bjack on 20/3/2015 at 01:51
Quote Posted by Nicker
OK. Reset.
Cool! :D
I will miss the Stig. All of hims.
heywood on 20/3/2015 at 14:33
Quote Posted by bjack
The "Yes Means Yes" California campaign is a wonderful example of doublethink. What a cynical name for that peace of crap legislation.
Please explain what you mean by doublethink.
As a principle and as a slogan, "yes means yes" makes perfect sense to me.
I googled the legislation and it seems stupidly crafted, but the idea behind it is a good one. "No means no" is the wrong standard.
faetal on 20/3/2015 at 15:08
If anything, it's a tautology.
bjack on 20/3/2015 at 17:17
Quote Posted by heywood
Please explain what you mean by doublethink.
As a principle and as a slogan, "yes means yes" makes perfect sense to me.
I googled the legislation and it seems stupidly crafted, but the idea behind it is a good one. "No means no" is the wrong standard.
It is a bad example, yes, I will admit that on closer examination. Affirmative consent must be given and it cannot be coerced and is not acceptable if the woman is drunk/intoxicated. OK, fine so far, but the yes can be verbal or non-verbal. This is where is gets sticky (pun intended). Non-verbal queues may be misleading, so the law itself builds in grey area, where the man is getting the go signal,yet subject to rape charges. That means yes=no in some cases. The problem is they added non-verbal consent, yet continued to say the law was yes=yes. I can't find the reference, but I did read when it passed that the guy cannot directly ask for the yes. That might be considered coercion, with the girl being forced to choose. As always, the chick has thee keys… :joke:
No=no is a bad standard when it comes to the meek. A girl must have said no to the guy. Not always going to happen.
One thing that needed to be addressed was when girls get pissed off at a guy and claim rape, even when consensual. The yes=yes is supposed to clear this up. It only muddies the waters though. Does the yes need to be recorded? Will he need a notarized copy? Does it need to be filmed? How about CGI and overdubs? The anti yes=yes crowd loves those talking points.
Here is opinion on the matter: (
http://time.com/3222176/campus-rape-the-problem-with-yes-means-yes/)
It says it much better than I can. I am happy my college days a long past.
Tony_Tarantula on 21/3/2015 at 05:19
Quote Posted by heywood
Please explain what you mean by doublethink.
As a principle and as a slogan, "yes means yes" makes perfect sense to me.
I googled the legislation and it seems stupidly crafted, but the idea behind it is a good one. "No means no" is the wrong standard.
A: Sex without consent is already a crime. It's called "rape" and has historically been punishable by death.
B: Exactly how the fuck do you plan on enforcing it? The "idea behind it" is "let's assume that men accused of rape are guilty until proven innocent". If you think that's a good idea then perhaps Puritan England or Iran would be more to your taste.
Hell, even a lot of the feminist movement is criticizing the concept as being fucking retarded. For Fuck's Sake the same people pushing this law were the same one's screaming a few years ago how the government doesn't belong in the bedroom.
Nicker on 21/3/2015 at 05:44
Sexual Contact Security Warning
Your partner is attempting to initiate sexual activity. Use caution when opening this encounter. Engaging in sexual activity without clear consent may be illegal in certain jurisdictions and may void your warranty. Bodily fluids may transmit viruses and other malicious agents, that could harm your body. Only do it with trusted partners.
Click to view safety certificate.
Are you sure you want to get it on?
ALLOW ------ CANCEL
faetal on 21/3/2015 at 10:18
I'd say it's less about enforcing it and more trying to increase the cultural volume of consent. When people are making a potentially dodgy decision about when to sleep with someone, it might sway things the right way in edge cases where people are more aware of what might be occurring. I'm not talking about changing the minds of serial rapists, but people who might not have thought about it properly. No way to enforce it sure, we don't have thought police, but it's a good education tool.
