Do College Students Really Need a Law to Say No to Sex?

How California Democrats are trying to get into your bedroom.

SACRAMENTO — Democrats routinely accuse Republicans of wanting to put the government into the bedroom whenever they support limits on gay rights. So it's odd that California's Democratic leaders are advancing a bill that would literally insert the state into the most intimate bedroom moments.

S.B. 967 would require all California colleges and universities that accept state financial aid to adopt sexual-behavior policies that include a standard by which students must provide their "affirmative consent" before engaging in a wide range of sexual activity.

And a simple "yes" might not suffice. As a senate analysis explains, the bill "requires consent to be ongoing throughout a sexual activity and authorizes a participant, at any time, to communicate that he/she no longer consents to continuing the sexual activity."

The bill, now in the assembly after passing the senate 27-9, also lowers the bar for on-campus sexual assault punishments to the "preponderance of evidence" standard used in lawsuits. It also requires colleges to provide prevention programs and to make services available for sexual assault victims.

The bill was introduced following serious allegations about inadequate campus responses to sexual assaults, but it has invariably invited ridicule — i.e., lots of bawdy jokes about lawyers and video cameras.

But if this becomes law, the ramifications might not be so funny. The bill essentially turns all sexual behavior into a potential sexual-assault unless there is a clear, affirmative series of "stop and consent" moments. (It seems to have been penned by someone with only a textbook understanding of how such relationships usually unfold.)

There's a big difference between a romantic tryst that lacks the requisite affirmative approvals (and perhaps later results in remorse and recrimination) and an assault where one person proceeds against the other person's will.

"Studies show that people who commit sexual violence are almost always aware that what they are doing is against the will of their victims, rather than the assault being the product of 'blurred' communications," writes Hans Bader, an attorney with the conservative Competitive Enterprise Institute, and a vocal critic of the bill.

Bader argued that only the worst sort of consensual sexual encounters typically involve pre-sexual negotiations — like those between prostitutes and their clients, where one party wants the encounter and the other "puts up with it to obtain money or other benefits."

"By codifying the use of the 'preponderance of the evidence' standard in campus sexual assault hearings, S.B. 967 erodes a crucial due-process protection for students accused of serious criminal conduct," argues the civil-libertarian Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE).

By contrast, John Manly, a Newport Beach attorney who represents sexual-assault victims in colleges and elsewhere, likes the lower standard given that it's not for a prosecution, but to remove a potential predator from campus. But most of the bill is about political posturing, he adds, given that it does nothing about university administrators who may mishandle and cover up allegations of sexual abuse on campus.

For instance, 40 students at the University of California-Berkeley allege in three recent federal lawsuits that the university discouraged them from filing sexual-abuse charges, under-reported such claims to the federal government, and treated their situation with indifference.

The right law, Manly adds, would halt state funds to any colleges that systemically covered up such abuses, but he doesn't think legislators have the courage to take on powerful lobbies. The state has still not enacted a law making it easier to remove sexual predators from K-12 schools two years after a horrific case in a Los Angeles elementary school. And that's a more clear-cut matter than this one.

So, instead of confronting the problem directly, critics say the legislature is advancing a bill that blurs the distinction between an assault and consensual sex and is likely to lead to more confusion and allegations about some decidely intimate moments. This bill may be hypocritical, but that may be the least of its problems.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • ||

    requires consent to be ongoing throughout a sexual activity and authorizes a participant, at any time, to communicate that he/she no longer consents to continuing the sexual activity

    You mean like it already is? Whew, it's a good thing that they're going to be generous enough to "authorize" a person having sex to stop it if they want to. Because they couldn't do that before, no sir. Thanks, government! Thanks for authorizing people to do things!

  • gimmeasammich||

    If you do it right, you should be getting consent repeatedly.

  • ||

    "He befriended consented me...repeatedly."

  • DEATFBIRSECIA||

    Problem with that though is that she's repeatedly seeking consent from "God!"

