College Fix: If a man and a woman are both drunk and they have sex, the man is the rapist if the woman decides he is at some point, regardless of how she felt in the moment.
This is what American University is teaching students in a required sexual consent module, according to Red Alert Politics.
The module “asks students personal behavioral questions like how many sexual partners they’ve had and how often they drink,” according to Red Alert, which says the program is called “Campus Clarity: Think About It.”
That appears to refer to CampusClarity (since acquired by training provider EverFi), whose invasive questions were pulled from mandatory student training by Clemson University in 2014 after they drew outside scrutiny. more here
Unless the guy is a Muslim right? Then it’s islamophobia
On the part of the woman. Is that how it works in libland?
Wow, the anti-sex league from 1984 is alive and well. What this means is that if you, for any reason, think the woman you’re about to have consensual sex with may be crazy or a bitch, run away as fast as you can. Blue balls is better than being gang raped in prison.
If “NO means NO!” as we are constantly reminded, then “YES means YES!”
Feminism is a mental disorder.
Sex post facto…
I know that the legal definition of rape usually includes sex with a woman who is intoxicated on the grounds that an intoxicated woman is not legally capable of giving consent.
That does bring up an interesting conundrum: If a drunk woman is legally incapable of acting in a responsible manner, then shouldn’t a guy who is drunk also be considered as being incapable of acting in a responsible manner? But a drunk man is supposed to be responsible for his actions but a drunk woman is not. And what if the woman got the guy drunk in order to have sex with him? Isn’t that sexual discrimination? (This, of course, does not include secretly giving the woman an intoxicant.)
And it what world is retroactively revoking consent legally acceptable?
Do men get the same option or must they still consider it charity?
So… is this one a yes or a no?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGoXyXiwOBg
😉
Sorry your honor, I IDENTIFIED AS A WOMAN during the sexual intercourse…
Uhm….what? LOL
Crosses American U off the list of possible schools our children may attend
If we follow this so-called reasoning to its logical conclusion, then to be safe a man should, after having sexual intercourse, kill the woman.
Dead women recant no permissions.
This is not, of course, the way things ought to be.
If the woman changes her mind halfway through, do I get my $50 back?
LOOK ON THE BRIGHT SIDE – A FEW MORE MONTHS OF THIS BS AND THERE WILL BE MORE HORNY WOMEN THAN YOU CAN SHAKE A STICK AT!!!
PLEASE!! DON’T!! STOP!! BECOMES PLEASE DON’T STOP!!!
Good thing Poor Lazlo has no children of College Age or they would be pulled out of Indoctrination school and sent to welding school
This is either a campaign for gay recruitment or to revoke the 19th Amendment. Will have to waterboard university administration to get to truth.
Bogus operandi.
The only thing a woman should be able to retroactively revoke is her decision to not make me a sammich.
Hey, ladies, “estoppel” is not the same as a butt plug.
Just as a test case, some guy needs to sue and say he was raped by a woman while he was drunk but consenting. That will set some kind of precedent.
Wyatt: $25
Q: How many times did you have sex last year?
A: 365
Q: How many different partners did you have last year?
A: 0
THIS is why MGTOW is getting much more popular. And women wonder why it’s difficult to find the right man (especially after all they’ve seen in college are the metrosexuals feminism has created).
This ruling says there’s nothing stopping a female from retracting her YES decision 30 years from now, especially if the guy was elected president. Oh, wait…
So, can we retroactively revoke consent to pay the tuition to this dung hill of a school?
They only want the muzzies to reproduce so they can take over. Why does ANYONE do what the left wants them to do?
Remember consent is key. If this guy hadn’t tried to bone a random vehicle without the express, enthusiastic consent of that car’s owner, he probably wouldn’t be in jail right now.
https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2018/05/03/police-use-stun-gun-on-man-attempting-to-have-sex-with-car/
@JDHasty: Sounds like a clear case of auto-eroticism to me.
😉
That’s going to put a BIG crimp in the college dating scene. There’s going to be a lot of frustrated women out there that, even if they get a date, it’s going to be a chaste event, not even a peck on the cheek. Maybe a handshake, but even that will become risky for the young man in this age of revocable consent.
JD: That was one of those annoying websites with the unstoppable embeded video. thanks.
@Vietvet May 3, 2018 at 7:16 pm
>Sounds like a clear case of auto-eroticism to me
I could go for some hot tail-pipe right now.
@Tim Buktu: If giving head gasket, be careful you don’t burn your lips.
🙂
Kafka?
Franz?
Hey, Kafka!
Where you at, bro?
American University?
izlamo delenda est …