Monday, September 29, 2014

"California adopts 'yes means yes' sex-assault rule"

"Gov. Jerry Brown announced Sunday that he has signed a bill that makes California the first in the nation to define when "yes means yes" and adopt requirements for colleges to follow when investigating sexual assault reports."
"Every student deserves a learning environment that is safe and healthy," De Leon said in a statement Sunday night. "The State of California will not allow schools to sweep rape cases under the rug. We've shifted the conversation regarding sexual assault to one of prevention, justice, and healing."

The bill requires training for faculty reviewing complaints so that victims are not asked inappropriate questions when filing complaints. The bill also requires access to counseling, health care services and other resources.

When lawmakers were considering the bill, critics said it was overreaching and sends universities into murky legal waters. Some Republicans in the Assembly questioned whether statewide legislation is an appropriate venue to define sexual consent between two people. There was no opposition from Republicans in the state Senate.
Link to the text of the bill  "SB-967 Student safety: sexual assault."

59 comments:

The Dude said...

Just two? California? Is that an example of Common Core math?

Unknown said...

If you oppose the over-reaching nanny democrats, you are obviously FOR rape.

Rapists!

Unknown said...

You're all racists and rapists.

Unknown said...

Oh glorious democrats, save us with your laws and your government sanctioned grief counseling.

Anyone watch the NFL and see the parade of Hollywood actors preaching and propagandizing about domestic violence?

I find it disturbing that Hollywood is considered an authority on any given issue.
ugh - our culture is frightening.

Eric the Fruit Bat said...

This comes as unwelcome news.

Now I'll have to do my sexual assaulting in Oregon, or maybe Nevada or Arizona.

ricpic said...

Who says we're far from the point when "lack of sensitivity" will land you in jail? Which of course is the whole point: criminalizing the insufficiently "evolved."

ricpic said...

The point when or the point where? I dunno.

Shouting Thomas said...

Everybody is now a potential informant and denouncer in your most intimate relationships.

Over at TOP, the mistress' inner totalitarian leaps out once again. It's all for your own good.

Read it and weep.

Lem the artificially intelligent said...

We need a Sign language provision to this legislation.

Somebody should hire Jeter to give the steal signs from third ;)

Shouting Thomas said...

Anyone watch the NFL and see the parade of Hollywood actors preaching and propagandizing about domestic violence? .

Feminists have been searching for a way to shake down the NFL for support of their foundations ever since the Super Bowl wife beating hoax.

They seem to have finally struck pay dirt. Big money involved.

Unknown said...

Rape is very important before an erection - er, I mean, election.

Same with full access to Kermit Gosnell.

Unknown said...

It's not just the feminists, it's male dominated leftists in media, too. That elevator video was ecstasy pill for the control freaks. Certainly smacking around girlfriend's isn't cool, but the over-blown response is gross.

The media fall all over themselves trying to one-up each other with OUTRAGE! Meanwhile, how many heads were chopped off today in Saudi Arabia and how may Christians and Jews were killed at the hands of Islam today?

Americans are so decadent.

Shouting Thomas said...

When I watched the elevator video, I saw a woman attacking a man with her fists flailing. She attacked him.

As usual, this has been written off, apparently out of the belief that a woman can't inflict damage.

This is false. Black women are quite often very good athletes and experienced street fighters.

Unknown said...

The response is always "we must do something!"

Really. Why?
(to squeeze and reduce our freedoms and make life increasingly difficult for law abiding citizens to go about their daily lives. Americans cannot be trusted to think or act without nanny state intervention, laws, rules, regulations and Hollywood's guiding influence.)

Unknown said...

She looked as if she came at him, but then he popped her. I'm not going to make excuses for either one of them. It was a mistake. People make them.
He was given a deferment and they eventually got married. She forgave him. Beyond that, how is any of it our business?
Sure, he's in the public eye as a football player. OK. They must do something! They kicked him out of the game. That's rather huge.

The over-reaction by the media/ Hollywood/democrat-complex is so ridiculous, it is pure decadent absurdity.

Unknown said...

Where is the Hollywood response to the Oklahoma beheading?

Where WAS the hollwyood's response to the Fort Hood shooting?

*crickets*

The Dude said...

ST - one can sure understand why they stay drunk over there - can you imagine doing that bint sober?

Amartel said...

Taking a bunch of people who have been babied all their lives, and act accordingly, and imposing yet another layer of instructional coddling, even though they are adults, as if they can't figure out for themselves what is right, and expecting them to grow up.
Finally.
Not gonna happen, nannystaters. What you will get is a bunch of resentful, angry, immature adults who hate each other. Highly manipulable, though. So there's that, which was the plan anyway.

Amartel said...

Governor Brown approves of warrantless surveillance droning. Domestic warrantless surveillance droning. Vetoed a bill on Sunday (!) that would have made it illegal and required public agencies to announce their intent to buy and use them. He feels the bill is too narrow and goes beyond what the state and federal constitutions prohibit. Wants to keep his options open. (The California Constitution provides an express right to privacy. Article 1, Section 16.)

bagoh20 said...