  • ||

    That's when you reply "Yes my child."

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    Ay papi!

  • Rich||

    You beat me to it, Epi.

    The bill "authorizes a participant to communicate" -- FFS!

  • WTF||

    You're being too generous - I bet "at any time" includes the morning after. Or next week, next month, etc., if there are any regrets.

  • wareagle||

    yup...as it is, how many of these rape claims stem from little more than buyer's remorse? It's college campi, for fuck's sake, not like you have to try that hard to get laid.

  • califernian||

    You can safely say "all" them and be statistically correct.

  • JW||

    Thanks, government! Thanks for authorizing people to do things!

    I can't wait to to see the definition of a "safe word" in legislation.

  • Edwin||

    actually guys, I'm going to go one step ahead of this, and say that once you're like in the middle of it, like the MIDDLE MIDDLE with no interruption happening, it isn't reasonable to ask a guy to stop. It's one thing if the phone rings and you both pause and she answers it and then she has to go for some reason, but like in the middle of it? come on, a guy's too excited to stop in the middle of it. you can't claim rape in the middle of consensual sex (for the aforementioned, and obviously evidence-iary reasons)

    and of course the same applies to the women, she could be on top grinding and not want to stop

  • BambiB||

    "" As a senate analysis explains, the bill "requires consent to be ongoing throughout a sexual activity…"

    "Is it okay to open this thing up here?"

    "Yes".

    (30 seconds later)

    "How about now. Can I take this thing out and..."

    "Yes. Yes. Yes."

    (45 seconds elapse)

    "Is it okay if I hold this in my hand?"

    "YES, STEVEN!"

    "And can I put this in here?"

    "YES! STEVEN! YESS! PLEASE!!!"

    "Okay - how about now? Can I peel this thing back here?"

    "JEEZ! What the HELL is wrong with you? YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! YES!!!!!"

    (25 seconds later)

    "How about now? Is that good?"

    "YES!!"

    (25 seconds later)

    "How about now? Is that better?"

    "YES!! It's fine! REALLY!"

    (25 seconds later)

    "How about now? Is that enough?"

    "YES STEVEN! YES! You opened the six pack. You got the can out. You picked up the glass and put ice in it. You've opened the can. Now would you PLEASE STOP ASKING PERMISSION EVERY TWO OUNCES AND POUR THE GOD-DAMNED SODA!!!??"

    "Uh. Well. Okay. As long as I still have your consent because, you know, under the law, consent has to be ongoing."

  • DEATFBIRSECIA||

    In other news: Waiters at Brazilian Steakhouses are now required to stop slicing cuts of meat onto your plate as soon as you say, "Parar!"

  • WTF||

    Man, I love rodizio.

  • Brandon||

    Are you in Denver, or is Rodizio a chain?

  • Plàya Manhattan.||

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodizio

    I think the name is too common to trademark.

  • Brandon||

    Oh.

  • Plàya Manhattan.||

    They have a stoplight at my local Churrascaria. You don't have to say anything.

  • ||

    Which one do you go to? I haven't been out for Brazilian BBQ in a long time.

  • Plàya Manhattan.||

    Samba. I'm planning on going to Fogo de Chao soon, though.

  • ||

    I've been to neither. My roommate really liked Fogo de Chao.

  • Trouser-Pod||

    If you have access-Texas de Brazil

  • OldMexican||

    As a senate analysis explains, the bill "requires consent to be ongoing throughout a sexual activity and authorizes a participant, at any time, to communicate that he/she no longer consents to continuing the sexual activity."


    "To continue coitus, please press right nipple. If you want to stop, please press left nipple.... You have pressed right nipple... If you want to confirm, please press right nipple again, otherwise, press left nipple... You have pressed right nipple. Coitus will resume. Thank you."

  • Raston Bot||

    If you consent, tug once. If you do not consent, tug 200 times.

