Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Gormy Cuss

(30,884 posts)
20. The law places the burden on institutions to provide the tools to students
Sun Jun 8, 2014, 01:34 PM
Jun 2014

and administrators to understand what constitutes affirmative consent.

Section 2 goes on to define now invalid excuses like the accused was drunk, or the accused didn't take reasonable steps to assure consent (I'm guessing things like asking someone "Do you want to screw me now?"
for example rather than assuming that a sleeping or intoxicated person is fair game.)

The indemnity against disciplinary action because the assaulted student was breaking the school's drinking policy is a no-brainer. It takes away one of the coercive means used currently by some administrators to dissuade formal reporting of sexual assault.
It's called blaming the victim or in some circles, personal responsibility.

This proposed law wasn't invented out of whole cloth. It is reactive: there are too many tales of colleges working diligently to under-report sexual assaults and to place an unreasonably high standard of proof on the victim.

You seem more concerned about the chance of false reporting than of the acknowledged large problem of unreported sexual assaults and improperly investigated complaints.

"prove they had agreed to have sex" rrneck Jun 2014 #1
It involves using words. Gormy Cuss Jun 2014 #2
Yes, that's certainly appropriate. rrneck Jun 2014 #6
Simply having such a policy will change the dynamic in a meaningful way Gormy Cuss Jun 2014 #7
In the late eighties rrneck Jun 2014 #9
This would be backed by law Gormy Cuss Jun 2014 #10
Great. If it's backed by law then the rules of evidence will apply. rrneck Jun 2014 #11
I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not qualified to answer that evidence question. Gormy Cuss Jun 2014 #13
As I recall rrneck Jun 2014 #14
Keep in mind that SB967 is a bill directed at the institutions and their responsibilities Gormy Cuss Jun 2014 #15
Well, lets have a look at the law in question rrneck Jun 2014 #18
The law places the burden on institutions to provide the tools to students Gormy Cuss Jun 2014 #20
What would those tools be rrneck Jun 2014 #22
Okay, one final time: the law is reactive. Gormy Cuss Jun 2014 #23
Yes, I am aware of my use of pronouns. rrneck Jun 2014 #24
Ah, now I remember... rrneck Jun 2014 #19
Ah, not surprising. That is a very progressive school Gormy Cuss Jun 2014 #21
I like the idea of there needing to be an explicit Squinch Jun 2014 #3
The rapist could say that but I think the point spooky3 Jun 2014 #4
yeah this is a problem, alp227 Jun 2014 #12
Gormy, could you give a link? This is interesting, but I'm not clear on what the law entails. Squinch Jun 2014 #5
Oops! Thanks for pointing that out. Gormy Cuss Jun 2014 #8
This message was self-deleted by its author Gormy Cuss Jun 2014 #16
FYI: The current version of SB967 Gormy Cuss Jun 2014 #17
Latest Discussions»Alliance Forums»Feminists»Bill pushes into college ...»Reply #20