Has anyone ever actually verbally requested permission to fuck? I mean besides some creepy bastard who's just asking because he can't believe he's finally getting laid. The state is now demanding that millions of people do what is unnatural and virtually unheard of. Nope. No overreaching there at all.

Unknown said...

How and why are we even allowed get up in the morning without a waiver?

Save us with your laws, sweet sweet totalitarian democrats.

Ripped from the headlines on tonight's episode of SVU - especially heinous.

Amartel said...

I thought lefties were against the government getting all up in their personal business. Except when it's their government and then, by all (any) means, feel free to snoop and micromanage.

Amartel said...

What if you ask permission and later s/he says you didn't? It'll be he said/she said. (Or he said/he said, or she said/she said. Wouldn't want to exclude.)
The permission will need to be recorded, preferably video-recorded, for future use as evidence in case someone's feelings get hurt. Also, in an abundance of caution, everyone will need to sign a written liability waiver, with the appropriate font size and specific wording, to be worked out over the course of multiple court battles and appeals, so no one can argue they were fooled. Of course, the waiver will need to be notarized and witnessed and filed with the court, along with a Petition for Relations. After appropriate notice (15 days plus 5 days if the petition is served by mail), the court will conduct a hearing at which it will accept evidence and hear testimony from any and all interested parties before ruling on the petition.

Thank you, and please wash out your sippy cups and replace them in the cabinet after use.

Unknown said...

I am surprised TIME, normally a steadfastly pro-democrat narrative pusher, allowed this outlandish opinion to print.

Amartel said...

Yaaaaas. Camille scores again.
Growing up means taking control of the aspects of life that you CAN control, like deciding whether or not to have sex and with whom. Defaulting to "society" (the government) for "justice" (punishment) if you make a wrong choice does not encourage good decisionmaking or maturity and it distracts from vigilance about things you can't control.

Unknown said...

The democrat party has an easier time controlling us if they turn us all into scared Julia-infants.

waaaa I want my bottle!

deborah said...

bago:
"Has anyone ever actually verbally requested permission to fuck?"

Kind of.

Trooper York said...

In every stupid law there is a business opportunity.

A college that only allows men would be the only safe place for men to attend based on the continual war on men by the feminazi's. Or alternatively a religious college with rules and only same sex classes and dorms.

Of course is that even legal? Or will the commie twats sue and force them to let in women who will then have men arrested for looking at them when they have not given them permission.

Trooper York said...

The only answer is to destroy the current system.

Of course it seems that it is crashing because of it's own weight.

Everything should be on-line or commuter schools. Pass a law that outlaws dorms and living on campus and you end all of this bullshit.

deborah said...

"Of course is that even legal?"

If it's a private school, it is. But it will not get federal funds.

Augusta golf course still bars female members.

The Dude said...

"In a historic change at one of the world's most exclusive golf clubs, Augusta National invited former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and South Carolina financier Darla Moore to become the first female members since the club was founded in 1932."

Trooper York said...

Why should any school get federal funds?

Trooper York said...

The government does not allow schools to have a traditional moral code. That was what the Sandra Fluke bullshit was all about.

They want to impose their decadent moral code.

deborah said...

I knew Condie had played there, but I did not know she and another had been invited to be members.

I don't think they necessarily should, Trooper. The US education system is a huge top-down mess, to the point of armed-intervention capability by the Department of Education?!

deborah said...

Currently Western civilization is circling the drain.

Trooper York said...

Education is too important to be left to the professors.

All teachers should be replaced by robots.

We have the technology.

The Dude said...

Time for a cultural revolution - shoot all the professors first. Or is that lawyers?

Or does it matter?

Trooper York said...

Shoot them twice if they are both! Just sayn'

Amartel said...

Hey, stop shooting!
The law's on your side.

The Dude said...

Says the lawyer...

deborah said...

"All teachers should be replaced by robots.

We have the technology."

There is the real problem. My hobby-horse is humanity blending with technology more closely than ever. It's been increasing since the first tool was invented, and now is growing exponentially. I think what makes us human is our use of tools. So that would make blending with ever-advancing technology part of our evolutionary path.

On the other hand, people should reconsider placing their kids in the cookie cutter meat grinder that is public school. Things are super bad there, even the best schools have drugs and bullies and extreme pressure to succeed.

Trooper York said...

The thing is that robots will not molest these poor kids. Which is endemic in schools. Especially colleges.

They should pass a law that every professor that has sex with a student is guilty of rape even if she gives consent. Because you know she would not consent if it didn't effect her grade.

Replace them all with the internet and online course. It will be a lot cheaper. Much less money wasted on student loans. Its a win/win.

Eric the Fruit Bat said...

It's funny how people have strong opinions about ostensible changes in social architecture that have no practical effect on them, whatsoever.