  • ||

    Real-life california co-ed practice robot sex doll!

  • dpbisme||

    Out-frigging-standing...

  • Suicidy||

    Does that senate analysis apply to fleeing congressional interns?

  • Drake||

    Issue green and red panels?

  • DanD||

    But that would be difficult for the 10% of the male population who are red-green colorblind. And what about blind people? What about blind *and* deaf people?

    Clearly we'll need to mandate weather-proof panels that have multilingual audio and braille cues. For the children.

  • Jorono||

    Can a guy claim he was raped by a woman and get her kicked out?

  • WTF||

    No. Because Patriarchy. Check your privilege.

  • Jorono||

    What about a gay man?

  • WTF||

    Hmmmm...that's a conundrum. I'm not sure which way victimhood and privilege are to be parsed in such a scenario.

  • The Tone Police||

    Any POCs in there? If no, proceed to income tax returns.

  • Jorono||

    So, maybe a black gay man could, but a white gay man could not. Sounds fair to me...

  • The Tone Police||

    It's really empowering to rip away the agency of POCs and women. OBVIOUSLY

  • ||

    A white gay man could but only if he's not rich or jewish.

  • ||

    Unless he's pajama boy.

  • ||

    Unless he's pajama boy.

  • ||

    So, maybe a black gay man could, but a white gay man could not. Sounds fair to me...

    ...and we'll just ignore the 30+% of lesbian women who claim to have been raped by women.

  • Edwin||

    if something isn't penetrating something else it isn't sex, so a lesbian can't rape *TROLL LOGIC*

  • Bgoptmst||

    The first comment of the linked article killed me. The lady is talking about how her boyfriend was raped by his ex-wife. Evidently she sucked him hard while he was sleeping and then rode him.

    Fuck, wish my wife would rape me!

  • Suicidy||

    What if she used a strap-on?

  • Chumby||

    Of course, it's company policy never to imply ownership in the event of a dildo. We have to use the indefinite article, "a dildo", never … your dildo.

  • Rich||

    FTFB: A comprehensive prevention program shall include a range of prevention strategies, including, but not limited to, women’s empowerment programming, awareness raising campaigns, primary prevention, bystander intervention, and risk reduction.

    Emphasis added. WTF?

  • WTF||

    What, you don't have witnesses when you're bumping uglys?

  • Rich||

    This, plus do they intend to *require* bystander intervention? If so, what could *possibly* go wrong?

  • WTF||

    Especially considering how some bystanders may interpret "intervention".

  • Rich||

    But everyone has to *consent*, Samrtypants!

  • The Tone Police||

    IRONY ALERT :)

  • OneOut||

    I woke this AM to find my right hand, without malice aforethought, gently caressing my throbbing manhood.

    Am I required to report myself ?

    There was no prior consent yet I ceased assaulting myself as soon as I woke and saw my wife laughing at me.

    Under this rule is she required to intervene ?

    Needz mor klarity !

  • Suicidy||

    By intervention do you mean an impromptu threesome?

  • ||

    Oh come on, Rich. I love an audience when I'm fucking. Plus it has the added advantage of having bystanders to pull me off if I go into one of my uncontrollable male rape frenzies, as I so often do. To be honest, I learned it from watching Warty.

  • trshmnster the terrible||

  • Tonio||

    Yeah, that's scary. I'm fearing a positive duty to intervene. The po-po and paramedics had domestic violence calls because both parties are likely to turn on you.

  • wareagle||

    awareness raising campaigns,

    out of curiosity, will these include being drunk off your ass at frat house or other things that were once called common sense?

  • Suicidy||

    The act of entering a frat party renders enduring consent with any single and/or multiple partners of either gender if you're a chick.

  • Rich||

    And a simple "yes" might not suffice.

    Sí. Да.

