If you’re a college student in Connecticut and want to have consensual sex, you might want to leave the state to do it.
The Legislature approved an “affirmative consent” bill Wednesday night that now goes to Democratic Gov. Dannel Malloy, a proponent of the idea that sex is rape if one partner does not get the other partner’s repeated and mutually-agreed upon consent throughout the act.
The problem with “affirmative consent” is that such laws make it practically impossible to use circumstantial evidence as a defense against an accusation of rape. It is not enough to show that a woman voluntarily went to a man’s dorm room with the intent to have sex; it must be shown that she agreed to engage in specific sex acts. Thus, “affirmative consent” shifts the burden of proof so decisively against the accused that the accusation alone suffices as proof of guilt. All sex is effectively illegal, requiring only an accusation to make your hookup a crime.
Ashe Schow at the Washington Examiner:
From the moment the students are about to touch, they would have to ask: “May I kiss you?” “May I touch you here?” etc. . . .
The policy decouples context from the totality of the sexual experience. If a student fails to ask for permission before one escalation, but asks for it for a different escalation, the entire encounter can be considered sexual assault. If a student has been drinking (the bill doesn’t require an accuser to prove they were incapacitated), then all consent is negated. Further, once someone is accused, their level of intoxication doesn’t matter, even if under the same policy they could be considered too incapacitated to consent. . . .
Past sexual encounters between two people also don’t count as consent, so even people in years-long relationships are required to follow these rules or they’ve committed rape (unless, of course, no one reports it).
That’s the thing about these policies: No one has sex this way, which means every student (even the accusers) are sexual assaulters and sexual assault victims. . . .
All an accuser has to do is claim they were too drunk and that they were not asked for consent and the accused is considered guilty, thanks to pressure from the federal government. Following this policy to the letter means nothing if an accuser claims one did not follow it precisely.
Greg Piper at the College Fix:
Only one lawmaker opposed the bill, Republican Sen. Joe Markley, saying it creates an uneven playing field between college students and others, the Hartford Courant reports:
“It criminalizes what many of us would consider entirely normal,” Markley said. “Almost any of us would say that we have done things under this policy which do not correspond to affirmative consent. To ask to change that behavior would ask to change human behavior.”
It’s 2016, and “entirely normal” human behavior is a crime.
Remember, guys: Never Talk to a College Girl.
UPDATE: Reporting another “John Doe” case, this one involving the University of St. Thomas, a Catholic school in Minnesota, Greg Piper remarks:
It should be abundantly clear by now that any disputed sexual contact between male and female college students will get the male in trouble, even if the female initiated sex and hard evidence contradicts her account.
To repeat what I have said before:
The more I read about the current climate on America’s college and university campuses, the more convinced I am that no man smart enough to go to college would ever be stupid enough to date a college girl.
Feminists have ginned up a frightening hysteria of anti-male fear among female students. Any boy who kisses a girl on campus could be expelled for sexual assault, and even speaking to a college girl might result in accusations of harassment.
Never Talk to a College Girl. Warn your sons, America.
Of course, this law will have absolutely no practical effect on romantic relationships in the state of Connecticut. It’s purpose is not to change behavior, but to provide feminists with a secret weapon to deploy only when they deem it necessary, i.e. the jilted girlfriend or the embarrassed coed who wakes up and decides it’s better to be known as a “rape” victim than the campus slut.
The more traction these sorts of things get, the more likely it is that males on campus will eschew dating their college classmates. Women will quickly find that they can no longer find a mate, because men won’t want to risk ruining their lives over a tryst with a crazy 19 year old coed.
Question from a salesclerk in a midwestern sporting goods store five Mondays ago “You must be from one of those Commie states back east” Governor Andrew Cuomo (D-NY), Connecticut’s next door neighbor, put his Nihil Obstart, Imprimatur on his states Commie state status with his statement “There’s no place in New York State for anyone who respects the Constitution, supports the Second Amendment, or is pro life”
This is going to come crashing down. It violates equal protection, due process, and presumption of innocence.
“… to provide feminists with a secret weapon to deploy only when they deem it necessary, i.e. the jilted girlfriend or the embarrassed coed who wakes up and decides it’s better to be known as a ‘rape’ victim than the campus slut.”
Yes, but such policies will change student behavior and, in fact, already have.
Consider, for example, the way young men now take extraordinary steps to make sure that they stay “friends” with their ex-girlfriends. Back in the day, breakups were almost always acrimonious. Bitter tears were cried, and mutual hatred was often the result of Love Gone Wrong. Nowadays, however, the end of a relationship is carefully negotiated to assure a peaceful parting of the ways. “We decided it wasn’t working out,” is the explanation one hears. “But we’re still good friends.”
Why is this? Well, in an age where accusations of sexual misconduct are a common sequel of breakups among college kids, every guy knows that all an embittered ex-girlfriend needs to do to get him expelled is to accuse him of rape. Therefore, he must be careful that the relationship ends amicably, lest he find himself dragged before a campus Star Chamber proceeding and required to prove she consented to everything, every time.