There's an evolutionary explanation, possibly.

But I doubt it.

Paddy O said...

Hey now! This became personal. There are some good professors out there... who need paying jobs.

Although, if necessary, I'm willing to become a bionic professor.

Most faculty that I know have a very distaste for administration, because they're the ones who make more and more rules, increasing the bureaucracy for everyone's life. A lot of administrators come out of faculty, however, so there's always those authoritarian examples who are still professors.

Of course, my experience has been mostly at Christian schools where the policies on sexual activity outside of marriage are: don't do it. So, the California ruling tends to just make it more likely that's what will happen, less doing it.

Personally I think that it's dangerous to trust whether or not consent was given based on testimony of those involved. So, all sexual activity should be signed for in the presence of a notary who can verify such consent and the boundaries which are established prior to said activities. Ideally, a couple would need permission also from the State, sending in their documents and 4-6 weeks later getting an approval in the mail.

Amartel said...

Robot teachers will not molest your kid? How do you know? What if the robot designer was a big sneaky perv? It's not the profession, it's the programming of the particular professionals.

Trooper York said...

That's just the point. If the robots are like Sean Young or Darryl Hannah or especially Joanna Cassidy then I guess it would be fine.

But if they make everyone work off of the Internet then we eliminate that problem. Just sayn'

Shouting Thomas said...

It's funny how people have strong opinions about ostensible changes in social architecture that have no practical effect on them, whatsoever.

This stuff already affects me.

Feminist women in Woodstock are obsessed with this "rape culture" BS. They are also romantically obsessed with musicians, and I am a musician.

I've already had one encounter with a woman who tried repeatedly to romance me on Facebook and tried to create a record of personal involvement with me. She was obsessed with the rape culture BS.

She was clearly trying to entrap me into a relationship so that she could become a heroine of the community by denouncing me as a sex abuser.

When she finally became exhausted with my refusals to be seen anywhere in public with her, she asked me why I was being so mean.

I answered: "I plan to spend my retirement enjoying life, babysitting my granddaughter and playing music, not talking to the police, hiring lawyers and making court appearances."

This shit is not limited to the moron world of academia.

Paddy O said...

"If they make everyone work off of the Internet"

Have you seen the internet?! Talk about a chronic molester.

"Robot teachers will not molest your kid?"

I've seen the new Battlestar Galactica. Robots will definitely molest the kids. That's how they turn them against their human families and then the robots can take over.

Trooper York said...

So? Would that be a bad thing?

I for one welcome our robot overlords.

They have to be a lot better then the Muslim overlords like Barrack Obama and Valarie Jarret.

Methadras said...

Republicans in the state house and senate are nothing but furniture to the democrats. They just show up and get sat on. Not that this law will apply to me, but it is clear that now that California has co-opted the english language, this law will clearly see its tentacles move into other arenas of law. Hell, I won't be surprised if the California bar goes back and looks at prior case law and tries to apply this law to it.

Titus said...

Hi!

Mass is very excited to announce we have the largest % of singles of any state. But by choice, not like youse guys, because no one will do you!

Education, health care, venture caple, thin and now number 1 in singles!

Fab.

Have a super day!

tits.

Amartel said...

Sounds like robot pervert heaven. Or hive . . . .
Dunh dunh DUNH

bagoh20 said...

"It's funny how people have strong opinions about ostensible changes in social architecture that have no practical effect on them, whatsoever.

There's an evolutionary explanation, possibly."


I hear this type of argument all the time from people, mostly liberals arguing why we should change things. "Why not? It doesn't affect you."

Or why we should not do things "why should we care about people on the other side of the f'n world? It doesn't affect us."

Very little of what is wrong or evil in the world affects us. Do we really have the standard that if it doesn't affect our insular little lives then it's not significant? My neighbor beats his wife or a pedophile abuses children, but my first concern should be: how does this affect me, and if it doesn't then why should I care?

It's a very poor argument.

But, it's better than the one that suggests we need state approved relationship advice from Jerry Brown.

The Dude said...

He fucked Linda Ronstadt and now he is inserting himself into the relationships of others.

Cause and effect, just sayin'.

Eric the Fruit Bat said...

It's also funny how some people can be convinced they understand something when they obviously don't.

There's an evolutionary explanation, most definitely.

Trooper York said...

Funny how a gay bat thinks it can comment on heterosexual relationships.

deborah said...

Paddy:
"Although, if necessary, I'm willing to become a bionic professor."

lol would you do that for the good of society?

Trooper, there's always free online learning:

Khan Academy

Amartel said...

"It's also funny how some people can be convinced they understand something when they obviously don't."

So why not just write what you mean? Is it a secret? Do we have to guess the secret? Is the password "bullshit?"

It's also funny how some people can't make a clear point because they're too preoccupied by a burning need to feel superior.

The Dude said...

I'm pretty sure Ol' Moonbeam fucked pre-morbidly obese Linda Ronstadt. They were in a tent.

Now they are past tents.