  • Tonio||

    This is what it's going to devolve to: Require each public college (etc) to have a Sexual Consent Registry Officer on duty 24/7. Before having sex you have to report to the SCRO with your intended partner, both show ID (and be 18, and not on any lists), both blow a clean breathalyzer, and both sign a shit-ton of forms that indicate you're both sober, intend to have sex with the other person, etc.

  • WTF||

    Won't work, because consent can be withdrawn at any time.

  • Tonio||

    Yes, true. I meant that as parody. I should have ratcheted it up a notch by requiring the SCO to monitor the activity.

  • WTF||

    Now you're talkin'!

  • Suicidy||

    I can monitor some activity, but no uggos.

  • Rich||

    both blow a clean breathalyzer

    Making sure, of course, that the breathalyzer first consents.

  • ||

    This is what it's going to devolve to: Require each public college (etc) to have a Sexual Consent Registry Officer on duty 24/7. Before having sex you have to report to the SCRO with your intended partner, both show ID (and be 18, and not on any lists), both blow a clean breathalyzer, and both sign a shit-ton of forms that indicate you're both sober, intend to have sex with the other person, etc.

    I honestly expect to see free-sex zones.

    Any sex taking place outside these zones is obviously forbidden and is directly attributable to existence of the nearest male outside any free-sex zone.

    Fences will be put up around free-sex zones to clearly mark their presence and razor-wire will be put atop the fences to prevent accidental movement in or out of the free-sex zones.

  • Rasilio||

    "I honestly expect to see free-sex zones."

    We already have those, it's called marriage

  • Suicidy||

    Not on my watch! I'm not a sex offender. I'm a sex DEFENDER!

  • OneOut||

    Free sex zones ?

    Or sex free zones ?

  • plusafdotcom||

    Is there an app for that?

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

    There is no hypocrisy.

    We like teh gayz but hatez teh privileged menz. What part of this don't you get?

    /prog

  • wareagle||

    this is straight out of Orwell wherein sexual activity was reduced to being for no more than reproductive purposes.

    What is funny (and a little bit sad) is how the left will defend this because rape kultur!!11!, but in the next breath accuse Team Red of being sexual hall monitors.

  • ||

    Well, it's another beautiful example of their projection, so at least there's that.

  • CentristClassicalLiberal||

    It's much easier if you reduce Democrats and Republicans to a single coin with two sides and write them both off equally.

  • antisocial-ist||

    Can't we throw that coin in the sewer already?

  • Beautiful Bean Footage||

    Nooooo, we must support TEAM BLUE, because otherwise, BOOOOSSSSSSHHHHH!!1!1

    /shriek

  • CentristClassicalLiberal||

    If i'm promoting any team then it's team yellow.

  • Suicidy||

    Here us a smile math problem. How many statists need to vid exterminated for all thus kind of bullshit to go away?

  • Zeb||

    this is straight out of Orwell wherein sexual activity was reduced to being for no more than reproductive purposes.

    I don't know about that. I expect the next thing to be mandated use of condoms and BC pills for people not licensed to have children.

  • waffles||

    As opposed to Huxley where sexual activity was only for recreational purposes? I've always assumed a woman described as pneumatic was eminently pumpable.

  • CentristClassicalLiberal||

    Economic stagnation makes people more prudish and culturally conservative. A post pertaining to bisexuality can't be made on Queerty without liberal gays ironically accusing bisexuals of being part of a vast conspiracy to destroy their way of life. Point out that bisexuals are more likely to vote independent or Libertarian and prepare for a gay cyber Chernobyl.

  • CentristClassicalLiberal||

    *more likely to vote independent or Libertarian when compared to gays who are a very solid Dem voting block.

  • sarcasmic||

    Show me someone who is bisexual and I'll show you a homosexual with one foot still in the closet.

  • antisocial-ist||

    I still think Chris Rock had the right pov on this issue.

  • The Tone Police||

    Trog beliefs are troggish

  • sarcasmic||

    Everyone I've known who claimed to be bisexual eventually got their other foot out of the closet and announced they were homosexual. Granted the sample size isn't huge, but the record is 100%.