NEVER TALK TO A COLLEGE GIRL!
How is “affirmative consent” established or shown? Does all this have to be in writing? And witnessed? Maybe this whole thing is a makework project for notaries.
It cannot be. Given that affirmative consent must be obtained at each stage of the process and that process is undefined, there is no way to comply. Consider asking permission to kiss someone. Does consent to that extend to only one kiss or kissing in general? Is a French kiss included or must that be negotiated separately?
The change of behavior will most likely lead to men seeking mates off-campus. Look to see feminists seek to extend this nonsense to such encounters such that matriculating to a college grants the college jurisdiction over one’s off campus/summer behavior.
(unverified- please assume traditional tabloid “DOES…” in front, and “question mark suffix” to this entire news report)
Meantime, Harvard “leadership” decide on the systematic prohibition of single sex (predominantly heterosexual male) org members, not “approved” by the institution, from any recognizable leadership
of academic student entities.
It’s for “our” goals in the NEW “diversity”. (iversity?)
Who IS this aptly named Faust chick?
What will have to happen will be the demand for the partner consent to video tape/recording of the entire time they are together.
It’s how I would operate within my own house and if you wind up at hers then bring along your own gear. Not that difficult in this age of smartphones and GoPro.
If the partner doesn’t agree then refuse to engage and leave.
Its about Men started to act with responsibility towards themselves and protect themselves from scammers and cons.
As for Women, not many of those will require any record because it’s the male who always gets the blame.
Make sure you get the consent to record also on record.
It’s worse than talking to the Police.
Even a married college student wouldn’t be protected. “Only one lawmaker opposed the bill” equals insanity.
OMG!! WHERE DID THAT TRUMP GUY COME FROM? WHAT IS THAT? A COUNTER-CULTURE REVOLUTION OR SOMETHING? MISOGYNY AND RACISM ARE ON THE MARCH!!!
In my world, all but one of those legislators would be deported onto a rusty aircraft carrier just beyond the 12 mile limit and given a single set of binoculars. This is yet more proof the insane visions of Shulamith Firestone and Andrea Dworkin have been mainstreamed right into the heart of American institutions. God help us all; really.
If Americans are now this stupid, they deserve exactly what’s coming to them, because who voted for those morons? Who keeps sending their kids to these insane asylums of caveman education?
When Islamic custom and practice begins to look sane you know you are falling off a cliff.
Gee, an insane lesbian ideology are institutional cock-blockers. Who’d have guessed?
I sense a consortium of home camera and sound security systems behind this.
PROTECT YOURSELVES! OUR 24/7 C-ALL-HEAR-ALL SECURITY SYSTEMS ARE THE PERFECT THING FOR THE MAN ON THE GO! OUR NOTARY PUBLICS ARE ON CALL NIGHT AND DAY! PRINT OUT YOUR OWN AFFIDAVITS WITH NO MUSS OR FUSS. DON’T GET CAUGHT WITH YOUR PANTS UP!
Any gripe can turn into a prison sentence.
Sad story… But excellent writing as always. I’ve got a headline post for 11AM on HotGas that will feature this, Robert. People need to know. Dont’ deal with college women…. That is if you go to college to begin with (also not a great idea in most cases).
It is probably for the safety of the male students. Better to find a nice out of state girl (say Pennsylvania) working as a welder by day, erotic dancer by night, but who dreams of dancing in the ballet.
Webcam all interactions. That should protect the young ladies’ honor.
[…] McCain reports on Connecticut’s insane new “affirmative consent” […]
[…] click to continue reading […]
Wait, where did Fawn Leibowitz go to college?
Interesting how this is only one direction.
My first real girlfriend in college, well, she was into weirdness and was much more aggressive than I was. By the “standards” of today she definitely raped me.
I didn’t think about it as rape. I still don’t.
I also don’t think she was on the far end of RSM’s crazy scale. Probably the lower third or so.
[…] blog of the day is The Other McCain, with a post on Connecticut outlawing college […]
Where’s the asterisk? This law could only apply to the white guys. After all, the black guys are simply charismatic. This thing needs an asterisk.
Expect more hidden?camera videos of sexual encounters in states that pass such asinine laws.
Is the law limited to people in the 18–25yrs range? Does it apply to married college students?
These people obviously have much too much time on thier hands, and too well?paid in the wasting of their time in the capitol!
Exactly the desired consequence, one would think.
After all, it can’t be an unintended consequence, since even those morons who inhabit the state legislature have sufficient IQ to see the consequences.
Therefore, it must be the result they’re aiming for.
And allow boomtown?growth to the “revenge porn” industry!
It seems to me that a male should never risk even being alone with a female without witnesses–preferably some of them female. At some point a male is going to be accused of rape as retaliation for saying no thank you to a date. Heck, what happens when some girl flips through a yearbook and accuses a guy she’s never met of rape? These things WILL happen.
