dating market.


----------



## xxGODDESSxx (Sep 15, 2014)

plarp said:


> If i felt like i had to ask something that before having sex with a girl i would simply not sleep with her. I would actually avoid her. You have no idea how pathetic and weird those words sound in a normal persons brain.
> 
> Also i think society needs to stop infantilizing women. I don't think there are many women in America who are so spineless than they need a man to ask before deciding if they are getting raped or not. I mean come on, this isn't 1565, we all agree that women are just as smart an capable as men right?


Agreed, plarp. I can truthfully say that out of all of the female friends I've ever had (myself included), not one of them has pulled this s*** on a man before.

If a guy needed to ask me "if it was okay" to touch me, the only thing he would be hearing from me is definitive NO. If he's too unaware to read my moods, body language, flirting.. then I want no part of him near me to begin with. Pfft. :no


----------



## TobeyJuarez (May 16, 2012)

Persephone The Dread said:


> *I think what people find immoral is the idea of someone leading someone else on - pretending you really care about them just to get sex.* If you have some kind of arrangement where by they have sex with you, and you pretend to have feelings or some crap and they're seriously OK with it (I really can't see that happening lol, maybe if what they really want is a guy's attention no matter the reason) then I don't see the problem with that.


 I feel like thats what you advised in your post, i guess it doesnt matter though...


----------



## Just Lurking (Feb 8, 2007)

It seems like a lot of people fail to read past "yes means yes", and then jump to their own conclusions.

The law itself,



> ...it shall not be a valid excuse to alleged lack of affirmative consent that the accused believed that the complainant consented to the sexual activity under either of the following circumstances:
> 
> (A) The accused's belief in affirmative consent arose from the intoxication or recklessness of the accused.
> 
> (B) The accused did not take reasonable steps, in the circumstances known to the accused at the time, to ascertain whether the complainant affirmatively consented.





> ...it shall not be a valid excuse that the accused believed that the complainant affirmatively consented to the sexual activity if the accused knew or reasonably should have known that the complainant was unable to consent to the sexual activity under any of the following circumstances:
> 
> (A) The complainant was asleep or unconscious.
> 
> ...


And interpretation of said law,



> The legislation says silence or lack of resistance does not constitute consent. *Under the bill, someone who is drunk, drugged, unconscious or asleep cannot grant consent.*
> 
> Lawmakers say *consent can be nonverbal*, and universities with similar policies have *outlined examples as a nod of the head or moving in closer to the person*.


It still needs to be practiced, but it doesn't seem to be what all this fear mongering makes it out to be.


----------



## Shameful (Sep 5, 2014)

Persephone The Dread said:


> Oh sure, yeah the groups do overlap. But even factoring in that fact there are still less women who are willing to have casual sex than men, and their standards are higher than men's typically for casual sex.


Sorry, I have a little more to say on this. Even with more men looking for just sex than women, the whole point of casual sex is no commitment. It's not like someone finds a casual sex partner and then that's it, they're out of the casual sex pool forever. In a few months when that gets stale they'll both be looking for someone new, and then long term relationships end daily and women go looking for fun to get their mind off someone. There's just always going to be women looking for casual sex and if that's really all a guy wants he just has to keep trying until he's in the right place at the right time and finds someone who thinks he looks good enough.

I think guys just think through casual sex wrong. Most women probably don't want to be picked up at a bar by a stranger, they want someone who they already know, but too well that it would be awkward.


----------



## diamondheart89 (Mar 21, 2011)

plarp said:


> *If i felt like i had to ask something that before having sex with a girl i would simply not sleep with her*. I would actually avoid her. You have no idea how pathetic and weird those words sound in a normal persons brain.
> 
> Also i think society needs to stop infantilizing women. I don't think there are many women in America who are so spineless than they need a man to ask before deciding if they are getting raped or not. I mean come on, this isn't 1565, we all agree that women are just as smart an capable as men right?


That's probably for the best then. Since when has asking someone's permission before touching their body and making sure you're both on the same page a bad thing? It's not infantilizing to make sure the other person wants the same thing you want. Especially during casual sex, and when alcohol is involved.

Plus, it says consent can be nonverbal. It means there should be an affirmative evidence that the other person wants it, rather than the status quo being "she didn't explicitly say no since she was drunk so it means yes - which some people have used as a defense".

I get the feeling that a lot of people against this are mainly people who think they should be able to get girls drunk and lower their ability to say no and have sex with them when otherwise those girls would have never agreed to sleep with them. That's creepy.


----------



## arnie (Jan 24, 2012)

diamondheart89 said:


> It's not that hard to ask "is this okay?". If you're not shy about getting naked with someone, you can take 3 seconds to ask that.


Apparently we need an app to determine when sex is consensual :










http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2014/09/29/good2go_a_new_app_for_consenting_to_sex.html


----------



## diamondheart89 (Mar 21, 2011)

arnie said:


> Apparently we need an app to determine when sex is consensual :
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Not all of us, but some of us definitely do.


----------



## plarp (Sep 29, 2014)

diamondheart89 said:


> That's probably for the best then. Since when has asking someone's permission before touching their body and making sure you're both on the same page a bad thing? It's not infantilizing to make sure the other person wants the same thing you want. Especially during casual sex, and when alcohol is involved.
> 
> Plus, it says consent can be nonverbal. It means there should be an affirmative evidence that the other person wants it, rather than the status quo being "she didn't explicitly say no since she was drunk so it means yes - which some people have used as a defense".
> 
> I get the feeling that a lot of people against this are mainly people who think they should be able to get girls drunk and lower their ability to say no and have sex with them when otherwise those girls would have never agreed to sleep with them. That's creepy.


You are so ignorant. Sex is a 50/50 EXCHANGE not something a man DOES to a woman.

You have a very warped view of sex, i would assume girls like you have had something occur in their past to make them think of sex in such an unhealthy manner.


----------



## diamondheart89 (Mar 21, 2011)

plarp said:


> You are so ignorant. Sex is a 50/50 EXCHANGE not something a man DOES to a woman.
> 
> You have a very warped view of sex, i would assume girls like you have had something occur in their past to make them think of sex in such an unhealthy manner.


:roll

Yes, it's warped to expect people to clarify that they want to have sex with each other. The law doesn't specify gender. It simply requires some form of establishing intention to have sex beforehand so you can't claim ignorance later if you do happen to have sex with someone who didn't want it.

Ad hominems don't add anything to your argument. I agree sex is an exchange, this has nothing to do with the fact that establishing consent beforehand is a very good idea.


----------



## mezzoforte (May 16, 2010)

_The legislation says silence or lack of resistance does not constitute consent. Under the bill, someone who is drunk, drugged, unconscious or asleep cannot grant consent.

Lawmakers say consent can be nonverbal, and universities with similar policies have outlined examples as a nod of the head or moving in closer to the person._

I agree with @Just Lurking, that sounds perfectly reasonable...

And if a guy leans in for a kiss or kisses/touches you and you don't like it, just say you don't want to, or leave...I think any girl who can't do this should work on it before she considers getting close to a man.


----------



## plarp (Sep 29, 2014)

arnie said:


> Apparently we need an app to determine when sex is consensual :
> 
> 
> 
> ...


lol this is awesome.


----------



## losthismarbles (Jul 5, 2014)

I didn't read all the posts but you guys are sick. WTH is wrong with the law? It's illegal to sleep with someone who isn't able to give some kind of coherent consent. 

Protecting people from rape = less sex for timid men??
Really, WTH. Maybe it somehow closes the door for some very obscure innocent situation. But that's even hard for me to see because a consenting partner isn't going to tell on you anyway.


----------



## PGVan (May 22, 2004)

Waifu said:


> Good people should stop having sex. Wait a year at least and make sure you truly love them before committing such an intimate act.


Everyone operates on different wavelengths when it comes to how soon sex happens. There is no magical time spent together when sex suddenly becomes ok to have.



Waifu said:


> Or just stop having sex without being in love which is wrong and harmful to your body and mind anyway.


 Sex without love does not harm your body or your mind. It just doesn't.

Not everyone needs love to want to have sex. You seem to be one of those people who do. That's fine, but don't tell others how they should see their own sexuality. It's their business, not yours.



Waifu said:


> Hopefully this law really will discourage sex so that more people make it through college pure and wholesome and then us honest and innocent people don't get stuck with them after being all used up.


 You either don't understand reality, or you're just trolling.


