California bill to raise standard of consent for student sex

June 13, 2014

sexA bill in the California legislature may change the way college students engage in sexual activity. [CBS LA]

Democratic state senators Kevin de Leon and Hannah Beth Jackson have introduced a bill that would require state run universities to adopt policies defining sexual consent in a particular manner. Students would then have to reach a mutual agreement, either verbally or on paper, prior to having sex.

The bill defines sexual consent as an “affirmative unambiguous and conscious decision by each participant to engage in mutually agreed upon sexual activity.”

It also states that lack of resistance or silence does not equate consent. Likewise, students could not achieve consent when one is incapacitated by alcohol, drugs or a medical condition.

“One out of five young women on a college campus will be sexually assaulted,” de Leon said. “I think this is really critical that we create a culture that’s respectful of women, that we create protocols that are transparent.”

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

A bit of Fry and Laurie …

Our government is heading in the direction of requiring a permit to have sex. They are drooling over the revenue they could generate. I just wish the government would ask for my permission before they screw me.


Especially after you get jailed on a bogus charge.

de Leon is on a spree lately with pi$$ poor Senate Bills, and now this.

Instead of regulating consensual sex between adults, how about regulating the DA’s who allow plea bargains for the bastards who commit the horrible crime?

Thanks for recognizing what a poor senator De Leon is. His bills are poorly conceived and poorly written, yet he is about to become Senate Pro Tem.

“Kevin de Leon has been linked to an ongoing scandal of illegal payments/bribes, and federal investigation of his fellow CA Senator Ronald S. Calderon. Although de Leon denies involvement in the scandal, he has not been cleared of any wrong doing as of December 2013.[1]

In Feburuary of 2014, the media has reported that Senator DeLeon is included in the list of 37 California state politicians warned by the FPPC after their campaigns were benefited by California lobbyist Kevin Sloat. Sloat was found guilty of violating state laws in regard to lobbying and was subsequently ordered to pay $133,500 in fines for his actions”.

His “ghost gun bill” and demonstration which showed he knew nothing about what he was saying has been mocked nation wide.…/anti-gun-senator-is-being-mocke...

I would suggest that all parties equip themselves with GoPro cameras in order to record the event.

These Democrats (they aren’t “liberals” by any stretch) would have a witness, notary public, and psychologist with a breathalyzer and drug test kit in everyone’s bedroom.

“Okay, kids, now that we’ve established general consent, please check and initial each box for specific consent on the following: (1) He can touch me THERE. (2) He can put it THERE. (3) He is allowed to kiss me THERE. … (127) He can be on top. … (247) He can pull my hair.”

“And, now, please select any specifically denied or non-consented items from this list here….”

“Now, Ms. Ironfist will drug test each of you and inspect for STDs, then Notary Horsefeathers will swear you in.”

“Good, now our referee, Mr. Moe Lester will observe as you proceed. Please stop if he blows his whistle and you must move your legs to provide him with adequate view with his flashlight if he so directs.”

“We will file a record of this proceeding in the state database for your safety so that you can be notified in any STDs or criminal behavior arise in the future. For your protection.”


Kevin, take a deep breath. Obviously your big brother fantasy isn’t what this is about. If we could see the whole law, you’d probably find that it is a way to deal with the increasing allegations/accusations of date rape, to establish criteria for determining whether it actually happened or whether what happened was OK. Feelings are fickle; what seemed like fun Saturday after a bit of thought on Sunday might make somebody mad enough to accuse the partner of a crime. If you were a guy kid, wouldn’t you appreciate having this level of protection from a later accusation that could ruin your life?

Well, hijinks, you display your ignorance. WE CAN SEE THE TEXT OF THE WHOLE LAW. And what this horrible law does is mandate an administrative disciplinary code that mirrors criminal rape and assault laws, but THROWS OUT ALL PROTECTIONS built into a criminal proceeding—-NO jury of your peers, NO innocent until proven guilty, NO judge.


“Either verbally or on paper, prior to having sex.”

Sounds very much like vows and a marriage license if you ask me. A dead concept in these progressive times.

Are Kevin de Leon and Hannah Beth Jackson both brain-dead?

Just keep piling on the legislation, aye? That’ll fix the world, right?

Their gun banning/gun control crap was bad enough. This confirms they’ll do anything for media exposure.

Wow, I thought liberals wanted government out of the bedroom. Guess not, they just want to control every aspect of it.

Oh, for pity’s sake. We now need the STATE to define this? ““affirmative unambiguous and conscious decision by each participant to engage in mutually agreed upon sexual activity.”

The “law” will be ambiguous, enforcement will be amiguous.

Please, worry about water and the debt.

On second thought, take up your time with sex because you would only screw up water and debt anyway

Agreed. Typical, lets just keep on legislating ourselves to death. The part that most dumbass politicians miss, is that it is not a problem with the current laws, it is the lack of enforcing them in a steady and consistent manner.

How can you get “steady and consistent” enforcement of a law that talks about “a mutual agreement, either VERBALLY or on paper, prior to having sex?” (Emphasis mine.) How is this going to be an improvement over the current “he said, she said” situations that make prosecutions so difficult (sometimes justifiably) when the accusations come after the fact? This sounds too much like show-piece legislation that is designed to allow the legislators to claim some sort of positive record on a tough situation without actually achieving anything of substance. (Sort of like most “gun control” legislation.)

An alternative to the proposal would be to find a way to discourage the use of alcohol and other drugs affecting judgment — especially among the young. That will be even more difficult than dealing with the problem of mental illness given society’s attitudes toward alcohol use in particular. But the problem of rape is largely entwined with messed-up social sexual mores and the use of mind-numbing substances to resolve the internal conflicts they create. Passing laws will do little or nothing to aid that situation.

Intelligent education with parental support prior to adulthood are the best we can do. Young men need to learn that their desires do not entitle them to whatever they want. Young women need to learn to communicate their limits more clearly and strongly. Both need to avoid sexual situations when either are under the influence.

1 2 3