  • ||

    I think that's just because so many gay men pretend to be bi when coming out, so everyone knows a bi guy who was really gay, but not willing to admit it. I don't know why people think that's an easier route to coming out than just coming out, but whatever.

    I will say the bi guys I've known have usually had a preference for one or the other but still enjoyed the social or sexual aspects of someone of the less preferred sex. They tended to focus on the preferred sex more as they got older. Guys who were more interested in women would generally just fool around "on the DL" and then get married rather than coming out as bi.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    I think that's just because so many gay men pretend to be bi when coming out, so everyone knows a bi guy who was really gay, but not willing to admit it.

    My former college roommate went that route after undergrad. It never made sense to any of us; we all knew he was gay before classes even started. Literally every time we brought a new person into our group of friends, they would take someone aside in the first couple of days to ask if he was gay.

    But on the other hand, I know several people who really are bi. Sure, my first girlfriend is now married to a man, but that doesn't mean she isn't attracted to girls too. Sarc saying there is no such thing as bi is just as ridiculous as those people who say everyone is bi.

  • Suicidy||

    And all hot chicks are ultimately open to doing each other. Which is just normal adult fun.

  • sarcasmic||

    Oh, and arrogant assholes are arrogant.

  • Brandon||

    Please. Nobody's that gay.

  • Zeb||

    I'm happy to define it by behavior. If you have sex with people of both sexes, then you are bisexual. There are definitely people who maintain that style of sexuality for a long time.

  • ||

    I'm happy to define it by behavior.

    You bigoted homophobe! A priest who rapes exclusively boys is an opportunistic pedophile, not a homosexual!

    My "sexual identity" is not defined by the person I'm currently having sex with. No one's is!

  • Suicidy||

    No, they're pretty much gay. You can play make believe all you want, but the truth is the truth.

  • CentristClassicalLiberal||

    Pedophiles are mainly attracted to pre-pubescence. Sure a pedophile can be gay but that's not the cause.

  • The Tone Police||

    Hey, does anybody else hear, "I Got You Babe"?

  • CentristClassicalLiberal||

    @ sarcasmic

    Actually I thought I was gay at first. Explain why my brain responds the same to male and female odors.

  • CentristClassicalLiberal||

    @ Zeb

    Just because you're committed to a blonde doesn't mean you're still not attracted to brunettes.

  • ||

    "requires consent to be ongoing throughout a sexual activity and authorizes a participant, at any time, to communicate that he/she no longer consents to continuing the sexual activity."

    At any time? Any time being a week later?

  • Zeb||

    no longer consents to continuing the sexual activity.

    If the sexual activity is still continuing after a week, I suppose.

    I think that the more ridiculous part there is the idea that a law is necessary to authorize such a thing.

  • ||

    At any time? Any time being a week later?

    AHA! Am I free to rescind *my* consent 9 months later?

  • Dixon_Sider||

    After just having a daughter a little more than 4 months ago (and not being married), I can say: emphatically NO. The state has their hooks in me already, and me and the mom live together and are planning to get married (were before the kid, too).

  • Rasilio||

    Wait, why are we oppressing women by requiring them to verbalize their withdrawal of consent? They could be ashamed or in shock or afraid of the consequences. She should be able to change her mind mid coitus and him just know to stop. Her inability to verbalize her withdrawal of consent is not a licence for the sexual predator to continue raping her.

  • OldMexican||

    And a simple "yes" might not suffice.


    How about a "yes" accompanied by loud and effusive exhortations to a higher being?

  • ||

    Wait, I thought the difference between Dems and Reps was that Dems would have their hands in your pockets but stay out of the bedroom?

    It's slavers all the way down.

  • antisocial-ist||

    Genitals are too close to pockets. They can't resist the urge to control.

  • califernian||

    "It's slavers all the way down."

