<p>The “Occidental” case really exemplifies how the whole “consent” issue can get convoluted. The 2 students both admitted that they were “drunker than they have ever been” when they engaged in sex in the boy’s dorm room. Despite text messages whereby the girl texted the boy asking if he had a condom and another text sent to her friend stating she was “going to have sex now”, the boy was expelled from the college when she filed a sexual assault claim a week after their encounter. Occidental’s sexual-assault policy, a version of which is used at many other colleges, says that intoxication or incapacitation “does not diminish one’s responsibility to obtain consent.” So in effect, the college would not consider the fact that the boy was intoxicated and found he was obligated to obtain her consent before engaging in sex with her. He was expelled and is appealing.</p>
<p>Well of course. They are right to believe that. Getting drunk is not a license to rape. I may disagree about whether the Occidental guy DID obtain consent, but there is no doubt that he needed to obtain consent, no matter how drunk he was. </p>
<p>If I was a college administrator, and someone accused of rape said he didn’t have to obtain consent because they were both really drunk, I’d throw the guy out on the spot. Getting drunk is not a license to rape. Getting her drunk is not a license to rape her. </p>
<p>Only if you believe that women are weak and incapable of making decisions for themselves does some of the colleges interpretations make any sense. </p>
<p>I have to admit that this case it is a tough one for me. The text messages were typed coherently and clearly showed an intent for her to engage in sex - and I do think the context of the messages do indicate consent, at least at that time. But then there is Shawn, the roommate who walked in on them while they were engaging in sex. He testified that what he saw was two people having normal sex and that Jane Doe was not resisting and was definitely conscious. He stated he had attended a sexual assault awareness class upon arriving on campus, and knew what he was supposed to do if he witnessed an assault. He said based on what he saw he did not think it was assault. </p>
<p>If your telling is accurate, HarvestMoon, sounds to me like he did obtain consent. She texted that she was going to have sex. She texted him about a condom. To me, that’s clear intent to have sex. What is her side of the story?</p>
<p>She admits the texts are accurate but says she remembers very little of the night. She felt violated and so reported it. It was really the wording of the college’s sexual assault policy that was used to expel the boy. I just can’t imagine that the texts were not taken into consideration, but they were not.
But the boy’s lawyer is using the texts as a basis for the appeal. The incident occurred last Fall so the boy has lost a whole year of school.</p>
<p>The Occidental case was presided over by an activist on a witch hunt, from what I read about it. The texts that were obviously ignored were discovered by the college’s own investigator. From everything I’ve read about it, she enthusiastically consented at the time, and actively participated in planning the encounter. I have nothing but contempt for the “she felt violated” nonsense. She may well have regretted her actions, and felt badly about it the next day, but what she needed to do was take responsibility for her own decisions and actions, not try to destroy another person. But the “the woman has always been raped if she has consumed any alcohol” line gave her a justification for evading her own responsibility. No honor there at all.</p>
<p>A while back I read about he Occidental case and was absolutely perplexed based on the account I read. She texted him, she pursued him and yet he is the perpetrator. If I was the lawyer for the boy I’d be screaming rape. She pursued him and that is in writing. If he had written those texts it would be a slam dunk case. So in my opinion the rules are protecting one class of individuals while ignoring the rights of another class of individuals. Woman can be extremely aggressive not just men as shown by her texts. Furthermore unless someone is just completely wasted out of your mind you can still make decisions. Interestingly doctors consult with their patients who are on pain killers in hospitals. You still can have judgement while under the influence. It does not negate all decision making unless you are drinking to irresponsible levels.</p>
<p>The texts cited in the article I linked in post #20 indicated to me there was mutual consent. He texted telling her to get rid of her friends and come back to his room and she responded with the question about the condom. He replied affirmatively.</p>
<p>It seems to me (and I know that this may be somewhat inflammatory) that there is an idea underlying some of this debate, and it is that sex is something that is done to women by men, even if there is consent. I guess I understand why the most basic biology might make people think this way, but I don’t really think it’s true, or at least, it isn’t always true. </p>
<p>I don’t have a good solution to this problem, which I think is very real. More evidence of the problem of leaving this to the criminal justice system:</p>
<p>I think the idea that because someone is drunk they can’t give consent, is as flawed as assuming that a woman who was drunk couldn’t be raped. </p>
<p>It seems the knee jerk over simplification of saying a woman who is drunk is not able to give consent is demeaning to her. It is just as bad as saying because she was drunk she couldn’t have been raped and was asking for it. Saying a woman cannot possibly be held accountable for their decisions while drunk but a man can is quite sexist.</p>
<p>To say that someone cannot give consent under the influence seems absurd to me. How many wives/husbands and boyfriends/girlfriends would be considered rapists under these rules? Not only that but these rules are one sided. Its up to the boy to figure it out as to whether a girl gives consent but in the age of equality the girl does not have to likewise?</p>
<p>I’m perplexed that she states that she was so drunk yet she was capable of texting, finding his room, and could think well enough to trick her friends in her escape from her room. I don’t doubt that having a one night stand can be traumatic but that alone does not constitute rape. </p>
<p>Our laws were written so that you are innocent to proven guilty beyond all reasonable doubt. The accused boy in this case was not afforded this right. Colleges are not courts and should not act as such. </p>
<p>I honestly believe we are making criminals out of way too many of our citizenry. Changing the drinking age to 21 has not stopped college students from drinking but instead has given many of them criminal records. How has this helped? Has it taught individuals how to drink responsibly? No, instead drinking has gone underground where hard alcohol (Vodka) is being consumed in effort to conceal the illegal activity as it is clear, easy to conceal and is odorless. Students are smart and policies and laws have made it so that they are no longer drinking lower alcohol content beverages but high content beverages. There are always unintended consequences of rules, regulations and laws. </p>
<p>I fear that college-age women are being coerced by campus activism into thinking that not having a good sexual experience is rape. That if they have been drinking it means that the sexual experience was an assault even if the woman wanted or initiated the sex and participated. Right now almost 3/4 of the college settlements have gone to the accused…this is telling but it should also shift the colleges focus on presuming guilt to a more balanced approach…colleges don’t like to shell out huge bucks to settle lawsuits. </p>
<p>That’s right! Women don’t know if they’ve been raped. They just aren’t very smart, are they? Or maybe they’re easily confused by “college culture?” Silly, little things need to learn to lie back and enjoy it.</p>
<p>The way people talk about it, you’d think that the few rapes being reported at all are a matter of women not “knowing” if they wanted to have sex or not. Have you ever had sex when you didn’t want to? Okay. That’s consensual.</p>
<p>Rape is not sex. Rape is somebody taking something. Sometimes violently, sometimes through incapacitation, sometimes just because they refuse to take no for an answer, and assume they have a “yes” unless they are kicked in the groin. No.</p>
<p>The problem honestly isn’t that there is “too much rape being reported,” it’s that most women are too embarrased or ashamed to report that they have been raped. They know that people will say, “Well, honey, what did YOU do to ask for this? Are you SURE you said no firmly and loudly?”</p>
<p>Give me a break. Rape is barely reported and if your “fear” is that college aged women are being coerced into thinking? Think about it again. A woman who has been raped knows it’s rape. And she doesn’t think an unsatisfying one night stand with a lousy lay is rape. She knows the difference. </p>
<p>That story is really hard to read. Read that story if you believe the biggest issue about rape on campus has to do with women being “coerced” into thinking they’ve been raped when all they had was really bad sex. </p>