Melanie Boyd Puts Smiley Face on Punitive Sex Crime Tribunals : The Yale Feminist Who Theorizes Sexual Assault Issues In Her Spare Time and Supports Universal Application of Affirmative Consent in American Life As a Path to "Feminist Sexual Power"

Why Does Melanie Boyd Remind Me of My Sweet
but Sex-hating, Buttinski Jewish Mother Who
Loved to Micromanage Everyone Else's Life?

"Grounding women’s emancipation, sexual and otherwise, on such a sweeping use of criminal punishment and civil incapacitation (e.g., expulsion from college with a transcript marking one as a sexual wrongdoer)  has led feminist reformers to take several stances typically thought to be hallmarks of social conservatism.  They are seeking social control through punitive and repressive deployments of state power.  They are criminalizing as a first rather than a last resort to achieving social change.  They are affirming indifference to the punishment of innocent conduct. They have moved well to the right of civil-liberties-oriented liberalism in their advocacy for swift and sure punishment unimpeded by due process restraints."

        - Janet Halley

Melanie Boyd, btw, please see my heartfelt note to you in all caps at the base of this page, thank you. Oh, and to all who stop by, I included a list below of actual studies on female sexual aggression. As for me, I've been sexually aggressive my whole life and loved every moment of it. The Catherine MacKinnon viewpoint (wellspring of the Melanie Boyd sex-negative world) that depends on the woman always being the passive and coerced participant is both inaccurate and silly, and btw only a concept that a woman who fears and hates sex could have imagined in the first place. And to all you out there who do fear and hate sex, that's fine, just go have your own party and stop trying to enforce your viewpoints on the rest of us. Pretty please? 

---

Sex-Negative
"Culture Activist"

Before we get on to the business of Melanie Boyd of Yale, the miss warm-and-fuzzy-aw-shucks Ivy League "sexual culture activist" and spokesperson for Affirmative Consent--who bills it as a harmless and sensible all-American pursuit that wouldn't hurt a sex starved fly--I note that the below snippet of blog commentary was cropped from a long thread connected to one of many debates on Huffington Post concerning the application of Affirmative Consent (AC) as a universal constant on college campuses across the United States. Perhaps it's just me, but I continually find it odd that certain heterosexual white women crowing about AC as a must-have on college campuses and in American bedrooms appear to see AC policy and law as a one-way street. If not, then why do they never discuss AC in terms of having to acquire or seek prior consent from their male partner for various acts of sex? How about just one, "Is it okay if I stick my finger up your ass, Bob?" or "I made sure to ask Rudolpho last night if I could kiss his throbbing member." No, not one. It's invariably about their obedient, well-trained male partner attempting to seek, or failing to seek (oh no, release the hounds!), ongoing stage-based prior sexual consent from them.

Might a few weeks of psychoanalysis reveal this unfair circumstance to be the result of narcissist power trips? Or perhaps a subconscious misandry that smugly grins each time their naked male partner quizzes with yet another "Will that be okay, schmoopy?" Or could it be a nurtured inheritance from a matriarchal micromanaging mother who bullied the emasculated father into begging for sex? That's one way to assure sexual dominance.

What do you think, my dear and precious Yale sex authorities? Your Melanie Boyd, working to institutionalize neurosis, has figured it out, and that's obvious when she states: "Determining consent post facto in a disciplinary hearing may be difficult (and disciplinary boards will sometimes get it wrong), but in media res agreement is clear." WELL YEAH! We know, Mel. No fooling honey! But the dark side of AC isn't about reality or normal passion-building sexual behavior, it's about sexual politics that favor one gender while punishing another, and about creating snares for that targeted gender--not to mention inflating sexual assault statistics to reinforce the notion of "campus rape epidemic."

In media res, agreement for sex surrounds us. Every night, millions of college students all across this great land are having sex, and hopefully darn good sex full of passionate aggression on the part of both parties. But there is no camera in the bedroom, my friends. We cannot micro-parse the beautiful language of healthy sex into a theoretically infinite number of affirmative consent infractions--not without a political agenda.

The core "gotcha"
legal snake in the grass
of Affirmative Consent

Btw I could be wrong on all counts about the real psychological motivations behind this apparent one-way consent street, but when the one-way AC street gets paved, and paved quite often, one begins to wonder as to the true motivation some people have for cheering on a circumstance backed by an authoritative gavel of punishment that only serves the needs of an elite victims-in-wait club--after all, doesn't a single misstep by a male when climbing the AC sex ladder towards paradise create an instant victim of sexual violence? Yes, it does! No question. Just nail down any AC feminist type in academia or elsewhere and she'll tell you, Yale man: You fucked up! Betty Blamethem says that four months ago on a Saturday you attempted digital penetration at 10:32 AM between two separate acts of coitus and heavy petting but you failed to acquire sufficient consent from her before said attempt (real AC court case -- start here and explore further).