----------



## Alone75 (Jul 29, 2013)

Sin said:


> if two drunk people have sex is it mutual rape?


No, only the male can ever be in the wrong of course! 
It's pissed me off some here saying timid men shouldn't be trying to get casual sex also. They still have sex drives and may not want to die virgins. If you don't have much to offer though, no woman will find you deserving of sex or a relationship with her regardless.


----------



## Paper Samurai (Oct 1, 2009)

It's just providing more legal weapons for jaded women to abuse. The American college system at the moment seems equally as moronic - where an individual can be accused of rape with zero evidence (barring word of mouth), presumed guilty and get kicked out.



> http://online.wsj.com/news/articles...?mod=WSJ_article_comments#articleTabs=article
> 
> I am a feminist. I have marched at the barricades, subscribed to Ms. magazine, and knocked on many a door in support of progressive candidates committed to women's rights. Until a month ago, I would have expressed unqualified support for Title IX and for the Violence Against Women Act. But that was before my son, a senior at a small liberal-arts college in New England, was charged-by an ex-girlfriend-with alleged acts of "nonconsensual sex" that supposedly occurred during the course of their relationship a few years earlier.
> 
> ...


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

extremly said:


> ^ Same way shy/timid man can't have it both ways (remain honest, hyper-consent seeking, integral human beings that ALSO demand girls to be turned on based on these qualities), girls can't have it both by rewarding the charming and smooth "predators" manipulate and play all the "games" and also cry hate when these same individuals are successful at getting rewarded by woman with sex.
> 
> The truth is these are very conflicting ideas. Kinda how overnight Sam pepper a pretty smooth individual became a "predator" in the eyes of many for doing the things girls reward in the dating market.


Not really... What he did would never be seen as desirable by most women.



TobeyJuarez said:


> I feel like thats what you advised in your post, i guess it doesnt matter though...


no lol, sorry if it came across that way. I was saying that's a better alternative, but if you're just looking for sex well.. Good luck, keep trying?



Shameful said:


> Sorry, I have a little more to say on this. Even with more men looking for just sex than women, the whole point of casual sex is no commitment. It's not like someone finds a casual sex partner and then that's it, they're out of the casual sex pool forever. In a few months when that gets stale they'll both be looking for someone new, and then long term relationships end daily and women go looking for fun to get their mind off someone. There's just always going to be women looking for casual sex and if that's really all a guy wants he just has to keep trying until he's in the right place at the right time and finds someone who thinks he looks good enough.
> 
> I think guys just think through casual sex wrong. Most women probably don't want to be picked up at a bar by a stranger, they want someone who they already know, but too well that it would be awkward.


I still think some guys are going to have a harder time to be honest, we'll just have to agree to disagree.


----------



## Kind Of (Jun 11, 2014)

I find it disturbing that you're concerned about the amount of sex timid men are supposedly going to be getting. Like, of all the things you could criticize here as far as efficiency or application goes in something that's about generally pretty scarring experiences for women, you're essentially coming up with, "But what about men's ability to get sex?!"

It's sex. They can suck it up when we're talking about rape. I'm sure the poor dears will find a way to survive.



plarp said:


> If i felt like i had to ask something that before having sex with a girl i would simply not sleep with her. I would actually avoid her. You have no idea how pathetic and weird those words sound in a normal persons brain.
> 
> Also i think society needs to stop infantilizing women. I don't think there are many women in America who are so spineless than they need a man to ask before deciding if they are getting raped or not. I mean come on, this isn't 1565, we all agree that women are just as smart an capable as men right?


There is a small (I think very, very small) subset of women who have trouble saying no, either because of their personality or because they find themselves intimidated in the moment. There was a girl in high school who couldn't manage to say "stop", and the guy just kind of kept going and assumed it was all fine and dandy. It's a ridiculous situation, but it does happen and it is problematic.

They're probably in danger of a lot more than just nonconsensual sex, though, and I've always been doubtful of the effectiveness of these things in helping them stay out of those situations. If full verbal consent was required, we might still have women who are afraid to say "no" when asked.


----------



## Cerberus (Feb 13, 2005)

People should just be required to video tape themselves having sex. Then, they can send said tape to a jury of their peers, so that this jury can decide whether rape took place. Tissue and lotion provided, free of charge . . . Jury attendance would skyrocket


----------



## ImBrittany (Nov 2, 2013)

With this new law I can literally sense people using it to trap people after consensual sex. But even with that being said, I guess it wouldn't be terribly difficult to ask "You sure you wanna do this?" somewhere before having sex. It can seem intrusive, that you have to follow a freakin script and it has potential to ruin the mood but I suppose the law has a purpose.


----------



## millenniumman75 (Feb 4, 2005)

I still say......get it in writing.


----------



## plarp (Sep 29, 2014)

Kind Of said:


> There is a small (I think very, very small) subset of women who have trouble saying no, either because of their personality or because they find themselves intimidated in the moment. There was a girl in high school who couldn't manage to say "stop", and the guy just kind of kept going and assumed it was all fine and dandy. It's a ridiculous situation, but it does happen and it is problematic.


 Yea no... laws should not be made to accommodate ppl like that. If she is that pathetic she should probably not even leave the house, let alone get into a relationship here sex in involved.

Feminism makes so many excuses for women, and its starting to remind me of a damsel in distress movement. The old patriarchal idea of weak pathetic women who can't help themselves and need the big strong white knight (government) to save them from themselves.

We wouldn't be making excuses for a man in that situation, and we should hold women to the same standard if the genders are truly equal.


----------



## plarp (Sep 29, 2014)

Cerberus said:


> People should just be required to video tape themselves having sex. Then, they can send said tape to a jury of their peers, so that this jury can decide whether rape took place. Tissue and lotion provided, free of charge . . . Jury attendance would skyrocket


this is illegal unfortunately. (invasion of privacy, which will probably be considered a form of rape one day :clap)


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

plarp said:


> Yea no... laws should not be made to accommodate ppl like that. *If she is that pathetic she should probably not even leave the house, let alone get into a relationship here sex in involved.*
> 
> Feminism makes so many excuses for women, and its starting to remind me of a damsel in distress movement. The old patriarchal idea of weak pathetic women who can't help themselves and need the big strong white knight (government) to save them from themselves.
> 
> We wouldn't be making excuses for a man in that situation, and we should hold women to the same standard if the genders are truly equal.


You'd be surprised how many women have been there, or close to that point at some point in their life. I'm sure a a significant minority of women on this site, myself included can relate to being scared of saying no, or telling someone to **** off. I know there's been quite a few threads started on this subject.

On behalf of all of us who've been there, your comments are incredibly useful (not.) Luckily these days I have less problems, especially when pissed off. If you were in front of me right now I'd tell you to... Well I can't say what I'd tell you because that's not allowed on this forum  you can use your imagination to fill in the blanks, if you'd like.

I don't need laws to accommodate me, or my past self though. What would be useful for women in such situations would be assertiveness training, and possibly mental health support where applicable. By the way, 'bla bla feminism rant' is not an excuse for being an insensitive a-hole. To anyone.


----------



## RelinquishedHell (Apr 10, 2012)

Just Lurking said:


> 'Timid' men are going to have a difficult time getting casual sex regardless of what the law says.


Exactly lol.


----------



## RelinquishedHell (Apr 10, 2012)

These laws are ridiculous though. You never know when A girl is going to decide to use this law against a guy when she gets pissed off at him. Any girl can put any guy in jail whenever she wants by accusing him of rape. Gotta bring your damn lawyer into the bedroom nowadays.


----------



## plarp (Sep 29, 2014)

Persephone The Dread said:


> You'd be surprised how many women have been there, or close to that point at some point in their life. I'm sure a a significant minority of women on this site, myself included can relate to being scared of saying no, or telling someone to **** off. I know there's been quite a few threads started on this subject.
> 
> On behalf of all of us who've been there, your comments are incredibly useful (not.) Luckily these days I have less problems, especially when pissed off. If you were in front of me right now I'd tell you to... Well I can't say what I'd tell you because that's not allowed on this forum  you can use your imagination to fill in the blanks, if you'd like.
> 
> I don't need laws to accommodate me, or my past self though. What would be useful for women in such situations would be assertiveness training, and possibly mental health support where applicable. By the way, 'bla bla feminism rant' is not an excuse for being an insensitive a-hole. To anyone.


If your SA is that bad, that you are scared to pleasantly tell someone to stop raping you you should not be going anywhere near men, let alone be in a situation where sex is even a possibility.