It reminds me of when Prop 8 was happening here in CA and I told my very liberal friend, I just don’t want a gay couple to force my church to marry them. And he waved me off dismissively and implied I was crazy as he said that would never happen. Forcing bakers is only a half step from forcing churches. The real question is why hasn’t some gay couple already done it?
I think the same thing about the Christian school my kids go to. What’s to stop CA from saying teach the Kindergartners about gay sex or you don’t get state accreditation. Nothing. Which is why every day they don’t, I wonder why?
It seems to me that the end game is complete sex segregation. It sounds like bad young adult post apocalyptic fiction, but Feminists would have no issue with that.
I live in the People’s Republic of Connecticut”. I can’t think of a single person who can’t wait to get out.
Honestly, given the recent trajectory of the cultural and political climate, I’m not sure those things matter anymore. We are moving away from being a Rule of Law society. Lenin’s “who/whom” standard is taking hold of people’s hearts and minds.
The intent is to instill fear in average and unattractive men. Sex between women and elite alphas will continue unabated. Women will have no trouble finding a mate.
Let me once again state that there are no college girls at Wabash College, because all students there are male.
I think Affirmative Consent only applies to heterosexuals.
it would a hate crime if Liberals told Gays they had to get the permission of management before they engaged in sexual activity.
Only one lawmaker opposed the bill, Republican Sen. Joe Markley,
I take it the Connecticut Republican Party isn’t worth a pitcher of warm spit.
Allan Bloom remarked on this phenomenon in 1987. He attributed it to the character of youth and the unimportance of the relationships they do form.
It was not that long ago (< 20 years) that Antioch College was ridiculed for instituting a code of conduct very like this.
Look at how well they’ve done on statewide and federal races./sarc
For a state where the Rs control the majority of the towns, why can’t we elect Rs to congress or our own statehouse?
Under-rated comment. That is exactly the intent. I see it as just another step in a protracted campaign to scare and shame a large portion of the male population into suppressing all aspects of their sexuality.
Take the ongoing anti-catcalling campaign. It has nothing to do with “harassment” and everything to do with the particular men making comments to nearby women.
(I place harassment in quotes because this seems to consist primarily of comments on attractiveness, the occasional expletive to denote the same, and greetings as shown by the much lauded ’10 hours of Walking’ video by the Hollaback campaign)
These men are generally of low socioeconomic status, therefore many women are irritated or even disgusted that these men would dare address them. There are few women that would consider as harassment a comment such as “Hello beautiful” or even a “Damn!” were it to come from a man in a suit standing next to a Mercedes.
It’s not about what’s being done, but controlling who is doing it.
I wish you were right, but I’m afraid you aren’t.
Those protections haven’t applied to men on college campuses in quite awhile, and it was only a matter of time before it spilled out into the wider population.
There are few politicians that are willing go up against the multi-million dollar feminist lobby behind bills such as this. To do so is career suicide, all it takes it to be labeled “anti-woman”, or “rape apologist”, or worse yet, have a random rape accusation tossed their way, and their political career is over.
Well at least college girls can get their sexual gratification with the college feminist lesbian chapter.
lower class male, its haram for you. Leave the rich mans harem alone.
Indeed, the publicized purpose of this law is merely a screen for the actual goal. To reverse the burden of proof, and make that burden unobtainable.
Even video evidence of active participation would not be exculpatory but incriminating under such a law.
I’m afraid even video evidence would not preclude prosecution under this law, unless said video showed active ongoing affirmative consent. If it does not, then that video would become the prosecutor’s centerpiece.
Or there could be a big future in dildos.
Givd it time. The lawyers are just starting yo smell blood.
Think Betty White, or maybe Sarah Silverman voice:
Affirmative Consent at every stage?
But I’m too POLITE to speak with my mouth full !
I don’t know what kind of country would do such a thing. It sure isn’t America. That country is dead and gone. This is the face of insanity.
It will be interesting to see how this law, all the false accusations and Mattress girl fiasco’s will effect the rate of exchange students in either direction. Anyone living in Conn. who does not wish to be subject to such a ridicules law would have to pay a stiff tuition increase if attending an out-of-state school. As long as you have to pay more anyway, why not study abroad?
Likewise, these witch hunt stories are gaining international attention. How many Germans will send their sons to school in America after what the Mattress Slut did. How many foreign girls will want to attend a school with 30-40% men? Let alone all those developmentally arrested mean-girls.
I have an idea for “Enthusiastic Consent: The Musical.”
Remember guys, consent is legally required throughout the entire sexual process, starting with foreplay. And because a woman’s brain is the biggest sex organ in her whole body, washing the dishes is just like foreplay to them.
So whenever you “engage the process” make sure you ask your sweetie if it’s OK to do the dishes.
Actually men aren’t marrying. That’s where the whole MGTOW thing came from. The social movement sprang from an already existing demographic. This is also the first generation of men raised by single, feminist moms. They think twice, or not at all, about marriage after listening to their mom bitch their dad out of their life.