Gotcha! Sexual violence will not be tolerated at this university. OMG! On to the sex-crimes star chamber, the UWC for fair and balanced processing (not to be confused with "due process"). As at other colleges, your accuser might be behind a screen to "prevent further trauma," and your questions are naturally ignored or unfairly limited, exculpatory evidence can be denied, and a room packed with angry sex negatives and their sycophants are staring you down as if you were The Night Stalker.

At many colleges, you are a rapist until proven a rapist. Justice is served.

As a matter of fact, see my comment and link below regarding the American Law Institute's rejection of a profoundly sex negative penal code modeled on stage-based sex snares. This might shake you into cold reality, guys and gals. Major AC players like Melanie Boyd of Yale want America dancing to their sexual power song, and so many like her with so much to gain won't stop singing it. Might we conjecture that the vision of hundreds of new sex crime courts on a state and local level is one that creates multiple orgasms in the sex negative universe?

Btw, why does this young woman have such a problem with our fuzzball Melanie? Does she doubt her genuine concern?... No, that's not it. I recommend a close read. I'm afraid Melanie is once again acting like my sex-hating, buttinski Jewish mother. Will she ever stop?

Back to the precious ones driving the one-way street. Perhaps in their minds, AC legal statutes now on the books in a few states absolve them from any responsibility. I can't speak for them all. Technically, the law does not absolve them of responsibility, however, when it comes to prosecution and expulsion, or to any punitive action for alleged stage-based AC violation, the record shows that males are the primary beneficiaries of this warm and fuzzy policy by a ratio of 100 to 1 at least?

On to the sex crimes star chamber... Your accuser might be behind a screen to "prevent further trauma," and your questions are naturally ignored or unfairly limited, exculpatory evidence can be denied, and a room packed with angry sex negatives and their sycophants are staring you down as if you were The Night Stalker. 

I wonder how that happens? Could Miss Ali tell us?

But heck, Melanie Boyd of Yale might tell you, if pressed after class over a few martinis, that all those fucking man bastards it coming, especially since her brand of feminist "sexual assault theory" primarily redefines all male sexual behavior as assault or theoretical assault depending on the alleged victim's point of view (read her work on this issue, not just her smiley face articles). Melanie is, after all, a student of Catherine MacKinnon (see below).

Affirmative Consent Treat
For Ali's Boyfriend

As for Miss Ali above, I feel sorry for her poor mutt of a boyfriend. Imagine him tirelessly and nervously asking her time and time if everything is okay. Can I do this, Ali? How about that, Ali? Do you want me to kiss your butt? Would you mind, Ali? OMG! The very presence of a man like that would freeze my vagina shut. How the hell can either one of them see this as sexy? And how the devil can he maintain an erection if he's focused constantly on getting the AC formula permission thing down straight? I can imagine a bit of curiosity and rules adjustment in the very beginning, but to have to go through this ordeal indefinitely?

It's weird and sick, and it serves only one type of personality, and not one I would own much less defend.

BTW, if I were on the college sex tribunal and looking for opportunities to dig for infractions, I might see the above statement as an admission of sexual assault, and most likely, of many counts of sexual assault. All part of the evidence package, because Miss Ali fails to note here, and in other posts on the subject, that she either seeks or obtains any form of prior consent from her anonymous male partner. Does she, or doesn't she? Surely, if this man were to make accusations of AC-based assault against her, days or months later, Miss Ali would be hard pressed to prove she obtained prior consent for her many acts of sexual behavior, even for so much as a kiss on the finger (which AC philosophy might term "a clear act of sexual violence").

Personally, I think Miss Ali might be shilling on behalf of bigger AC tuna, but who knows.

Dare Disagree With Me
And I'll Label You 

Not surprisingly, the tribe of sex negatives, victim cultists, and Amanda Marcotte (btw who asserts that anyone who disagrees with her on AC issues is "anti-feminist") wannabes are clamoring for the legal and institutional stamp of AC across the board asap. On comment threads and forum boards on Internet these persons pose and prattle about voiding the "male rapist" U.S Constitution, the need for special national sex courts that disallow juries and due process, and last but not least, the widespread and irrevocable prison-hard slam down of AC into the non-college world complete with arm-long lists of codified AC sex offenses--alleged non-consensual hand holding just a misdemeanor (punished only by sex offender registration and a stiff fine).

**** If you think the above sounds exaggerated or ridiculous, guys and gals, think again.

You most likely don't know about a movement by sex negative AC feminists within the American Law Institute to create a new model penal code that redefines a broad array of sexual behaviors and actions (from hand holding to final thrust) as jail-time criminal, i.e., if prior consent by the alleged victim cannot be proved (and of course, it can't). AC cheer leaders just like Melanie Boyd of Yale were lobbying for this with all guns blazing. But they failed. Prominent attorneys and judges in the ALI, many of them legendary feminist women, thumpingly rejected the punitive world of the Melanie Boyds. And who would think--despite Amanda Marcotte's declaration that they must all be anti-feminist, rape culture yahoos to have dared such an opinion!!!