    +1

  • db||

    They have altered the deal. Pray they don't alter it any further.

  • ||

    'Fuck You' is the magic word.

  • db||

    No big deal, I always make sure.to ask after each thrust, "are you OK? Did that hurt? Are you sure?" Really helps set the mood. So I should be golden.

  • Plàya Manhattan.||

    "it was rape because he was talking too much".

  • Marshall Gill||

    I always make sure.to ask after each thrust, "are you OK? Did that hurt? Are you sure?" Really helps set the mood. So I should be golden.

    Actually, no. How can you prove that the question was asked and answered in the affirmative? I have my wife initial and indicate the exact time, down to the second, on the consent form after each stroke. Only occasionally has the form slipped out of her range between strokes in which case the attorney present will slide it back into position. Once the language interpreter (she might say "no" in a language with which you are unfamiliar) touched the form but the union rep informed her that was not part of her contract. This is not to be confused with the sign language interpreter, in case she attempted to withdraw consent in sign. My wife doesn't sign, but you never know!

  • califernian||

    for American 'liberals', the only thing off-limits is the uterus and even then primarily in the case where an underage girl is getting a secret abortion from medical providers who don't have to inform the parents.

  • Frozen Costume||

    So, when can I have sex?

  • sarcasmic||

    Next time you're alone in the shower.

  • trshmnster the terrible||

    You must either have a sex change, become a eunuch, or become homosexual. Standard God-given penis-vagina sex is strictly forbidden.

  • What's that smell?||

    Listen it's simple the Democrats CAN dictate (hee-hee I said dic)your sex life and your life for that matter because they are Democrats...Duh

  • trshmnster the terrible||

    They're the experts on liberating sex, therefore we should listen to them!

    /derp

  • ||

    Does not using the safe word imply consent?

  • trshmnster the terrible||

    Nope, that's icky roleplaying sex, and the right-thinking Cali legislature will not allow it to continue. No means no, even when it was previously agreed that it doesn't mean no, and "horsecock scalliwag" (terrible safe phrase) really means no.

  • toolkien||

    This was much simpler when short skirts/shorts simply meant she was asking for it. And our Muslim friends apparently are on to something with that head to toe approach. I can't think of a better way to make "no means no" than wearing a tent.

  • Tony||

    One of the more bizarre defenses of this I've heard: "It can be incredibly hot asking for consent. Do you want me to bite your ear? Do you like this? That's sexy!" Honestly I'd rather listen to an evangelical pontificate about sex than ultra-liberals sometimes.

  • trshmnster the terrible||

    You shouldn't be forced by state legislature to lose your voice when having sex.

  • ||

    ^This.

  • Suicidy||

    I would be even happier if all ultra-liberals stopped breathing permanently.

  • Edwin||

    and you wonder why we're not on your side, Tony? Yeah, those ultra liberals are nuts, you just keep denying how deep the cray goes. We have our crazies, but they're few and far between, you liberals just do a good job of pinpointing on them and exploding their crazy all over the news.

    there's one republican here or there who thinks all sex that isn't for procreation is immoral or who wants to ban abortion outright, but like 80%-90% of liberals want us to spend a trillion dollars on green energy, want to raise taxes but especially on the middle class (they all ignore the actual effect of the tax code and focus on the posted rate), want us to have completely unrestricted imigration letting in literally 10 million people a year, do not want to fix our inevitably bankrupt welfare systems and in fact want to expand them, etc.

    Our crazies are only here and there, your whole side is teh crazy

  • Suicidy||

    Maybe their side should not exist.

  • Tony||

    That is ass-backwards and that is why you're stupid for not being on my side. Our crazies overreach on PROTECTING WOMEN FROM RAPE. Sound the fucking alarm. Your crazies overreach on literally everything, are wrong about everything that has a factual basis, and are much more numerous.