Here is a nice analogy: (
http://rockstardinosaurpirateprincess.com/2015/03/02/consent-not-actually-that-complicated/)
heywood on 21/3/2015 at 14:27
Quote Posted by bjack
One thing that needed to be addressed was when girls get pissed off at a guy and claim rape, even when consensual. The yes=yes is supposed to clear this up.
There's no reasonable, practical way to prevent false accusations. "Yes Means Yes" just clarifies that affirmative consent is the standard.
Quote Posted by Tony_Tarantula
A: Sex without consent is already a crime. It's called "rape" and has historically been punishable by death.
B: Exactly how the fuck do you plan on enforcing it? The "idea behind it" is "let's assume that men accused of rape are guilty until proven innocent". If you think that's a good idea then perhaps Puritan England or Iran would be more to your taste.
Hell, even a lot of the feminist movement is criticizing the concept as being fucking retarded. For Fuck's Sake the same people pushing this law were the same one's screaming a few years ago how the government doesn't belong in the bedroom.
I can't believe I have to explain this.
"No Means No" is the wrong standard because it
doesn't require consent. The victim can be incapacitated, or too intoxicated, or just too fearful to resist. To pick on a stereotype, if I'm the drunk horny frat boy trying to get a piece of ass, "No Means No" implies that as long as she doesn't tell me to stop or push me off, I can take her even if I don't have her consent or she's not capable of giving it. "Yes Means Yes" means she has to want it, or at least agree to it, and implies that she has to be capable of giving consent.
Get it now?
Quote Posted by faetal
I'd say it's less about enforcing it and more trying to increase the cultural volume of consent. When people are making a potentially dodgy decision about when to sleep with someone, it might sway things the right way in edge cases where people are more aware of what might be occurring. I'm not talking about changing the minds of serial rapists, but people who might not have thought about it properly. No way to enforce it sure, we don't have thought police, but it's a good education tool.
Here is a nice analogy: (
http://rockstardinosaurpirateprincess.com/2015/03/02/consent-not-actually-that-complicated/)
Yes, exactly, this has nothing to do with serial rapists. It is about making sure people understand what consent is. It really shouldn't be hard to figure out, but apparently is.
Also, it may affect how some cases are decided, e.g. if witnesses can establish that the victim was too intoxicated to consent.
Tony_Tarantula on 21/3/2015 at 16:04
Quote Posted by heywood
"No Means No" is the wrong standard because it
doesn't require consent. The victim can be incapacitated, or too intoxicated, or just too fearful to resist. To pick on a stereotype, if I'm the drunk horny frat boy trying to get a piece of ass, "No Means No" implies that as long as she doesn't tell me to stop or push me off, I can take her even if I don't have her consent or she's not capable of giving it. "Yes Means Yes" means she has to want it, or at least agree to it, and implies that she has to be capable of giving consent.
Get it now?
How about
What the fuck is wrong with you? Nobody even fucking mentioned "no means no"......and despite the polarity of the words involved, the abscence "yes means yes" does not mean "no means no". Hopefully you're capable of understanding that not everything in the world is binary A or B option.
For starters what you're railing against is ALREADY illegal under current laws. It's still rape and punishable as rape. You don't need to add a "yes means yes" law to make that the case.
Secondly you should read the actual law. "yes means yes" doesn't just mean that you need consent for every sexual action taken. That's already the law.
What "yes means yes" means is that unless someone accused of rape can provide proof that every single action taken was consensual, the college must punish them as if they were proven guilty in a court of law. It literally asks you to believe that someone is a rapist merely because someone else said so regardless of whether or not there is any evidence to support it.
Given the number of false rape accusations you can imagine where this is going to lead. And no, it's not some "infinitely small number" as another poster put it: Depending on who you ask, anywhere from 20% to
(http://anandaanswers.com/ananda-answers-an-alarming-national-trend-false-rape-allegations-2/) half of campus rape accusations are admitted to be false by the accuser. The 2% false number that most people bandy about actually is an anecdotal reference from a book written by Susan Brown Miller.