But shucks and heck, like Melanie Boyd says in her Huffington Post article, it's all warm and fuzzy stuff, this affirmative consent apple pie. It's no problem. Want a slice? It's just all about respect for women, right? It's that simple... Right? Hmmmm. Well, I will affirm for the record, that I would never date much less have major sex with a man who did not treat me with respect. But I wonder if Melanie has it straight. I mean, does she have the whole picture here clearly in her noggin? Let's take a quote from the ALI opponents of AC doctrine to get a really good look at the dark side, the side Melanie ignores, the side that accused must face in college sex tribunals or in the feminist affirmative consent-based sex court of the future:

"At every stage of every physical relationship, the “perpetrator” is at risk with no safe harbor of any type. If the initiator got positive agreement “sufficient to show affirmative permission” (Discussion Draft No. 2, Substantive Material, at 54) to initiate a kiss, the initiator is still at risk because the accuser can always counter by asserting, “I didn’t say you could kiss me that way.” If the initiator got positive agreement the next identical kiss because, “I didn’t say you could kiss me twice.” The draft acknowledges that its standard “requires the fact finder to focus on the existence of consent regarding each of the disputed sex acts.” Id. and Section 213.0(3)."

          - American Law Institute Members In Opposition to The Affirmative Consent Penal Code

Yes, "every stage" and "disputed sex acts." And here is the rub, ladies and gents. The warm and fuzzy Melanie Boyds of the world will act as if the above just isn't true. All a myth. 

But in fact, it is true, all too terribly and frighteningly true. 

______________________

An excellent debate wherein Wendy McElroy

exposes fraudulent statistics used to support the notion of rape culture

Compare the words and behavior of Nancy vs. Alexandra below



OMG, dig this AC bozo! The good doctor says it must be verbal?


One last thing, to Melanie Boyd and all the other Affirmative Consenters, young or old, who are trying really really hard to define the behavior of American women in the bedroom according to their own biases, need for control, and psychological issues they have with men and sex in general: 

SEXUALLY ACTIVE AND SENSIBLE AMERICAN WOMEN WILL NEVER VIEW THE KIND OF SEXUAL BEHAVIOR THEY DESIRE, ENJOY, AND FREELY CHOOSE TO PARTAKE IN WITH MALE PARTNERS OF THEIR CHOICE AS A SERIES OF DANGEROUS AND POTENTIALLY VIOLENT ACTS OF CEASELESS PREDATION THAT MUST BE RESTRAINED WITH PUNITIVE RULES AND LAWS.

I am not a follower of Catherine M, Andrea D, or any other role model haters of this ilk. I know how to give consent. I don't hate men or women. I hate assholes and hypocrites, narcissists and control freaks.

And I mean it sincerely.

_______________________

Note the underpinnings of AC below by that dear Catherine MacKinnon:

From http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-rape/

MacKinnon Triumphant - Affirmative
Consent is Her Fondest Dream Come True

"Recent scholarship includes some novel approaches to the legal definition of rape. MacKinnon, for instance, has recommended that a broadened understanding of force (as including hierarchies of power) should be supplemented not by a nonconsent requirement, but by a standard of “welcomeness.” A consent standard, she observes, incorporates gender hierarchy by assuming that men initiate sexual contact which women then either accept or refuse, whereas a welcomeness standard suggests the centrality of “choice, mutuality, and desire” (2005, 243). She explains her approach as follows:

The idea here is not to prohibit sexual contact between hierarchical unequals per se but to legally interpret sex that a hierarchical subordinate says was unwanted in the context of the forms of force that animate the hierarchy between the parties. To counter a claim that sex was forced by inequality, a defendant could (among other defenses) prove the sex was wanted—affirmatively and freely wanted—despite the inequality, and was not forced by the socially entrenched forms of power that distinguish the parties. (247-48)"

The above is the origin of AC. Good luck to those defendants attempting to disprove socially entrenched power presence while arguing the sex was affirmatively desired.

Catherine knows that's impossible. Thus, Affirmative Consent is born and the rest will be history.

FEMALE SEXUAL AGGRESSION STUDIES

(courtesy of Free Thoughts Blog)

Aizeman & Kelley, 1988 – 14% of men (and 29% of women) reported they had been forced to have intercourse against their will

Anderson 1998 – Survey of 461 women (general population) 43% secured sexual acts by verbal coercion; 36.5% by getting a man intoxicated; threat of force – 27.8%, use of force – 20%;  By threatening a man with a weapon – 8.9%.

Anderson, 1999 – 43% of college women admitted to using verbal or physical pressure to obtain sex

Anderson and Aymami (1993) 28.5% of women reported the use of verbal coercion, 14.7% had coerced a man into sexual activity by getting him intoxicated and 7.1% had threatened or used physical force.