  • Daily Beatings||

    The sponsor of this bill, California State Sen. Kevin de Leon, is well known for his ignorant rants, especially with anything anti-gun:

    “This is a ghost gun. This right here has the ability with a .30-caliber clip to disperse with 30 bullets within half a second. Thirty magazine clip in half a second.

    Crazy is still crazy no matter how noble or asinine the cause is.

  • Zeb||

    How about if you don't consent, you say "Stop, I don't consent to this"? Why is that so hard? If you can't stand up for yourself, people are going to take advantage of you. Those people may be in the wrong, but knowing that doesn't stop you from getting fucked when you don't want it.
    The idea here seems to be that you should be able to go out, get drunk, make stupid decisions and be completely passive and expect that no one will ever take advantage of that. That would be nice, I guess, but it will never happen.

  • trshmnster the terrible||

    See, but it's scary to say stop, because of rape kultur!!! Nothing turns a nice guy into a rape machine like hearing the phrase "I don't like that!"

    See, back in the day, if a girl was really passive and picky, she'd not fuck random dudes, because they would do things she didn't like. She'd find one or two guys who did it like she liked and stick with them. Of course, these days that mentality gets in the way of your right to be a skank, so men should go to jail because they prefer to be creative with random strangers and sometimes the stranger doesn't like what they're doing.

  • ||

    Even the Eloi get eaten.

  • Edwin||

    it's not an issue of "if you're not strong enough to raise your voice, you deserve to get taken advantage of", it's a basic issue of the ability to prove claims or not. If you admit you never said no, then for all intents and purposes, you consented. We can't cater to every fickle idiots minor preferences and feelings. If a chick feels like she was taken advantage of, that's her problem, not a legitimate rape charge that society has an interest in punishing

  • GILMORE||

    " As a senate analysis explains, the bill "requires consent to be ongoing throughout a sexual activity and authorizes a participant, at any time, to communicate that he/she no longer consents to continuing the sexual activity.""

    Yes, I recall what that was like in Junior High, when you'd be making out with a girl, your tongue gently probing her lower braces, and she's politely slap your hand away from her left breast, while accepting any gestures toward the right one.

    It was like "Operation"! only stickier.

  • GILMORE||

    Also, does this mean that as a man, I can just say, "now get out?" at any time, and be legally justified in doing so?

  • BambiB||

    You're already justified in that. Bitches be Ho's.

  • Trouser-Pod||

    So, what...no Dream Police parody yet?

  • Brian||

    I miss the good ol' days. Used to be, if some dude was goin' around town all a-rapity-rapin', the men folk would just take him out back and beat him to death.

  • Geoff Nathan||

    Perhaps you don't understand. I once had an anti-rape activist tell me that all men benefited from rape because it kept all women cowed and pliable. Your vigilante scenario doesn't accord with that narrative, so you must be misremembering.

  • Cloudbuster||

    So if she's shouting "Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes!" it might not be out of ecstasy, just contractual obligation.

  • Suicidy||

    No means yes. Yes means anal.

  • Edwin||

    //i.e., lots of bawdy jokes about lawyers and video cameras.

    Who's joking? I seriously intend to get a Kobe Bryant camera in my apartment as soon as I have the money. It has gotten that ridiculous nowadays, and that's nothing to laugh about

  • Suicidy||

    This is all a good way to explain why you're video recording your fuck sessions. For legal purposes. Just make sure they sign the release form.

  • Edwin||

    I figure I'll just say I've had roommates and its a security camera. Of course I won't distribute the videos (I don't want people seeing my naked ass). Plus it's likely to only get a shot of the couch from the TV. Such should be enough to prove consent to a jury

  • Chumby||

    There are four kinds of orgasms:
    (1) GOOD
    "Oh yeah. Oh yes. Yes! YES!"

    (2) BAD
    "Oh no. Oh no. No."

    (3) RELIGIOUS
    "Oh god. Oh Jesus. God."

