A more honest article on the college rape mess

[Loren Pechtel]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/la-me-sexual-assault-legal-20140608,0,6345555.story

These are just the tip of the iceberg:

Still, Andrew Miltenberg, a New York attorney who represents plaintiffs suing Vassar and Drew University, said interest in filing such cases has surged in the last year; he is now receiving three to four calls a week from all over the country.

 

[Bronzeage]

It will be interesting to see what happens if young men come to see casual sex as something with potentially life ruining consequences, even when they have done nothing wrong.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Of those three to four calls a week, I wonder how many are women who've been charged under this neutral and unbiased policy?

 

[J842P]

It will be interesting to see what happens if young men come to see casual sex as something with potentially life ruining consequences, even when they have done nothing wrong.

Life-ruining consequences already exist for young men when it comes to casual sex. I don't think that college sexual assault policies will change the mindset of most adolescent and young adult men.

 

[Derec]

It will be interesting to see what happens if young men come to see casual sex as something with potentially life ruining consequences, even when they have done nothing wrong.

We might get a neopuritan, sex-negative culture, this time from the far Left. A belated victory for second wave, sex-negative feminists like Dworkin, Brownmiller, Steinem, MacKinnon, Daly et al.
Not a good development.

- - - Updated - - -

Life-ruining consequences already exist for young men when it comes to casual sex. I don't think that college sexual assault policies will change the mindset of most adolescent and young adult men.

Being expelled for consensual sex just because the girl regretted it the next day (or year) is quite a different kettle of fish to things like STIs or unwanted pregnancy.

 

[Bronzeage]

It will be interesting to see what happens if young men come to see casual sex as something with potentially life ruining consequences, even when they have done nothing wrong.

Life-ruining consequences already exist for young men when it comes to casual sex. I don't think that college sexual assault policies will change the mindset of most adolescent and young adult men.

The life ruining consequences of casual sex have always existed for young men, or at the least, I can testify it goes back as far as the 1970's. The question is, what would happen if young men come to recognize the potential consequences. This is a matter of changing perceptions.

If college sexual assault policies will not change the mindset of adolescent and young men, what would?

Does the mindset really need to be changed? Is this a "don't fix what isn't broke" situation? Should we go back to the old model of giving all sexual limits to the females, and if a boy or man goes too far, it's her fault and her problem?

There is an even older model, where the female is not allowed any contact with a boy or man until her father hands her over to her husband.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Plus you get some free goats

 

[Toni]

We might get a neopuritan, sex-negative culture, this time from the far Left. A belated victory for second wave, sex-negative feminists like Dworkin, Brownmiller, Steinem, MacKinnon, Daly et al.
Not a good development.

- - - Updated - - -

Life-ruining consequences already exist for young men when it comes to casual sex. I don't think that college sexual assault policies will change the mindset of most adolescent and young adult men.

Being expelled for consensual senx just because the girl regretted it the next day (or year) is quite a different kettle of fish to things like STIs or unwanted pregnancy.

And quite a different kettle of fish from something called reality.

 

[Bronzeage]

We might get a neopuritan, sex-negative culture, this time from the far Left. A belated victory for second wave, sex-negative feminists like Dworkin, Brownmiller, Steinem, MacKinnon, Daly et al.
Not a good development.

- - - Updated - - -

Life-ruining consequences already exist for young men when it comes to casual sex. I don't think that college sexual assault policies will change the mindset of most adolescent and young adult men.

Being expelled for consensual sex just because the girl regretted it the next day (or year) is quite a different kettle of fish to things like STIs or unwanted pregnancy.

Have you ever paid child support?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It will be interesting to see what happens if young men come to see casual sex as something with potentially life ruining consequences, even when they have done nothing wrong.

Life-ruining consequences already exist for young men when it comes to casual sex. I don't think that college sexual assault policies will change the mindset of most adolescent and young adult men.

1) Condoms.

2) Normally she has as much interest as he at preventing problems. In this case she's the one causing them.

 

[thebeave]

Where is the ACLU in all of this? I thought it was basically their mission to take on cases of people denied their due process and rights. Yet, they seem not to be found.

 

[Derec]

And quite a different kettle of fish from something called reality.

Why are you so adamant to deny the reality of the overreach and hysteria on the subject of "college rape"?

