Front Page  »  

California defines “yes” in student sex bill

September 29, 2014

yes_logoCalifornia Governor Jerry Brown has signed a bill that creates new rules for college students in the state who engage in sexual activity. [LA Times]

The new law defines sexual consent as an “affirmative, conscious and voluntary agreement to engage in sexual activity.” It states that lack of resistance or silence does not equate consent, and that students cannot achieve consent when one is incapacitated by drugs or alcohol.

The restrictions apply to all universities in California, public or private, that receive state-funded financial aid.

Democratic state senators Kevin de Leon and Hanna Beth Jackson authored the legislation. They introduced the bill after accusations surfaced of universities improperly investigating sexual assault allegations.


Loading...
Subjects:     
Related:


25 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I’m confused… Is it the Dems that want government out of the bedroom and not interfering with women’s sex lives? Liars and hypocrites.


0

If a drunk can’t give consent, does that mean a big move away from the bar scene for hookups? How does one determine if a prospective partner is “incapacitated?” Is it drunkenness to the point that one can’t make a coherent response to a question or comment? Is it the absence of the ability to make a rational judgment? If it is the latter, how does a prospective mate determine that? (I know some people who aren’t able to make a rational judgment when cold sober.)


Does this law apply equally to men and women? While I am sure that it is mostly drunk women who are taken advantage of, what about a case where a woman finds a drunk man, gets him to perform sex with her and either gives him an STD or a child?


What about people how are already in an ongoing sexual relationship? Does prior consent change the criteria for consent when under the influence? Who decides and what is the standard for evidence?


This whole law seems like a poor solution to a real problem — which may have no solutions that are both good and realistic. Not all problems can be solved by passing laws — even laws that are more clearly defined and enforceable!


0

As to bars not being a hook up scene, LOL! Some laws are made to be ignored. This is definitely one of those that NO ONE will give a moment of thought to.


And, no, prior and ongoing relationships aren’t exempt. You need a written contract signed by a notary for a hug now. I’m not joking either.


0

I take it that those last two sentences come from personal experience ?


0

Ask Geriatric Brown. You voted for him, and I’m sure you’ll do the same next month.


0

geriatric brown ? time wounds all heels


0

If only he was so lucky.


0

Bunny Ranch here I come! Yeeeeeeeha!


0

The beginning of the piece said Jerry Brown……..need not read on……YMBFKM!


0

OK, from what I heard on the radio is that alcohol consumption negates a “yes”, but what if both parties are drinking? Can either party change their mind after the fact and accuse the other of a sexual assault? Or just the woman? Maybe this is their way of forcing abstinence on them?


0

If specifying college students only, does this indicate that other women CAN be taken advantage of under the same circumstances??? WTF! This is totally ridiculous and doesn’t make anything any better for anyone, anywhere.


0

It’s not really a law that people must follow. It’s policy for state universities. This, it only applies to state college students. It imposes student discipline policies, not a new crime. It will be completely ignored by everyone except militant feminists.


0

(sorry for the double-post, this was meant to reply to THIS post of Kevin’s)


What if they fornicate under carnal knowledge while OFF DUTY as students? In their OFF CAMPUS pigsty? This is nothing but a weak smoke screen, trying to set the board for a ridiculous game that only the ignorant and media (being redundant, I know) will play in the next few years to set the stage for elections.


When you have nothing to run on, invent something to save us from.


0

It appears al lawsuit will be required to determine if students can be OFF DUTY.


0

I’m sure many college students will resort to secretly videotaping the session in case they ever need to prove consent.


0

Yep, and then post to Youtube; or then charged for non consensual taping when they use it in defense of sexual assault charges.


0

Given that Kevin de Leon was involved, is there a section on how many condoms can be

carried at one time?


Only in the land of fruits and nuts does a Governor feel he needs to pass a bill so silly

instead of punishing the bastards who commit these types of crimes, and make it hurt!


0

No .30 caliber clips allowed. What a moron that dude is! Even Adam Hill can find two brain cells to run together (when Dee is in the room makes two).


0

It sounds like Brown has created a new version of the “Peter Principal” that surely will put the lawyers to work. He said she said and tell me more.


0

Wow, more useless fodder from the ignorant who run the asylum of California.


Isn’t sexual assault on college campii usually a “he said, she said” affair? How would this defining “yes” change any of that?


This is why I never (if it can be avoided) vote for a lawyer or an “educator” when they run for public office. This is the stupid crap we get.


0

Until your daughter is raped.


0
1 2