Either way i'm not about to vote away my own rights as a male just for a law to cater to the lowest common denominator of women. damsels in distress who need the government to protect them from themselves.

Do i empathize with ppl like that? not really. Not when they are brave women (and girls and boys) who are getting raped every day in warzones and prisons and doing everything in the power to stop it to no avail. In that backdrop the plight of an american college student who cant inform her "attacker" that the sex is non-consensual is pathetic. Im going to go as far as saying the man is the victim in that situation.


----------



## plarp (Sep 29, 2014)

And i've been scared to say "no" for the vast majority of my life. I had the disorder for most of my childhood, its not just a woman thing.

But if someone asked for my last cupcake in elementary school and a gave it to her, would i turn around and tell the teacher she stole it from me? Its called grow the hell up, and take responsibility for yourself.


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

plarp said:


> If your SA is that bad, that you are scared to pleasantly tell someone to stop raping you you should not be going anywhere near men, let alone be in a situation where sex is even a possibility.
> 
> Either way i'm not about to vote away my own rights as a male just for a law to cater to the lowest common denominator of women. damsels in distress who need the government to protect them from themselves.
> 
> Do i empathize with ppl like that? not really. Not when they are brave women (and girls and boys) who are getting raped every day in warzones and prisons and doing everything in the power to stop it to no avail. In that backdrop the plight of an american college student who cant inform her "attacker" that the sex is non-consensual is pathetic. Im going to go as far as saying the man is the victim in that situation.


I don't think you understood what I said, but that seems hardly surprising. Nevermind dude, nevermind.


----------



## CowGoMoo (Apr 14, 2013)

VanGogh said:


> Most relationships don't really start until sex happens.


Biggest lie on this website :clap


----------



## Cenarius (Aug 2, 2014)

I really don't like the idea that women should be expecting men to act like their fathers. Grown adults should be capable of at least saying the word no, a word we've been saying our entire lives. He's your date, not your dad, and just because you're uncomfortable doesn't mean he did anything wrong.


----------



## CowGoMoo (Apr 14, 2013)

Wow these laws are only gonna ruin a few more lives.
Girls lie all the time about being raped. 
Now it just makes it easier to convict the guy. 
The penalty for using rape laws to wrongly and knowingly convict a guy of rape should be death.


----------



## arnie (Jan 24, 2012)

Just remember guys: Yes doesn't always mean yes, but if you're a man then *refusing sex to a woman is considered an act of sexual violence.*

/srs

http://linkis.com/thecollegefix.com/t1efE


----------



## TicklemeRingo (Jan 11, 2013)

plarp said:


> If your SA is that bad, that you are scared to pleasantly tell someone to stop raping you you should not be going anywhere near men, let alone be in a situation where sex is even a possibility.


I've known of people who have only discovered that they have that difficulty in the moment. They previously assumed (like you do) that it would be an easy straight-forward matter of just saying _"Stop now" _only to discover in the moment that it wasn't that simple.

I don't expect you to accept or understand that right now, but maybe one day you will.

As for the law in question, I don't know much about it so can't comment either way.


----------



## zookeeper (Jun 3, 2009)

arnie said:


> Just remember guys: Yes doesn't always mean yes, but if you're a man then *refusing sex to a woman is considered an act of sexual violence.*
> 
> /srs
> 
> http://linkis.com/thecollegefix.com/t1efE


Even a cursory glance at that website shows that they just *might* have an axe to grind.


----------



## Milco (Dec 12, 2009)

arnie said:


> Apparently we need an app to determine when sex is consensual :
> 
> 
> 
> ...


An app which logs whom you have sex with and the company reserves the rights to use that information as they see fit.
Also, if consent is withdrawn during sex, having confirmed previously consent on an app could potentially be problematic, depending on the legal standards in the area.
That's a potential problem with emphasis on consent in general though, and why it in many ways is easier to have "no means no".

But there can be no doubt that unconscious people can't consent.
If the current law in any way allows for people to assume consent from an unconscious person, that would be mind-blowingly problematic.
There are different ways to make these kinds of laws, but while they obviously need to provide legal protection against abuse and violence, they also need to not criminalise normal, non-harmful behaviour.
How exactly to go about that is a long and complicated discussion though.
But as this is actual law, it's worth remembering that a much higher legal standard is applied than what is the case in campus disciplinary hearings.


----------



## Bloat (Jan 24, 2014)

I think some, if not many rapes can be prevented in the future with proper sex education (consent, respect, contraceptives). The legalization and regulation of prostitution (also reducing rapes and illegal sex trafficking).

I do not think that rapists are necessarily mental, they just have not been taught the non-biased way to behave(respect for sex partner for example).


From what I seen, majority of rapists get away with it anyway even with all the laws in place. The sky's the limit for rapists. Especially husbands(or wives) and boyfriends(or girlfriends).

Hard to prove consent or lack of it.


----------



## extremly (Oct 25, 2012)

arnie said:


> Just remember guys: Yes doesn't always mean yes, but if you're a man then *refusing sex to a woman is considered an act of sexual violence.*
> 
> /srs
> 
> http://linkis.com/thecollegefix.com/t1efE


Why do we look down on the church and the bible and "superstitions" of the pass as barbaric and backwards? This link and the current state of affairs just proves that us, human beings, simply replaced an irrational cult for another one.


----------



## Paper Samurai (Oct 1, 2009)

Persephone The Dread said:


> I don't need laws to accommodate me, or my past self though. What would be useful for women in such situations would be assertiveness training, and possibly mental health support where applicable.


I'd be more willing to support this idea tbh. The law that's getting passed seems to be just blurring the lines on what constitutes rape - I really can't see the benefit of that.


----------



## plarp (Sep 29, 2014)

extremly said:


> Why do we look down on the church and the bible and "superstitions" of the pass as barbaric and backwards? This link and the current state of affairs just proves that us, human beings, simply replaced an irrational cult for another one.


amen!


----------



## markwalters2 (Mar 18, 2013)

It's best to have a lawyer on hand to negotiate any sex acts. Just in case.


----------



## CowGoMoo (Apr 14, 2013)

This law will never pass. It's too idiotic and any moron can see how it will be abused by immature brats who don't think twice about ruining some poor guys life


----------



## Morpheus (May 26, 2006)

CowGoMoo said:


> This law will never pass.


The law has already passed. The governor just signed it. However, it only applies to California, and it only applies to college campuses. You can't be prosecuted by the police for violating it, but your school can punish you for violating it if you are a college student. The harshest punish they can give is to expel you from school; they can't jail you. They have to give you a hearing before punishing you.


----------



## DeeperUnderstanding (May 19, 2007)

Honestly, no matter what you look like or how shy you are, you can be a freak underneath it all and still love sex. The only thing that matters to women, though, is how you are perceived as being, and that is really what makes you either attractive or unattractive to those women.

And by perceiving, I mean both physically and mentally.


----------



## Yokoo (Sep 27, 2014)

plarp said:


> Yea no... laws should not be made to accommodate ppl like that. If she is that pathetic she should probably not even leave the house, let alone get into a relationship here sex in involved.


Oh, thank you. Ever thought that some of those people might be suffering from SA or PTSD, are fighting hard to build their life back, and to do those normal things like socializing with other people?
I have no idea how many times guys I talked to like they were human beings thought I was interested in them because I am nervous about talking to anyone and blush easily. There were a handful of times when guys openly ignored my vocal refusal to spend more time with them. I can only imagine what would have happened to another woman who at that time could not find her voice - and I have had other situations where I simply couldn't utter a word out of fear.



plarp said:


> If your SA is that bad, that you are scared to pleasantly tell someone to stop raping you you should not be going anywhere near men, let alone be in a situation where sex is even a possibility.


I am really, really angry with you. You deny other people the right to exist in public spaces, in shared communal spaces, and in shared familiar spaces, simply because they do not conform with your idea how a person is supposed to act.

You don't have any right to deny other people to use those space in a way that does not hurt others. You don't have any right to deny other people to use those spaces because it would mean that *you* have to act in a way that actually pays attention to maintaining the rights of another person.

Do you know the quote
"The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins."
If you're the one swinging the fist, you're also the one who has to check if there is a nose in the way. You don't get to say that the other person should have moved out of the way, because they should have been able to anticipate that you would want to swing your fist.

In the same vein, if you use public spaces in a way that can restrict the way other people can use those spaces, you have to check with them first if they are okay with it.