Fiebert & Tucci (1998) – 70% of male college students reported experiencing some type of harassment, pressuring, or coercion by a female

Hannon, Kunetz, Van Laar, & Williams (1996) – 10% of surveyed male college students reported experiencing a completed sexual assault perpetrated by a female intimate partner

Hogben, Byrne & Hamburger (1996) Lifetime prevalence of 24% for women having made a man engage in sexual activity against his will.

Krahe, Waizenhofer & Moller (2003) – 9.3% of women reported having used aggressive strategies to coerce a man into sexual activities.  Exploitation of the man’s incapacitated state: 5.6% Verbal pressure: 3.2%. Physical force: 2%. An additional 5.4% reported attempted acts of sexual aggression

Larimer, Lydum, Anderson and Turner (1999) 20.7% of male respondents had been the recipients of unwanted sexual contact in the year prior to the survey. Verbal pressure was experienced by 7.9%, physical force by 0.6% and intoxication through alcohol or drugs by 3.6%.

Muehlenhard and Cook (1988) 23.8% of male respondents had engaged in unwanted sexual activity as a result of threat or physical force, and 26.8% reported unwanted sexual contact as a result of verbal pressure. For unwanted intercourse, the prevalence rates were 6.5% for physical force and 13.4% for verbal pressure.

O’Sullivan, Byers and Finkelman (1998) Overall incidence of 8% of women reporting sexual aggression for the academic year preceding the survey. Intercourse due to use of threat or physical force 0.5%, by use of alcohol or drugs 0.5% and attempted intercourse due to threat or use of physical force also 0.5%. Of male respondents, 18.5% reported having experienced sexual aggression. Specifically, 3.8% reported experiencing unwanted sexual intercourse due to use of alcohol or drugs, and 2.3% reported attempted intercourse due to threat or use of physical force.

Poppen and Segal (1988) 14% of women reported lifetime incident(s) of perpetration (including both verbal coercion and physical assault)

Russell and Oswald (2001) – 18% of women in a college sample reported engaging in sexually coercive behaviors, ranging from verbal threats and pressure to use of physically aggressive tactics.

Russell and Oswald (2002) 44% of college men in their sample reported being subjected to a sexually coercive tactic.

Shea (1988) Women’s reported lifetime prevalence – 19% for verbal coercion; 1.2% reported having physically assaulted a man.

Sisco, Becker, Figueredo, & Sales (2005) – A third of women reported that they had verbally harassed a person or pressured the person into performing a sexual act that the person felt uncomfortable with while roughly one in ten performed a coercive sexual act that would be considered illegal (e.g., sexual acts that involved a person who was unable or unwilling to consent)

Sorensen, Stein, Siegel, Golding and Burnam (1987) Lifetime prevalence rate of 9.4% and an adult prevalence rate of 7.2% for men’s sexual victimization (male self-reports).

Struckman-Johnson (1988) – 2% of 355 female college students reported they had forced sex on a dating partner at least once in their lifetime.

Struckman-Johnson and Struckman-Johnson (1998) – 43% of college men reported experiencing a coercive incident, of which 36% reported unwanted touch and 27% reported being coerced into sexual intercourse.

Where does this research lead us? Most obviously, to the conclusion that female sexual aggression in relationships is far more common than commonly held.

____________ 

More links to our MacKinnon disciple, Melanie Boyd:

Melanie Boyd - Women's, Gender, and Sexuality Studies - Yale ...

wgss.yale.edu/people/melanie-boyd

Melanie Boyd teaches in WGSS when she can, but is primarily housed in the Yale ... In alternate years, she teaches “Theorizing Sexual Violence” for the WGSS ... she has been working on atheoretical analysis of sexual assault prevention ...

I Said “Yes” and I Meant “Yes,” but Dean Boyd Told Me It's Not What I ...

https://callmemiss.com/.../i-said-yes-and-i-meant-yes-but-dean-boyd-told-me-its-not-...

Jun 14, 2013 - Allie picks up the story as Melanie Boyd, a scholar on gender issues and assistant dean of student affairs at Yale University, opines ... away from targeting just sexual violence to thinking about consensual sex,” Boyd said, “and ...

Missing: theory

Yale program to shift sexual assault culture goes beyond rape ...

https://www.insidehighered.com/.../yale-program-shift-sexual-assault...

Inside Higher Ed

Jun 5, 2013 - Making sure students know what sexual violence is and how to prevent it is of course critical on college campuses, said Boyd (whose own ...

Missing: theory

Retooling the Scripts: An Interview with Melanie Boyd - Broad ...

www.broadrecognitionyale.com/.../retooling-the-scripts-an-interview-with-melanie-bo...

Dec 19, 2013 - Melanie Boyd is the Assistant Dean of Student Affairs at Yale, as well as ... Boyd's scholarly work focuses on sexual violence, victimhood, and other ... feminist theoretical models—some new, some longstanding—about sexual ...