 

[Bronzeage]

It will be interesting to see what happens if young men come to see casual sex as something with potentially life ruining consequences, even when they have done nothing wrong.

Life-ruining consequences already exist for young men when it comes to casual sex. I don't think that college sexual assault policies will change the mindset of most adolescent and young adult men.

1) Condoms.

2) Normally she has as much interest as he at preventing problems. In this case she's the one causing them.

Condoms are your friend. It took me a while to learn that lesson.

If the man does not use a condom, does this mean he shoulders more of the responsibility for the problem? Couldn't the young man have avoided most of the trouble by simply declining to have sex with someone he can't trust?

 

[J842P]

It will be interesting to see what happens if young men come to see casual sex as something with potentially life ruining consequences, even when they have done nothing wrong.

Life-ruining consequences already exist for young men when it comes to casual sex. I don't think that college sexual assault policies will change the mindset of most adolescent and young adult men.

The life ruining consequences of casual sex have always existed for young men, or at the least, I can testify it goes back as far as the 1970's. The question is, what would happen if young men come to recognize the potential consequences. This is a matter of changing perceptions.

Most young men recognize the potential consequences. In this day an age, it is few who can claim ignorance in such matters. The problem is that most young men, indeed, most young people, have a different perception of long-term consequences. There is a jarring change around the age of 25 for most people where they suddenly weigh long-term consequences more heavily against short-term considerations. We can even sit here and wax scientific on the biological reasons for this sort of change. But that seems to me to be a derail.

If college sexual assault policies will not change the mindset of adolescent and young men, what would?

Honestly, if an untreatable fatal disease isn't enough, then do you really suppose college sexual assault policies would change anything?

Does the mindset really need to be changed? Is this a "don't fix what isn't broke" situation? Should we go back to the old model of giving all sexual limits to the females, and if a boy or man goes too far, it's her fault and her problem?

I'm assuming that is a rhetorical question, but I'll answer it anyway. No, we shouldn't. In general, I am for society removing as many potential problems associated with sex of any kind between consenting parties. In general, I am for society being open to and supporting all manner of non-exploitative sexualities. From a humanistic perspective, I believe that sexual limits should be reserved for each individual, regardless of biological sex or gender identity.

There is an even older model, where the female is not allowed any contact with a boy or man until her father hands her over to her husband.

Right, the "good ol' days" model. Personally, I find everything about that period extremely distasteful. The social mores of that time were steeped in the world-view of a puritanical, hateful, life-denying death cult from a murderous bronze-age society. Unfortunately for us, the version that spread through Western society, Christianity, has a prominent eschatological element to it, making it even more life-denying than the old Abrahamic core it stems from.

 

[Bronzeage]

It will be interesting to see what happens if young men come to see casual sex as something with potentially life ruining consequences, even when they have done nothing wrong.

Life-ruining consequences already exist for young men when it comes to casual sex. I don't think that college sexual assault policies will change the mindset of most adolescent and young adult men.

The life ruining consequences of casual sex have always existed for young men, or at the least, I can testify it goes back as far as the 1970's. The question is, what would happen if young men come to recognize the potential consequences. This is a matter of changing perceptions.

Most young men recognize the potential consequences. In this day an age, it is few who can claim ignorance in such matters. The problem is that most young men, indeed, most young people, have a different perception of long-term consequences. There is a jarring change around the age of 25 for most people where they suddenly weigh long-term consequences more heavily against short-term considerations. We can even sit here and wax scientific on the biological reasons for this sort of change. But that seems to me to be a derail.

If college sexual assault policies will not change the mindset of adolescent and young men, what would?

Honestly, if an untreatable fatal disease isn't enough, then do you really suppose college sexual assault policies would change anything?

Does the mindset really need to be changed? Is this a "don't fix what isn't broke" situation? Should we go back to the old model of giving all sexual limits to the females, and if a boy or man goes too far, it's her fault and her problem?

I'm assuming that is a rhetorical question, but I'll answer it anyway. No, we shouldn't. In general, I am for society removing as many potential problems associated with sex of any kind between consenting parties. In general, I am for society being open to and supporting all manner of non-exploitative sexualities. From a humanistic perspective, I believe that sexual limits should be reserved for each individual, regardless of biological sex or gender identity.