If you want to interact with another person in a way that can have a negative impact on that person if they don't want the interaction, you have to check with them if they indeed want it. If you don't do that, it's your fault and you have to bear the consequences.



CowGoMoo said:


> Girls lie all the time about being raped.


[citation needed]


----------



## Shameful (Sep 5, 2014)

Yokoo said:


> Do you know the quote
> "The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins."
> If you're the one swinging the fist, you're also the one who has to check if there is a nose in the way. You don't get to say that the other person should have moved out of the way, because they should have been able to anticipate that you would want to swing your fist.
> 
> ...


That is a beautiful way to put it.


----------



## Darktower776 (Aug 16, 2013)

@Yokoo - Well said. :yes


----------



## plarp (Sep 29, 2014)

Yokoo said:


> Oh, thank you. Ever thought that some of those people might be suffering from SA or PTSD, are fighting hard to build their life back, and to do those normal things like socializing with other people?
> I have no idea how many times guys I talked to like they were human beings thought I was interested in them because I am nervous about talking to anyone and blush easily. There were a handful of times when guys openly ignored my vocal refusal to spend more time with them. I can only imagine what would have happened to another woman who at that time could not find her voice - and I have had other situations where I simply couldn't utter a word out of fear.
> 
> I am really, really angry with you. You deny other people the right to exist in public spaces, in shared communal spaces, and in shared familiar spaces, simply because they do not conform with your idea how a person is supposed to act.
> ...


*You *have no right to put other peoples wellbeing at risk because of your personal problem. You have no right to put an innocent men in a situation where he can get accused of one of the most serious crimes in society just because u dont have the ability to inform him that you don't want to have sex.

This has nothing to do with public space, stop strawmanning my arguement. No one cares if you go to wallmart or the mall or W/e. * Im saying if you have a problem like that then don't get into relationships for your own good and of the other party.* What kind of twisted sense of morality do u operate under?

How is this so difficult to understand?


----------



## plarp (Sep 29, 2014)

If you find a guy who understands ur problems and is willing to work around them great, but don't force your issues on people who don't want anything to do with them.

Dont make your problem everyone elses problem because its not, and don't force laws designed to cater to ill people on the general public. If you could see past your own self righteous selfishness you would understand this.


----------



## CopadoMexicano (Aug 21, 2004)

how fair it is for social programming


----------



## plarp (Sep 29, 2014)

Yokoo said:


> [citation needed]


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/blindsided-the-exoneration-of-brian-banks/

http://www.vanityfair.com/society/2014/03/duke-lacrosse-rape-scandal-ryan-mcfadyen

http://www.newsday.com/long-island/...onye-won-t-be-charged-1.1475704?firstfree=yes

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...6035d8-0c86-11e2-bd1a-b868e65d57eb_story.html

how many more citations do you need?


----------



## CopadoMexicano (Aug 21, 2004)

plarp said:


> http://www.cbsnews.com/news/blindsided-the-exoneration-of-brian-banks/
> 
> http://www.vanityfair.com/society/2014/03/duke-lacrosse-rape-scandal-ryan-mcfadyen
> 
> ...


Id like a ticket to the north pole please.


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

plarp said:


> If you find a guy who understands ur problems and is willing to work around them great, but don't force your issues on people who don't want anything to do with them.
> 
> Dont make your problem everyone elses problem because its not, and don't force laws designed to cater to ill people on the general public. If you could see past your own self righteous selfishness you would understand this.


lmao, I think you're freaking out because you're worried a woman like that would report you for raping her. News flash: nobody's said that.

Also lol at 'forcing your issues onto people who don't want them' Do you imagine women like this often go out of their way to be in such situations?



> _'If you could see past your own self righteous selfishness you would understand.'_


----------



## plarp (Sep 29, 2014)

Persephone The Dread said:


> lmao, I think you're freaking out because you're worried a woman like that would report you for raping her. News flash: nobody's said that.
> 
> Also lol at 'forcing your issues onto people who don't want them' Do you imagine women like this often go out of their way to be in such situations?


As i mentioned earlier, i don't feel like this law affects me in anyway. For the record im not particularly interested in sex. Much less with someone who such severe problems.

What im against is the selfish "morality" and hypocrisy of you people that support things like this.


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

plarp said:


> As i mentioned earlier, i don't feel like this law affects me in anyway. For the record im not particularly interested in sex. Much less with someone who such severe problems.
> 
> What im against is the selfish "morality" and hypocrisy of you people that support things like this.


You need to learn to read. I don't support the law based on what I've read of it and I don't think it will really help anyone. I just wanted to point out how insensitive you came across (and then continued to come across in your further posts after that, making me feel less bad about calling you out initially.)


----------



## plarp (Sep 29, 2014)

Persephone The Dread said:


> lmao, I think you're freaking out because you're worried a woman like that would report you for raping her. News flash: nobody's said that.
> 
> Also lol at 'forcing your issues onto people who don't want them' Do you *imagine women like this often go out of their way to be in such situations?*


I dont know and i dont care.

All im saying is that they have no right to put other human beings in such a horrible situation because of their personal problems and then hide behind a garbage biased law to ruin another human beings life.


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

plarp said:


> I dont know and i dont care.
> 
> All im saying is that they have no right to put other human beings in such a horrible situation because of their personal problems and then hide behind a garbage biased law to ruin another human beings life.


You make it sound like shy and unassertive women are going out of their way to target and throw themselves at aggressive, pushy guys in order to get them into trouble later.

You are incredibly ignorant and foolish to believe that. Your belief is right up there with 'all shy men are creepy because they make me feel uncomfortable and don't put me at ease.'

This isn't even the reason this law ****ing exists. It's due to the wider belief about consent and sex in society and the biggest contributor to it existing will be drinking culture.


----------



## plarp (Sep 29, 2014)

Persephone The Dread said:


> You make it sound like shy and unassertive women are going out of their way to target and throw themselves at aggressive, pushy guys in order to get them into trouble later.
> 
> You are incredibly ignorant and foolish to believe that. Your belief is right up there with* 'all shy men are creepy because they make me feel uncomfortable and don't put me at ease.'
> *
> This isn't even the reason this law ****ing exists. It's due to the wider belief about consent and sex in society and the biggest contributor to it existing will be drinking culture.


If a girl feels that shy men make her uncomfortable she has every right to avoid them.

The problem starts when she tries to put them all in jail for sexual harassment because they "creeped her out"


----------



## will22 (Mar 28, 2011)

Wouldn't the problem of non-consent be much less of a problem if women had the social role to initiate sex and not the man? Men can't get pregnant and we are extremely less picky when it comes to who we are willing to have sex with.

And I'm not talking about women with SA, I completely understand if that sounds like too much to them.


----------



## Yokoo (Sep 27, 2014)

plarp said:


> http://www.cbsnews.com/news/blindsided-the-exoneration-of-brian-banks/
> 
> http://www.vanityfair.com/society/2014/03/duke-lacrosse-rape-scandal-ryan-mcfadyen
> 
> ...


Uhm, I actually was looking for statistics, not for anecdotal evidence.
Anecdotes tell you: Yes, it does indeed happen. Nobody contested that.

The question is how frequently it does happen to justify a statement like


> Girls lie all the time about being raped.


I could link you to a story about somebody who let their fingernails grow longer than three feet, actually, several stories about different people, but that doesn't provide evidence if I want to claim that people let their fingernails grow that long _all the time_.

I looked at the numbers later yesterday, it seems that depending on the methodology used a reasonable estimate of false accusations is between 2% to 8%.
I would not call that 'all the time'. Especially if you also consider the dark figures which, depending on the legislative system and general culture are estimated to be ten fold (two to a hundred actually) of the number of reported rapes. (These estimations include the groups of victims that highly underreport assaults.)
Yes, there are false rape allegations. It disproportionately hits men in high profile positions - like the ones you linked - as well as men from very low prestige ethnic groups, like African Americans in the US and immigrants from certain ethnic groups in Europe.

But that still does not support the claim that 'girls lie about being raped all the time'.
Moreover, it is reasonable to say that it's a hundred times likelier that a person was raped or assaulted and did not report it, than that a person falsely accuses somebody. (I specifically say person because while in the general public most victims are women, the same is not true for certain specific subgroups.)



plarp said:


> *You *have no right to put other peoples wellbeing at risk because of your personal problem. You have no right to put an innocent men in a situation where he can get accused of one of the most serious crimes in society just because u dont have the ability to inform him that you don't want to have sex.
> 
> This has nothing to do with public space, stop strawmanning my arguement. No one cares if you go to wallmart or the mall or W/e. * Im saying if you have a problem like that then don't get into relationships for your own good and of the other party.* What kind of twisted sense of morality do u operate under?
> 
> How is this so difficult to understand?