Yale considers launching harassment site - Yale Daily News

yaledailynews.com/blog/.../yale-considers-launching-harassment-site/

Yale Daily News

Apr 22, 2016 - Melanie Boyd, assistant dean of student affairs and director of the office of ... co-founder and co-director of Unite Against Sexual Assault at Yale, .... trust in A. This partially explains why Alinsky's theory of People Power and the ...

Melanie Boyd - Huffington Post

www.huffingtonpost.com/melanie-boyd/

The Huffington Post

Dec 17, 2014 - Melanie Boyd works on ending sexual violence by creating a more positive sexual culture. An academic and activist, she believes in putting feminist theory to ... of Women's, Gender, and Sexuality Studies at Yale University.

[PDF]Leadership Exchange: Sexual Violence Prevention on ... - President

https://president.uoregon.edu/.../leadership_exchange-sexual_vi...

University of Oregon

standards for campus compliance of Title lX sexual harassment, examining the ..... theory, and their own rich experiences of campus culture for the assignment. ... c'Today, Yale College ... Melanie Boydis assistant dean of student affairs in the.

[PDF]PRESENTATIONS Addressing Sexual Violence Prevention

www.nyscha.org/files/2015/SexualViolencePreventionSessions.pdf

prevention initiatives are appropriately timed, evidence and theory-based, and address ... Discuss relationship violence, sexual assault, and stalking prevention on campus. ... Melanie Boyd, PhD, Assistant Dean of Student Affairs, Yale College.

Yale moves to combat 'historic' sexual misconduct rates | Daily Mail ...

www.dailymail.co.uk/.../Yale-moves-combat-historic-sexual-misconduct-rates...

Daily Mail

Mar 24, 2013 - Yale battles 'historic' levels of sexual assault at Ivy League school with campus ...Melanie Boyd, the assistant dean of student affairs, told the ...

Yale's "due process" procedures after anyone is accused:

 An independent attorney is hired as an “impartial fact-finder.” That person interviews both parties and tries to gather “any pertinent documents and interview any relevant witnesses.” The fact-finder has a brief 21 days to complete the work. 

The attorney’s findings are then given to a five-person panel. Within five days a hearing is held. That’s the extent of “trial prep.” Neither party can question the fact-finder directly for clarity or confusion. Written responses to the fact-finder's report aren't allowed. Additional documents or evidence in response to the fact-finder's report aren't allowed. In this case, the “cop” is all-powerful. 

There is no right to discovery. There is no right to know of exculpatory evidence. There is no statute of limitations. There is no right for the defendant to confront his or her accuser. The “complainant and the respondent” do not appear together. 

Each side can speak for just 10 minutes. Neither is allowed to call any witnesses – only the panel can do that and if it does, only the panel can ask them questions. The panel votes via secret ballot. Majority wins. 

No explanation is required.

Affirmative Consent Law: "Invading Bodies" and Disputed Sex Acts

Judge Carol McCoy

"The judge found that the university unlawfully limited the plaintiff's right to cross-examine the primary witness against him, namely, the female student who had accused him of sexual assault. According to the university's procedures, a student who is accused of sexual assault does not cross-examine the complainant directly, but rather, submits his questions to the chair of the disciplinary panel that is conducting the hearing, who asks the questions on behalf of the accused. In this case, the accused student submitted 31 questions for possible cross-examination of the complainant, but the chair asked only 9 of them." 

          - Court Ruling on Affirmative Consent Case at UCSD

"Mr. Dixon did describe behaviors that he believed indicated [the female trainer's] affirmative consent during both incidents. He stated that he believed there was affirmative consent because she was "Lip biting, moaning, kissing me back on my neck type thing." He also stated that he believed she indicated affirmative consent by lying naked on the bed while he put on the condom."

          - Overturn of Affirmative Consent Conviction by Los Angeles Superior Court

"Harvard has adopted procedures for deciding cases of alleged sexual misconduct which lack the most basic elements of fairness and due process, are overwhelmingly stacked against the accused, and are in no way required by Title IX law or regulation..."

          - Boston Globe Article re Sexual Assault Policy at Harvard

"The UTC Chancellor improperly shifted the burden of proof and imposed an untenable standard upon Mr. Mock to disprove the accusation that he forcibly assaulted Ms. Morris. He made no finding that Ms. Morris did not consent, intertwined the definition in SOC 7 of sexual assault and sexual misconduct, and made no distinction as to which acts had occurred."

         - Judge Carol McCoy on Reversing An Affirmative Consent Conviction

"At every stage of every physical relationship, the “perpetrator” is at risk with no safe harbor of any type. If the initiator got positive agreement “sufficient to show affirmative permission” (Discussion Draft No. 2, Substantive Material, at 54) to initiate a kiss, the initiator is still at risk because the accuser can always counter by asserting, “I didn’t say you could kiss me that way.” If the initiator got positive agreement “sufficient to show affirmative permission” and did the kiss the right way, the initiator is still at risk with the next identical kiss because, “I didn’t say you could kiss me twice.” The draft acknowledges that its standard “requires the fact finder to focus on the existence of consent regarding each of the disputed sex acts.” Id. and Section 213.0(3)."