There is an even older model, where the female is not allowed any contact with a boy or man until her father hands her over to her husband.

Right, the "good ol' days" model. Personally, I find everything about that period extremely distasteful. The social mores of that time were steeped in the world-view of a puritanical, hateful, life-denying death cult from a murderous bronze-age society. Unfortunately for us, the version that spread through Western society, Christianity, has a prominent eschatological element to it, making it even more life-denying than the old Abrahamic core it stems from.

Rhetorical questions do have answers.

Sorry about the bronze age. We did the best we could with what we had. Antibiotics and contraceptive would have made life nicer, or at least longer.

What I find strange is we have a situation where young men knowingly place themselves in a dangerous situation and no one seems to think the young men should know better, and worse, are incapable of doing better.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

If the man does not use a condom, does this mean he shoulders more of the responsibility for the problem? Couldn't the young man have avoided most of the trouble by simply declining to have sex with someone he can't trust?

But lets not apply a double standard between the man and the woman if we can avoid doing so. She could just as easily decline having sex or insist on a condom, unless there actually was a rape. As Loren said, she usually has just as much reason to want to prevent problems, more so actually, since she is the one whose body may get pregnant. But here she is causing the problem.

 

[prideandfall]

Most young men recognize the potential consequences. In this day an age, it is few who can claim ignorance in such matters. The problem is that most young men, indeed, most young people, have a different perception of long-term consequences. There is a jarring change around the age of 25 for most people where they suddenly weigh long-term consequences more heavily against short-term considerations. We can even sit here and wax scientific on the biological reasons for this sort of change. But that seems to me to be a derail.

i think that "jarring change" is less about people suddenly considering long-term future goals and more about the raging hormonal cocktail that is repeatedly pile-driving your body from the ages of 15 through 25ish finally starts to wear off and you can actually engage a fully rational perception of your life.

this is the part about this discussion that always amuses me the most - how much of it is had by dusty-crotched old ass people (of both genders) that hardly even remember what a throbbing boner feels like, much less the capacity to relate to the extent to which said boner can totally co-opt the higher order brain functions of younger men.

 

[J842P]

Most young men recognize the potential consequences. In this day an age, it is few who can claim ignorance in such matters. The problem is that most young men, indeed, most young people, have a different perception of long-term consequences. There is a jarring change around the age of 25 for most people where they suddenly weigh long-term consequences more heavily against short-term considerations. We can even sit here and wax scientific on the biological reasons for this sort of change. But that seems to me to be a derail.

i think that "jarring change" is less about people suddenly considering long-term future goals and more about the raging hormonal cocktail that is repeatedly pile-driving your body from the ages of 15 through 25ish finally starts to wear off and you can actually engage a fully rational perception of your life.

this is the part about this discussion that always amuses me the most - how much of it is had by dusty-crotched old ass people (of both genders) that hardly even remember what a throbbing boner feels like, much less the capacity to relate to the extent to which said boner can totally co-opt the higher order brain functions of younger men.

Oh yeah. I think that with sexually related things it is even worse because of that, but I think it applies to almost everything.

 

[Bronzeage]

If the man does not use a condom, does this mean he shoulders more of the responsibility for the problem? Couldn't the young man have avoided most of the trouble by simply declining to have sex with someone he can't trust?

But lets not apply a double standard between the man and the woman if we can avoid doing so. She could just as easily decline having sex or insist on a condom, unless there actually was a rape. As Loren said, she usually has just as much reason to want to prevent problems, more so actually, since she is the one whose body may get pregnant. But here she is causing the problem.

The problem is the double standard which has traditionally been applied. Women have always shouldered more of the consequences of poor judgment in sexual partners.

I like that line about "But here she is causing the problem." Wouldn't better judgment in sex partners reduce false rape charges? Here is a solution which is totally in the young man's grasp and control, yet no one seems to think this is a viable solution.

When it's fear of pregnancy, we expect her to prevent problems by either exercising birth control, or restraint. When it's fear of false rape charges, we expect her exercise restraint, again. We seem to require little responsibility for foolish actions from the man.

 

[laughing dog]

And quite a different kettle of fish from something called reality.

Why are you so adamant to deny the reality of the overreach and hysteria on the subject of "college rape"?

Your responses make that impossible.