We have these things, you know, they are called laws. We have them for a reason. For example, that every person has a right to their bodily integrity.

*My desire* to do something that involves your body counts *less than your right to decide what you do with your own body*. Your desire to do something that involves my body counts less than my right to decide what to do with my own body.



> dont have the ability to inform him that you don't want to have sex.


You do not have a right to do _anything_ to the body of another person unless you have the consent of that person. It is not that person's responsibility to deny you consent, it is your responsibility to ask for consent. Sex is no different from that. Also, consent has to be _mutual_.

(By the way I'm pretty taken aback by what some of my American friends tell me about dating there. If I want to have sex with a guy and think that desire is mutual I let him know. I don't drop hints and hope he'll catch up on it, and sulk when he doesn't.)

It seems you don't realize why your previous posting was so offensive. I am not strawmanning.


> If she is that pathetic she *should *probably* not even leave the house*, let alone get into a relationship here sex in involved.


First of all, I had roughly two years in which I did not leave the house.

Secondly, you just called me any many girls and women I know pathetic, on the grounds that they can't guarantee they will always be able to do something you expect people to be able to do. That kind of value judgement is very inappropriate. If you want to think of yourself as pathetic when you can't do things that most of your peers can do you are free to do so, but don't include other people.

Thirdly: You seem to believe that such situations only arise when somebody already is in a relationship. They don't.
The arise in a circle of friends, at work, at school, when doing leisure activities, with random strangers on the streets.
You may not try to pick up women on the streets, but other men do. I mentioned before that I blush when I am anxious, and many men misinterpret that as me being interested in them (or as easy prey) even when my entire body language is evasive/rejecting, some even when I tell them repeatedly that I am not interested. I've had to hit guys before to get them to leave me alone.

I could ask you back: Under what twisted sense of morality are you operating that you seem to believe it is alright take something you have right to take - as long as nobody complains?

I do agree that it is not alright for anyone to falsely accuse somebody of rape, but all of the cases that were brought to my attention had one or several of the following elements:
- man very high profile (like Strauss-Kahn) where somebody stood a large political or financial gain from defaming that person
- man very low prestige, the kind that also tends to be falsely accused of many other crimes
- relationship gone very, very bad
- woman mentally ill

High profile cases are unlikely to actually play a role in your situation. I don't know if you are part of a low prestige minority. It is very sad that especially men of those groups are often falsely accused of crimes, but I don't think there is anything particular to rape accusations that can be done to help their situation. 
What in your situation may apply is a toxic relationship ending and/or the partner being mentally ill (often both come together). That is, however, not an isolated issue. Stalking of an ex-partner, revenge porn, telling (other kinds of) lies about that person in your social circle are also part of that issue. While this kind of situation is everything but pretty, exactly those cases are the reason why rape victims are questioned repeatedly despite the emotional distress it causes them, why friends of the couple/former couple can be asked as witnesses, why there a psychological evaluations of the victim etc.
That is what our justice systems are there for.

If you are scared of such a situation the only advice I can give you is to try to avoid toxic relationships, and if you find yourself in one to end it quickly and with witnesses. The same goes for romantic relationships and relationships built around casual sex.
If you're just looking to pick somebody up for casual sex, make sure your friends know where you're going, who you're going with* and that that person is also going there with the intention to have sex with you. I mean, if you can let somebody into your house and trust them not to steal your electronics or murder you in your sleep, why shouldn't you be able to trust that person to not falsely accuse you of a crime?

*(... these are basic precations women are expected to take, by the way.)


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

will22 said:


> Wouldn't the problem of non-consent be much less of a problem if women had the social role to initiate sex and not the man? Men can't get pregnant and we are extremely less picky when it comes to who we are willing to have sex with.
> 
> And I'm not talking about women with SA, I completely understand if that sounds like too much to them.


I've always thought that would make more sense in general. Things are a bit back to front.


----------



## Shameful (Sep 5, 2014)

will22 said:


> Wouldn't the problem of non-consent be much less of a problem if women had the social role to initiate sex and not the man? Men can't get pregnant and we are extremely less picky when it comes to who we are willing to have sex with.
> 
> And I'm not talking about women with SA, I completely understand if that sounds like too much to them.


No because that really doesn't hit the problem. There isn't any real problem with understanding consent, people are able to tell when someone is uncomfortable, and are able when someone is too drunk to consent. The idea that rape is just guys not understanding girl's signals is completely false. Rapists, particularly campus rapists, are not confused guys, they're usually serial rapists who target drunk or insecure looking girls, they know what they're doing but they rely on the fact that most girls will question whether it was rape because she didn't say no, and that her peers will question it because she didn't say no, and that the authorities will question it because she didn't say no. That's what they're seeking to resolve here. Lisak & Miller study/model of rape is good to understand this more.


----------



## Yokoo (Sep 27, 2014)

Yokoo said:


> I could ask you back: Under what twisted sense of morality are you operating that you seem to believe it is alright take something you have *NO* right to take - as long as nobody complains?


Typing skills, I have them ...


----------



## jonny neurotic (Jan 20, 2011)

Callsign said:


> I don't see much of a problem unless the timid fellow doesn't know the girl very well or something. The bloke says in a silly sort of way, "do you consent to having sex m'lady?". The woman smirks and says yes. There is no problem for shy guys other than say, the guy pauses for a long time, and acts like something horrible could happen. The mood is killed and these people are not going to have sex.


Was thinking the same thing myself. It could be turned into a joke like that and one could have a perfectly agreeable time with ones ladyfriend. Of course if one can't even look a lady in the eyes, let alone persuade one to be his extra special friend, then one is unlikely to ever know this law exists. lol


----------



## plarp (Sep 29, 2014)

Yokoo said:


> Uhm, I actually was looking for statistics, not for anecdotal evidence.
> Anecdotes tell you: Yes, it does indeed happen. Nobody contested that.
> 
> The question is how frequently it does happen to justify a statement like
> ...


You can type all this... and i'm not going to bother to reply because im tired of this topic.

But all the stats you post are meaningless (i can post stats that say the opposite btw) When i've seen 3 false accusations of rape/sexual assault from my highshool alone. None of them ever went to the police but its enough to cast a serious doubt in my mind whenever hearing about the issue. Why do u think i've spent so much time talking about this issue? ive seen it first hand

Is false rape accusation a huge problem? i dont know, and i dont care. All i want are laws that don't enable women who *do* falsely accuse to ruin ppl lives easier.


----------



## plarp (Sep 29, 2014)

Persephone The Dread said:


> You need to learn to read. I don't support the law based on what I've read of it and I don't think it will really help anyone. I just wanted to point out how insensitive you came across (and then continued to come across in your further posts after that, making me feel less bad about calling you out initially.)


Dear i actually do understand where you are comming from, dont get me wrong. 

It wasn't cool to call ppl ho have severe SA "pathetic" or that should "stay in the house." As i mentioned earlier i actually do understand what ppl like that are going through and its not as simple as it looks.The inability to refuse comes from not wanting to hurt others ppls feelings at the expense of your own. i used to give away half my lunch at school for that reason.

Is a woman who wont say no to her partner for sex going to turn around and accuse him of rape? no. Thats not the point im trying to make.

This law is not about SAD women, it is about feminism and the drinking/hook up culture we have nothing to do with.


----------



## will22 (Mar 28, 2011)

Shameful said:


> No because that really doesn't hit the problem. There isn't any real problem with understanding consent, people are able to tell when someone is uncomfortable, and are able when someone is too drunk to consent. The idea that rape is just guys not understanding girl's signals is completely false. Rapists, particularly campus rapists, are not confused guys, they're usually serial rapists who target drunk or insecure looking girls, they know what they're doing but they rely on the fact that most girls will question whether it was rape because she didn't say no, and that her peers will question it because she didn't say no, and that the authorities will question it because she didn't say no. That's what they're seeking to resolve here. Lisak & Miller study/model of rape is good to understand this more.


After I wrote that I realized I should have clarified that by the, "problem of non-consent", I meant the problem of understanding consent. I think that if the problem of understanding consent was less of a problem, there would be at least some decline in the amount of rape. I'll give you most rapists are serial rapists who don't give a damn about consent when they decide to rape if that's what you've found through research.