          - American Law Institute Members In Opposition to The Affirmative Consent Penal Code

"Here is a rich irony to chew on: At a time when women's political, social, physical, and especially economic powers are at a 10,000-year high, a movement to regulate sexual intercourse in this country is growing, fueled by the notion that contemporary women can't say "no."

          - Copulemus in Pace

"Grounding women’s emancipation, sexual and otherwise, on such a sweeping use of criminal punishment and civil incapacitation (e.g., expulsion from college with a transcript marking one as a sexual wrongdoer)  has led feminist reformers to take several stances typically thought to be hallmarks of social conservatism.  They are seeking social control through punitive and repressive deployments of state power.  They are criminalizing as a first rather than a last resort to achieving social change.  They are affirming indifference to the punishment of innocent conduct. They have moved well to the right of civil-liberties-oriented liberalism in their advocacy for swift and sure punishment unimpeded by due process restraints."

        - Janet Halley

Gloria Now an AC Proponent 

Let's cut to the chase with this issue of "affirmative consent" and the laws it has spawned now taking root in America and growing like unconstitutional weeds from the sex-negative feminist earth. But make no mistake, I'm a feminist, and have considered myself such for a long, long time. I choose sex when I wish. No one crawls into bed with me without my consent. Are you kidding? I am an independent and strong personality, and no one pushes me around. I've fought for women's rights. Having said this, I am not caving in to this new wave of intense, witch-pointing bullying on the part of certain "feminist" groups who are now on news programs and social media calling anyone and everyone a "rape apologist" or "anti-woman" or part of the "war on women" if they don't fully agree with the intent and legal mechanics of affirmative consent and those particular laws that have come into being (and threaten to generate) as a result.

One of affirmative consent's new and foremost spokespersons, Gloria Steinhem--who gives us the now standard marketing pitch for the woman-body-saving rule of "Yes Means Yes," better known as "affirmative consent"--hopes that it will counteract the ongoing "patriarchal" circumstance of "invading bodies." In other words, Gloria (and I am very disappointed by her), and her new affirmative consent associates, are attempting to cajole me into rethinking most of my entire sex life in terms of what they now view as criminal sexual assault. As Gloria says:

Until now, this has been the state of affairs in our nation’s laws on sexual assault. Invading bodies has been taken less seriously by the law than invading private property, even though body-invasion is far more traumatic. This has remained an unspoken bias of patriarchal law. After all, women were property until very recently. In some countries, they still are.

(just to jump in here for a second--you'll learn below that "invading bodies" is code for anything from a behavior as innocuous as a casual hand hold to full blown coitus thrusting)

Even in America, women’s human right to make decisions about their own bodies remains controversial, especially when it comes to sex and reproduction. Until [California passed SB 967], the prevailing standard has been “no means no.” If she says no (or, more liberally, indicates any resistance with her body), then the sex is seen as nonconsensual. That is, it’s rape. Under such a standard, the enormous gray area between “yes” and “no” is defined residually as “yes”: Unless one hears an explicit “no,” consent is implied. “Yes means yes” completely redefines that gray area. Silence is not consent; it is the absence of consent. Only an explicit “yes” can be considered consent.

The goddess has spoken. Only "an explicit yes" is consent. Gloria seems to see affirmative consent as this glorious new sexy thing (read the article until the end), and sure, it could be, just like at the end of Ulysses by Joyce. Yes, yes, yes, and yes, and yes!  But what is the dark side of affirmative consent?

What about the devil in the sexy details that Gloria isn't talking about?

Should I be traumatized now?

Let me ruminate: So all that sex I willingly had and encouraged, according to Gloria, wasn't consented to at all because I had not issued forth with an explicit "yes" after "yes" after "yes." I don't know whether to giggle or be traumatized. Should I be traumatized? Would that be politically correct? Come to think of it, who can't look back in time based on this new value thrust upon us by Gloria and the affirmative consent club and imagine scores and scores of sexual assaults or rapes taking place because we didn't say the word "yes" again and again and again. A new standard, a new viewpoint, a fresh way to be perpetually victimized. Whenever I didn't want sex I just said "no," but I didn't have to say no, as it turns out. I could have said nothing and my silence would have made all my partners into sex criminals.

Think about it, you guys. Just because we didn't say "no" to Bob or Frank ten years ago, just because we silently enjoyed the sex and participated in the act, as well as encouraged it with non-verbal communication, doesn't mean that we were not raped. We were! As of the advent of affirmative consent, we are all supplied with an indefinite amount of opportunities to conceive ourselves, past tense, as victims of sexual assault. Really, it's like having a buffet of sexual assault memory to choose from.

As of the advent of affirmative consent, we are all supplied with an indefinite amount of opportunities to conceive ourselves, past tense, as victims of sexual assault.