Shameful said:


> There isn't any real problem with understanding consent


Here I disagree. What is the reason for the yes sometimes means no campaigning by rape awareness activists? Let's say men not understanding signs is involved in only 10% of instances of rape/sexually-fueled assault. It's still worth addressing. Given myself and many other men have problems telling if a woman is showing sexual intent, outside or inside an intimate situation, because that is not their social role, I think it would help in these cases if it was.

I have a question about your take on serial rapists. Do you think there's a meaningful percentage of serial rapists who rape because they are sexually frustrated from a lack of sexual intimacy? And by a lack I mean less than a few times per week (which for a man isn't a lot).


----------



## Shameful (Sep 5, 2014)

will22 said:


> I have a question about your take on serial rapists. Do you think there's a meaningful percentage of serial rapists who rape because they are sexually frustrated from a lack of sexual intimacy? And by a lack I mean less than a few times per week (which for a man isn't a lot).


No, I don't think any rape at all is caused by sexual frustration. That's not a motive that was found in any of the major studies done or considered in any rape model. I'd say probably no rapes are caused by that, unless it was caused by that + some other factor that was much more important. Most of the studies I read say that most rapists get sex easily, or even have a consistent sexual partner but choose to rape anyway.



> Then what is the reason for the yes sometimes means no campaigning by rape awareness activists?


It's for what I said before - the men who rape are relying on the fact that victims won't call it rape, their peers won't call it rape, and the authorities won't call it rape because they didn't act the way we're taught rape victims act. The rapist knows his victim is not consenting, it's not hard to tell, the awareness campaigns aren't to teach men that they're raping, it's to teach the public to understand what a rape victim looks like (more accurately, to let go of their rigid ideas of what a rape victim looks like).



> Let's say men not understanding signs is involved in only 10% of instances of rape or sexual violence. It's still worth addressing.


If that were true, absolutely. I have no reason to believe that's true. Either way, changing the social role of who initiates seems impossible and not really necessary. Changing the way we talk about consent, from something that has to be revoked, to something that has to be given, is what we need. There's no confusion when you ask and get an answer.


----------



## Yokoo (Sep 27, 2014)

plarp said:


> Is false rape accusation a huge problem? i dont know, *and i dont care*. All i want are laws that don't enable women who *do* falsely accuse to ruin ppl lives easier.


That is a major problem. You should care. If you don't trust your legistators and the current trends in your society on an issue you should learn how to judge the information available about it, and I don't mean opinion pieces or rants on MRA or extreme feminist sites. If you don't have the time to learn how to judge the methodology of studies, you should at least read what other people in the field have to say about a methodology, find out who makes valid arguments and then trust that person's judgement.

If you don't do that, you will not be able to have an informed opinion on a topic, and if you don't have that, you are open to manipulation.


----------



## will22 (Mar 28, 2011)

Shameful said:


> Changing the way we talk about consent, from something that has to be revoked, to something that has to be given, is what we need. There's no confusion when you ask and get an answer.


I have no problem asking women if they'd like to have sex point blank. As you probably know, that's usually considered terrible for a man to do. There's no confusion, but there's usually offense or aversion experienced by the woman in that situation. If there's a way to change society so that is considered fine to do, I'm all for that.

Most men don't currently have a problem being asked this point blank, and there's less chance of them not wanting to give consent than a woman not wanting give consent. So I add the proposal of a shift in the social role of who initiates sexual advances in addition (and not opposed) to your proposals of a shift in the attitudes of what constitutes consent to men and your implicit proposal of most women not being emotionally aversive by being asked directly.


----------



## Shameful (Sep 5, 2014)

will22 said:


> As you probably know, that's usually considered terrible for a man to do.


I know there are men who consider that a terrible idea. They are wrong though. If a woman is in bed with you and willing to have sex, asking if she's willing is not going to suddenly make her change her mind and walk out, unless she was actually unwilling in which case you just avoided raping someone.


----------



## Yokoo (Sep 27, 2014)

will22 said:


> I have no problem asking women if they'd like to have sex point blank. As you probably know, that's usually considered terrible for a man to do.


What kind of situation are you talking about?


----------



## will22 (Mar 28, 2011)

Shameful said:


> I know there are men who consider that a terrible idea. They are wrong though. If a woman is in bed with you and willing to have sex, asking if she's willing is not going to suddenly make her change her mind and walk out, unless she was actually unwilling in which case you just avoided raping someone.


Yes, men would have to be educated too. The common advice given to men about how to initiate sex is to be implicit and smooth. *Not* direct. This advice is given for a reason, because it works past general female sexual insecurity in the country I live in. I very rarely hear women complain about their partners not being direct enough to initiate sex, but I do hear wishes for men by women in relationships to be more indirect in their initiation of sex! This I see as a result of how we are conditioned socially. Yes there are women that would not have a problem with this in bed, like you it seems. But, this seems to be a minority opinion among women.

Then there's the overwhelming evidence that this doesn't work *at all* for the initiation of recreational sex, but just like in bed, usually works just fine for men.


----------



## hmweasley (Sep 12, 2013)

Shameful said:


> I know there are men who consider that a terrible idea. They are wrong though. If a woman is in bed with you and willing to have sex, asking if she's willing is not going to suddenly make her change her mind and walk out, unless she was actually unwilling in which case you just avoided raping someone.


This. Definitely. If you're about to have sex, then I don't know why openly voicing that would seem negative to someone.


----------



## Shameful (Sep 5, 2014)

will22 said:


> Yes, men would have to be educated too. The common advice given to men about how to initiate sex is to be implicit and smooth. *Not* direct. This advice is given for a reason, because it works past general female sexual insecurity in the country I live in. I very rarely here women complain about there partners not being direct enough to initiate sex, but I do hear wishes for men by women in relationships to be more indirect in their initiation of sex! This I see as a result of how we are conditioned socially. Yes there are women that would not have a problem with this in bed, like you it seems. But, this seems to be a minority opinion among women.
> 
> Then there's the overwhelming evidence that this doesn't work *at all* for the initiation of recreational sex, but just like in bed, usually works just fine for men.


Dude....are you joking here? I honestly can't tell. How are you getting walking up to strangers in public and asking for sex from "If a woman is in bed with you and willing to have sex, asking if she's willing"?

This is really simple: you're making out with a girl, you put your hand under shirt, she stops kissing back, so you back off and ask "are you ok?" This isn't complicated, there is no confusion. The only way to be 'confused' is to be intentionally confused because you don't like the answer you expect to get.


----------



## will22 (Mar 28, 2011)

Shameful said:


> Dude....are you joking here? I honestly can't tell. How are you getting walking up to strangers in public and asking for sex from "If a woman is in bed with you and willing to have sex, asking if she's willing"?


First, I have no problem asking a girl if she's willing to have sex in bed or outside the bed. I've already explained why, and how I agree there needs to be a cultural shift in that regard. I wasn't one of those people arguing against that. I'm offering one proposal in addition to the ones you are offering.

The first paragraph I wrote addressed people in bed or in relationships. The second paragraph addressed approaching for recreational sex.

In both types of situations, for the reasons I explained, it is considered a bad idea for men to do, but not women. In the first case of in bed or in relationships it is usually considered ineffective, a turn-off, undesirable, or rude. In the second situation of initiating recreational sex I explained and gave evidence of how it is always ineffective.


----------



## Shameful (Sep 5, 2014)

will22 said:


> First, I have no problem asking a girl if she's willing to have sex in bed or outside the bed. I've already explained why, and how I agree there needs to be a cultural shift in that regard. I wasn't one of those people arguing against that. I'm offering one proposal in addition to the ones you are offering.
> 
> The first paragraph I wrote addressed people in bed or in relationships. The second paragraph addressed approaching for recreational sex.
> 
> In both types of situations, for the reasons I explained, it is considered a bad idea for men to do, but not women. In the first case of in bed or in relationships it is usually considered ineffective, a turn-off, undesirable, or rude. In the second situation of initiating recreational sex I explained and gave evidence of how it is always ineffective.


Well I only care about the in bed part, this whole thread is about the bed part, I have no idea why you brought up approaching. It is not a turn off, undesirable, or rude, and that's just really silly to think that. If a woman is in bed with you and ready to have sex, asking if she's sure is not going to turn her off and it's not going to change her mind. There's no downside to making it verbal.


----------



## will22 (Mar 28, 2011)

Shameful said:


> Well I only care about the in bed part, this whole thread is about the bed part, I have no idea why you brought up approaching. It is not a turn off, undesirable, or rude, and that's just really silly to think that.


I bring up initiating consent for recreational sex directly by men because it is considered ineffective by men and women for the same reasons it is considered inneffective by men and women for direct male initiation of consent for sex in bed. The reasons: Men are told to be indirect and smooth, and most women expect that.

So much of this would not be a problem if there was a cultural shift for women to initiate sex because men can't conceive children, and most men don't consider direct approach of consent to be a turn off, undesirable, or rude.



Shameful said:


> If a woman is in bed with you and ready to have sex, asking if she's sure is not going to turn her off and it's not going to change her mind. .


A direct question of asking a woman in bed if she would like to have sex will turn the average women where I live off for the reasons I explained. You seemed to have added a component in the quote above by the woman making it obvious she is sexually ready before it's the man's norm to ask, like for example taking off her clothes in a seductive manner looking into a man's eyes. But the OP, ,with his question of "Hey, do you want to have sex now?" doesn't necessarily indicate any amount of possible readiness by the woman except by being in bed. Most women, at least where I live, expect an indirect approach in bed and they don't consider verbal consent necessary and often find it aversive. I agree this should not be the case, and again, I agree with your proposals and have added another, because men almost never take offense and rarely become aversive by being directly asked for reasons I explained.


----------



## losthismarbles (Jul 5, 2014)

Omg This entire thread is idiotic. If a girl is going to lie to accuse you of rape or one of the great multitude of other crimes someone can accuse/frame you for she's gonna do that. This law doesn't change that. 

I just have to ask, do you guys think it's ok to sleep with someone who's too drunk to say no? Or maybe someone who's incapacitated, asleep, drugged, or too terrified to say no, or just unable to communicate or fight back? 
And those are the exact situations this law is trying to prevent. 
The thought of someone even suggesting that any of that is ok is just disgusting. 

There is a lot of trust involved with having sex with someone whether its casual or not. Your partner not accusing you of rape later is part of that. If you can't even trust them that much you shouldn't be sleeping with them. That was the same before and it's the same now. And will continue to be in the future. 

If you're partner isn't a nutcase they aren't going to accuse you of rape. 

And whatever happens in bed with a consenting couple is going to stay between them. You guys act like there will be someone watching everyone initiating sex writing your names down when you don't say the magic words before you start. 
"Uh oh bob didn't say 'can i have sex with you?' better write his name down so we can arrest him later". If you both actually ok with having sex you'll both know and unless one of you is crazy your not going to press charges because one of you didn't ask verbally or in some other specific manner. 
This law isn't actually going to stop you from sleeping with someone without verbal consent. It's really easy to see if someone wants to. And if it's not obvious to you then you should definitely be asking verbally and clearly.

And of course sexual assault goes under reported. There are many reasons not to come forward with it. No one wants to admit they were raped, and it's also very difficult to prove. And schools also don't like to admit that it happened on their campus and will try to hide it. Imagine having to go report it and have everyone hearing about what happened to you, and then have nothing come of it?

This has no effect on timid men.


----------



## plarp (Sep 29, 2014)

Shameful said:


> If that were true, absolutely. I have no reason to believe that's true. Either way, changing the social role of who initiates seems impossible and not really necessary. Changing the way we talk about consent, from something that has to be revoked, to something that has to be given, is what we need. There's no confusion when you ask and get an answer.


I needs to change, and its very possible. The male gender role in the west is quickly becoming a joke, all responsibilities with no benefits and i think alot of guys are done with it. Its very possible for roles to switch, and for men to just say "skrew it" Look at the so called "herbivore men of japan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbivore_men

Also there is this tribe in china called the mosuo where the women control sex (and everything else) while the men are carefree and childlike... i would rather live like that tbh, sure beats western masculinity where society pulls you in a million different directions and your always the bad guy.


----------



## brooke_brigham (Nov 28, 2013)

I liked this comment

"_Men have the power, because while a man is worried that a woman might say no, a woman is worried that the man might kill her for saying no._"

An extreme example yes but I hate it men say women have all the power. I'd much rather have the ACTUAL power than the mental power. Men can rape, beat up women and physically get them to do what they want them to do. When was the last time a guy feared getting raped at night in a dark parking lot?


----------



## arnie (Jan 24, 2012)

brooke_brigham said:


> I liked this comment
> 
> "_Men have the power, because while a man is worried that a woman might say no, a woman is worried that the man might kill her for saying no._"
> 
> An extreme example yes but I hate it men say women have all the power. I'd much rather have the ACTUAL power than the mental power. Men can rape, beat up women and physically get them to do what they want them to do. When was the last time a guy feared getting raped at night in a dark parking lot?


False.

The rape rate for men is almost the same as the rate for women.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...n-date-forced-sexual-assault-column/16007089/


----------



## brooke_brigham (Nov 28, 2013)

arnie said:


> False.
> 
> The rape rate for men is almost the same as the rate for women.
> 
> http://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...n-date-forced-sexual-assault-column/16007089/


Im not sure what to make of that study considering there are other studies which contradict those statistics. I guess my question for you would be, when youre walking into a dark parking lot do you worry about getting raped? If you get drunk at a party do you worry about getting raped?

I'm not suggesting that no men ever get raped but I find it very difficult to believe that crimes are nearly equal.


----------



## TheHopeless (Sep 11, 2013)

"Oh boo hoo, my desire for sex is more important than protecting people from RAPE". Okay, look, this Yes Means Yes Law is fantastic and a step forward in the right direction. Too often cases of sexual assault and rape are dismissed for countless stupid reasons. Enough is enough. I'm a guy, and I am telling you fellow gentlemen: Saying that this law means less sex for timid men is inherently sexist and selfish. You're completely disregarding the safety and comfort of others because getting to stick your crank in a woman (or man) is more important than her/his needs.

Always get consent. Period. *You don't even need to ask, "Hey do you want to have sex?"*, because _yes_, that _is_ a mood killer. But* there are several ways to get consent without killing the mood:* 

 Pay attention to your partner and how they react. 
 COMMUNICATE. It doesn't kill the mood to ask, "Do you like that?" It really doesn't!
 Communication also means asking your partner what they like, which is another way of getting consent without killing the mood, since it can spice things up. And, you're doing something that the other person specifically says that they want.
 Also, more people are into talking dirty than you think. You can use this as a way to get consent. For example if you can say, "I'm gonna **** you so hard" and your partner responds, "Yes, **** me hard!" then, well, you can piece this together, right?
 This is also why the "safe word" was invented, so if you're doing anything reeeally kinky there's an easy way to tell if it's going too far.
 "Should I go further?" isn't much of a mood killer if you're just starting to get into the action, either.

Aaaand, because I know some people are going to bring up something about false accusations of rape, here's a super easy, neat little trick: Get your sexual partner's number. Even if it's just a casual romp, get that number. The morning after, text them, and ask them if they enjoyed it last night. Most likely they aren't going to respond with a no, so when they respond, save that text! Then if bullcrap shows up, you have evidence that she did give consent. Ta-da! And if they don't respond with a yes, well... _communicate!_ Sort that shizz out!

*NOTICE HOW I'M NOT USING GENDERED PRONOUNS! I know that men can and do get raped and sexually harassed. Consent applies to EVERYONE. *

Dudes, seriously. Fellow males. WTH? Come on now, I know that your own sexual triumphs, the whole "conquering the vagina" crap and "duuuude I'm getting laaaid" crap isn't the most important things in your lives. Yeah, sure, *if you just want casual sex that's fine but that should NEVER come at the expense of your respect for others*. Stop acting like women are just sex objects and that only your needs matter. I'm a guy, and I even figured this out myself. It isn't hard.

^ I'm only using gendered pronouns in that paragraph because it's pretty much just dudes complaining about this "Yes Means Yes" thing. And before anyone tries to dismiss me as some "White Knight" or crazy male feminazi who traded in his balls in the name of feminism in an attempt to get laid by feminists or whatever the hell people do to dismiss men who stand up for women: I don't even consider myself a feminist. But I do believe in equal rights and I do believe that it is everyone's responsibility to treat others with respect and pay attention to the needs of others. It takes two to shag, and saying "yes Means Yes is less sex for timid men" isn't respectful of the other half of the shagging equation.