The ability for us to engage in such fuck-the-patriarchy or time-for-payback mind games are given special significance by the model sex crime penal code of Stephen Schulhofer of NYU law. Btw, Gloria's language of "invading bodies" above is very very close to the affirmative consent language used by Schulhofer to market and pitch his own version of affirmative consent law to anyone who will listen. Together with certain people in the American Law Institute, Schulhofer is pushing his version of a new America, one wherein "invading bodies" are exterminated by federal and state prison sentences, i.e., hard time behind bars for alleged perps, not to mention sex offender registration, ruined lives, etc. I've written about this perversion of law that turns every act of sex, and every sub-act thereof (including a cheek kiss or pat on the shoulder), into a potential sex crime.

However, Professor Schulhofer diverges from Gloria Steinem on the matter of consent equaling only an "explicit yes." He notes in his penal code--that will criminalize the sexual behavior of millions of Americans, not just college students--that consent can actually be given in non-verbal form. But he stops short of defining it. I wonder why? Seriously, is that fair to the thousands yet to be accused? Rather, he leaves it up to the defense attorney and prosecutor to debate in a court of law--or in a college student's case, he leaves it up to the members of college sex tribunal (the college student is routinely denied legal counsel, or counsel is prohibited from speech during the proceedings).

In effect then, Schulhofer's penal code, as well as affirmative consent law in California and New York, allows nonverbal consent to be whatever the alleged victim and prosecuting entity want it to be. Consider. The accused affirmative-consent sex criminal in college is effectively disallowed from defining nonverbal consent, even in the absence of a clear legal definition. Only his or her accusers have this privilege. To all intents and purposes, he or she is at the mercy of an utterly Kafkaesque circumstance. They can only present their viewpoint regarding what they believed to be consent while the sex crime tribunal at their college decides whether or not their perception of nonverbal consent will be allowed (who wants to take bets?). However, if the alleged victim counters at the time that XYZ behavior wasn't actually consent, in her mind, then the alleged perpetrator is theoretically left without a defense.

The accused affirmative-consent sex criminal in college is effectively disallowed from defining nonverbal consent, even in the absence of a clear legal definition. Only his or her accusers have this privilege. To all intents and purposes, he or she is at the mercy of an utterly Kafkaesque circumstance.

It is my belief, based on the evidence at hand, that the purpose of the college sex tribunal is to do one thing and one thing only: CONVICT. One might say the whole thing is rigged. But then again, doesn't it have to be? Given the reality of judging alleged sex crime perpetrators in order to find them "guilty" using affirmative consent standards forces the process to transmogrify into just the type of Kafkaesque circumstances now occurring in college sex tribunals. Negating constitutionally mandated due process is just one example. The recent court cases below speak to this very loudly.

Three recent court cases in Tennessee and California (UC San Diego and  summation / USC Decision) have vigorously overturned affirmative consent convictions and deemed the college sex tribunal process that props it to be unconstitutional. In fact, the process is so heavily biased towards the accused that it disallows (him) from even questioning the accuser (who sits behind a screen and won't take questions--ostensibly for the purpose of avoiding further trauma). Everyone gets to be automatically so traumatized in college sex tribunal hearings that the accused is effectively hamstrung and dependent on a hostile panel to communicate on his behalf. You would think the presumption of trauma would be tested by a psychological screening test or evaluation of some type by a professional prior to denying the accused his rights--after all, someone who has waited many weeks or several months before bothering to file a sex crime complaint until after she sees her ex-boyfriend with another woman isn't that likely to be so traumatized or capable of being induced to trauma that the accused must inevitably be denied his constitutional right to face his accuser.

One might say the whole thing is rigged. But then again, doesn't it have to be? Given the reality of judging alleged sex crime perpetrators in order to find them "guilty" using affirmative consent standards forces the process to transmogrify into just the type of Kafkaesque circumstance now occurring in college sex tribunals.

Also, btw, the accused under affirmative consent law is obligated to disprove the accusation(s) against him. Impossible, of course, and unconstitutional. But as we know, feminist law philosophy rejects law as infected with patriarchal bias and "unreasonable" from a feminist point of view that wishes to dethrone the patriarchal tyrants who wrote the law in the first place (I wonder if that applies to old divorce torts that favor the woman?).

Therefore, every feminist from Gloria to Eleanor Smeal and beyond is basically coming down against law as we know it. They want serious jail-time penal codes (see Schulhofer and Murphy at ALI) that provide sure and lasting punishment for the accused who must be deprived of "patriarchal" due process in order for their affirmative consent shredding machine to work properly.

_______

'Affirmative Consent' Will Make Rape Laws Worse ...

www.bloombergview.com/.../-affirmative-consent-will-make-rape-laws-...

'Affirmative Consent' Will Make Rape Laws Worse. Megan McArdle. 549 Jul 1, 2015 4:40 PM EDT. By Megan McArdle. a; A. The "tough on crime" posture is ...