----------



## VanGogh (Jan 13, 2013)

Just Lurking said:


> As for the law itself, maybe see how the law is put into practice before judging it. The current conviction rate for rape cases is pretty bad, and the law is meant to improve that.


What if the current conviction rate is perfectly fine or even getting out of control? Maybe the rate is only bad to those who want to see more men go to jail for rape with a lower & lower threshold of evidence? Who would those people be who would want that?


----------



## Just Lurking (Feb 8, 2007)

VanGogh said:


> What if the current conviction rate is perfectly fine or even getting out of control?


What conviction rate would be out of control?



VanGogh said:


> Maybe the rate is only bad to those who want to see more men go to jail for rape with a lower & lower threshold of evidence?


Are they lowering the threshold of evidence, or are they just making the definition of "rape" clearer to specifically include the "drunk, drugged, unconscious, and asleep"?

Rape crimes tend not to have third party witnesses, so for those cases that come down to _"he said, she said"_ arguments - what happens?

This law is just telling universities what kinds of policies they need to practice in response to allegations of sexual misconduct, but a hearing to decide whether or not a student is going to be expelled from school will have a lesser standard for proof than a criminal court. In criminal court, the burden of proof would still be entirely on the accused (or, it should be).


----------



## VanGogh (Jan 13, 2013)

will22 said:


> A direct question of asking a woman in bed if she would like to have sex will turn the average women where I live off for the reasons I explained. You seemed to have added a component in the quote above by the woman making it obvious she is sexually ready before it's the man's norm to ask, like for example taking off her clothes in a seductive manner looking into a man's eyes. But the OP, ,with his question of "Hey, do you want to have sex now?" doesn't necessarily indicate any amount of possible readiness by the woman except by being in bed. Most women, at least where I live, expect an indirect approach in bed and they don't consider verbal consent necessary and often find it aversive. I agree this should not be the case, and again, I agree with your proposals and have added another, because men almost never take offense and rarely become aversive by being directly asked for reasons I explained.


^This guy gets it and understands why this is bunk.

Verbal "yes" will almost never come except in the case of established sexual relationships. In those relationships, it is perfectly normal to be direct and present a sexual question like "Do you want to have sex now?". However, in the case where there is no pre-existing sexual relationship, in order to initiate and engage in sex there is usually some awkward tension. That tension is NOT broken by blurting out a litmus test question like "Do you want to have sex now?" but rather a lot of non-verbal momentum that starts out subtle and finally cascades into clearly consensual sex.

This is exactly my point. Anyone who doesn't get this hasn't had a lot of sex. Any woman jumping in here to claim that any initial sexual encounter of hers with a new lover got started out with a request for clear consent is fabricating a story. The only possible time that would be realistic and possibly still lead to sex is if the 2 people are young and have been seeing each other for a long time without sex and talked about it plenty of times beforehand. That is not very common. Most people start their relationships with sex, whether it happens instantly or takes 3 dates. It's rare that people will date for more than 3 dates without starting to have sex.


----------



## Putin (May 21, 2013)

VanGogh said:


> ^This guy gets it and understands why this is bunk.
> 
> Verbal "yes" will almost never come except in the case of established sexual relationships. In those relationships, it is perfectly normal to be direct and present a sexual question like "Do you want to have sex now?". * However, in the case where there is no pre-existing sexual relationship, in order to initiate and engage in sex there is usually some awkward tension. That tension is NOT broken by blurting out a litmus test question like "Do you want to have sex now?"* but rather a lot of non-verbal momentum that starts out subtle and finally cascades into clearly consensual sex.


Any guy who does that is never ever getting laid.


----------



## zookeeper (Jun 3, 2009)

Putin said:


> Any guy who does that is never ever getting laid.





> i can't wait to **** you...(waits for no or yeeeessssss)


Interesting how it goes from "never ever getting laid" to "I've asked for consent, got it, and now I'm going in...


----------



## will22 (Mar 28, 2011)

VanGogh said:


> ^This guy gets it and understands why this is bunk.
> 
> Verbal "yes" will almost never come except in the case of established sexual relationships. In those relationships, it is perfectly normal to be direct and present a sexual question like "Do you want to have sex now?".
> However, in the case where there is no pre-existing sexual relationship, in order to initiate and engage in sex there is usually some awkward tension. That tension is NOT broken by blurting out a litmus test question like "Do you want to have sex now?" but rather a lot of non-verbal momentum that starts out subtle and finally cascades into clearly consensual sex.
> ...


Other people brought up being verbal isn't a requirement for consent in the legislation, so your argument in your OP is a whole other topic than the legislation.

You are correct in your disagreement with others about what a response from an average woman is to a direct verbal request for consent in the U.S.

I disagree that asking for direct verbal consent would make it hard for a shy man, because despite that route usually turning a woman off, it makes it easier for myself and others with too much anxiety to only go with body language.

I don't know whether you agree with me whether it would be nice *ideally* if there was direct, verbal consent between men and women before sex. Here are two *ideal* scenarios I can think of that you might agree with Vangogh 
1. if men were brought up to give direct verbal consent instead of being indirect and contrary to what it is like now, women weren't turned off by it
2. more women instead of exclusively men have the social role to initiate sex, and the request for consent was direct and verbal (and naturally there would be little to no apprehension by the man in bed).

This legislation is kinda particular in the way it expects people to have sex. It requires ongoing affirmation, which is imo is a great way to have sex, but some people have consensual sex in such a way that ongoing affirmation wouldn't be measurable by an outsider. The legislation of course is useful for when the victim was drinking, being drugged, being coerced etc.. But I wish the legislation would have stuck to those cases and defining them to be non-consensual, instead of also creating an umbrella picture of what consent looks like.

aand I'm tired of thinking about this, bye thread. No cherry picking stuff, thanks in advance.


----------



## jonny neurotic (Jan 20, 2011)

So many guys who aren't getting any know what would and wouldn't turn a woman off. lol

I think that if someone has either asked you to go to their bedroom or willingly entered your bedroom then, over intoxication aside, that is pretty much giving consent. Also, any women I have been with have been grabbing at my man parts and flapping their tongue around in my mouth for a while before any item of clothes come off. I honestly don't see how there could be any confusion.


----------



## VanGogh (Jan 13, 2013)

will22 said:


> I don't know whether you agree with me whether it would be nice *ideally* if there was direct, verbal consent between men and women before sex. Here are two *ideal* scenarios I can think of that you might agree with Vangogh
> 1. if men were brought up to give direct verbal consent instead of being indirect and contrary to what it is like now, women weren't turned off by it
> 2. more women instead of exclusively men have the social role to initiate sex, and the request for consent was direct and verbal (and naturally there would be little to no apprehension by the man in bed).


#1 turns most women off #2 will never happen for the same exact reason #1 turns most women off. No amount of bringing men up differently will change that.

Think of your phone, a lot have voice commands now which let you tell it to call someone. After years & years of big companies trying to get it right, it hardly ever works and most everyone reverts to what is essentially easier - bring up the listing in your contacts or recent calls and push a button. Changing your behaviors as a man will do nothing.

Women are more significantly driven by their feelings than men, they are more attuned to the feelings of communication than the actual communication itself. Yes I know because of me saying this I'll get snapped at by women here (which just ends up proving my point) but it's simply the way it is. Sex is in that realm. It's way most gay men (who aren't stricken by social anxiety) have an overabundance of sex. Because gay men can pull out logical lines to other gay men like "Do you want to have sex?" They know it's not a turn-off but a turn-on as much as it is for straight guys if a girl verbalized it. But for women it's a turn-off to get asked if they want to have sex by someone they don't yet know very well. They don't want to be asked so they can verbally agree, they want it to just take place. If they don't want it to happen, they would either not be in a position where things would be easily lead that way or they will clearly display signs of resistance.

Perhaps the law doesn't require an outright "yes", I'm not sure that's clear and if the only goal is to make it clear that a woman who is drunk or passed out is not giving consent then fine. But, seriously, how is this going to change anything from a legal standpoint? The law already specifies how to determine consent. If a guy is too much of an idiot to realize that a passed out girl is not consenting to sex then no "yes means yes" college law will deter him from being an idiot. It won't change improve what happens legally. All it changes is giving women on a college campus a power dynamic over men to more easily bypass the normal legal system to punish a man at whim. A woman says "I didn't consent" and with no evidence or trial the man is now booted from campus.


----------



## jimity (Jan 12, 2011)

How many people do you know have one night stands sober? I'd say a lot of people get drunk in order to allow them to have casual sex.


----------