California SB 967 makes 'affirmative consent' law - CNN.com

www.cnn.com/2014/09/03/.../affirmative-consent-school-policy/

CNN

Sep 3, 2014 - California SB 967 requires students to seek "affirmative consent" from partners at each stage of sexual activity. How does "yes means yes" ...

Affirmative Consent: Are Students Really Asking? - The New ...

www.nytimes.com/.../affirmative-consent-are-students...

The New York Times

Jul 28, 2015 - “Affirmative consent is a knowing, voluntary and mutual decision among ... New York's law standardizes prevention and response policies and ...

Bill Text - SB-967 Student safety: sexual assault.

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/.../billNavCli...

California State Legislature

Existing law requires the governing boards of each community college district, the ... anaffirmative consent standard in the determination of whether consent was ...

Cuomo Signs Affirmative Consent College Sexual Assault ...

www.huffingtonpost.com/.../cuomo-affirmative-con...

The Huffington Post

Cuomo Signs Affirmative Consent College Sexual Assault Bill Into Law. Reuters. Posted: 07/07/2015 2:03 pm EDT Updated: 07/08/2015 4:59 pm EDT. CUOMO ...

Affirmative Consent Laws (Yes Means Yes) State by State ...

affirmativeconsent.com/affirmative-consent-laws-state-by-state/

Affirmative Consent laws state by state. As state colleges and legislatures enact yes means yes and affirmative consent policy - we'll track it here.

What 'Affirmative Consent' Actually Means | ThinkProgress

thinkprogress.org/.../affirmative-consent-really-means/

ThinkProgress

Jun 25, 2014 - Affirmative consent isn't based on the idea that every sexual ... that California's proposed law isn't that groundbreaking on the collegiate level.

How Affirmative Consent Laws Criminalize Everyone

thefederalist.com/.../how-affirmative-consent-laws-criminalize-everyone/

Mar 30, 2015 - Affirmative consent laws trivialize sexual assault by turning nearly everyone who has ever dated into a sexual offender. For example, if a ...

An Appalling Case for Affirmative-Consent Laws - The Atlantic

www.theatlantic.com/...affirmative-consent-laws/381518/

The Atlantic

Oct 16, 2014 - They're also the value judgments that Ezra Klein invokes in his endorsement of a California law requiring affirmative consent for sex on the ...

The Affirmative Consent Standard & Rape / Sexual Assault ...

sgvnowproject.weebly.com/the-affirmative-consent-standard--rape--sexu...

The Affirmative Consent Standard - You Must Receive a Verbal "Yes" ... Presentation by Dr. Harry Brod, a leader in the pro-feminist men's movement .... that generatepositive, measurable outcomes in populations throughout the world.

What 'Affirmative Consent' Actually Means | ThinkProgress

thinkprogress.org/.../affirmative-consent-really-means/

ThinkProgress

Jun 25, 2014 - Affirmative consent isn't based on the idea that every sexual encounter is a rigid ... The current societal script on sex assumes that passivity and silence ... It's a state,” feminist writer Jaclyn Friedman, who wrote a book on ...

[PDF]“hands off”: sex, feminism, affirmative consent, and the law ...

weblaw.usc.edu/.../11_Subotnik_Final.pdf

USC Gould School of Law

by DAN SUBOTNIK - ‎Cited by 12 - ‎Related articles

See KATIE ROIPHE, THE MORNING AFTER: SEX, FEAR, AND FEMINISM ON .... and defendant adduced no positive evidence of consent, he could be con-.

Sex Is Serious | Boston Review

bostonreview.net/.../feminists-christians-sex-ethics-affirmative-consent-el...

Jan 12, 2015 - Christian conservatives and some feminists agree that sex must not come with .... But would feminist defenders of affirmative consent ethics say the same? ..... It could, however, have negative consequences, including ...

No, California's new affirmative consent law will not redefine ...

feministing.com/.../no-californias-new-affirmative-consent-la...

Feministing

Oct 7, 2014 - But feminist calls for changing norms around sex and consent ... left with is a concept of “negative consent”–an assumption that people are in a ...

Sex-Shaming: The Feminist Weapon of Choice to Silence ...

https://reason.com/.../sex-shaming-the-feminist-weapon-of-choic

Reason

Oct 10, 2014 - But what precisely got Joy's pretty pink "consent is sexy" panties knotted ... when one partner is reluctant and hasn't offered "affirmative consent.

Affirmative Consent As Legal Standard? | - Yes Means Yes

https://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/.../affirmative-consent-as-legal-st...

Mar 19, 2010 - When feminists talk in moral terms about rape, many of us talk about ... I'm certainly not the first person to think that affirmative consent ought to work ......sex detracts from the positive impact that such a restructuring could have ...

__________________________________________

Doctor Brod makes up his own law and demands an explicit "Yes" from us all or else he's going to huff and puff and flunk us for the semester. "You can't trust body language. It's dangerous!"