    (4) FAKE
    "Oh Craig. Craig."

  • BambiB||

    The men on each campus should refuse to have anything to do with any woman who doesn't sign a general "consent to sex" form that says, in part, that consent, once given, is on-going until revoked in writing.

    After the prigs sit home alone for a few months, everyone will sign - and the legislature can suck hind tit.

  • plusafdotcom||

    Well, that certainly puts a whole new spin on the concept of "fucking stupidity."

  • db||

    Oh MY GOD IT'S THE SKWERLZ! They're barking from INSIDE THE WEBSITE!

  • The Tone Police||

    They nuked the whole site. I knew it was a mistake to let the leader of SquirISIS go.

  • Ivan Pike||

    Is reason.com hosted on IRS servers?

  • Raston Bot||

    SKWERLZ UNITE!
    Local 602 of the Reason server.

  • Invisible Finger||

    Or the Local 404

  • db||

    This website is apparently served from the IRS.

  • JWatts||

    Did Reason hire the IRS to manage the backend of its website?

  • JWatts||

    Beaten by db!

  • db||

    Like a rented skwerl.

  • Pro Libertate||

    All those comments will be lost in time. . .like tears in rain.

  • Trouser-Pod||

  • Plàya Manhattan.||

    Nooo!!! All of my witty comments, gone!!!

  • db||

    We will rebuild! We must, for the sake.of humanity!

    It started with a time discontinuity,and the spacetime fabric began to unravel at an ever-increasing rate until all of HR was subsumed. I take it as proof that Warty Hugeman exists and wants us to be perplexed.

  • Doctor Whom||

    Soon, monsters will start appearing all over Cardiff, and the only way to save humanity will be to have sex with a searingly hot member of a British secret organization.

  • ||

    I thought that was what SCORPION STARE was for. Because you just described CASE NIGHTMARE GREEN.

  • Hugh Akston||

    You think it's bad for you? I finally got nicole to admit that Ezri is better than Jadzia!

  • The Tone Police||

    not even in the Terran Empire, Hugh.

  • ||

    Nobody even got to see me post a picture of Doutzen Kroes for Hugh's benefit.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Was that in response to my assertion that Dutch women grow better mustaches than Polish men?

  • ||

    No, it was to Playa's assertion that you wouldn't want to go to Europe to bang a bunch of Dutch dudes, which I find incomprehensible, but am willing to work with.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Playa is correct. There is no picture you can post that would trigger my "hey I should travel there" response.

  • Trouser-Pod||

    So, we seem to have two memes for this snafu.

    I give you the perpetrator

  • sarcasmic||

    Doomsday prepper father accused of plotting to kill federal agents and stockpiling guns and explosives for the 'end of days' ... only for FBI to raid his home and find only food and five legal firearms in safe
    Martin Winters, 55, of Valrico, Florida, had been under government surveillance since October
    He was charged with building destructive devices
    Winters ran from authorities on Monday when they presented him with a search warrant
    Investigators believed he had over 50 assault rifles and several explosives buried on his property
    They found barrels of food
    Winters surrendered on Wednesday and was arrested
    He daughters have defended their father, saying he is not dangerous
    They claim he was preparing for an emergency lockdown-type situation


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new.....-food.html
    Paranoid nutter fears government is out to get him! Government proves him right!

  • db||

    It is the government that is paranoid now.

  • sarcasmic||

    Sexy senorita Heather Graham, 44, makes a splash in black bikini as she frolics in sea on Mexico break


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs.....break.html
    Not bad for 44. Not bad at all.

  • MasterDarque||

    Personally I think we should only be allowed to fuck in state monitored facilities just to be on the safe side. New federal job sex affirmation analyst. GS15 to start. Sign me up baby.

  • sarcasmic||

    'In the event of an emergency, the cabin crew will be the ones carrying the liquor kit': Extravagant male flight attendant's hilarious safety speech takes web by storm


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new.....storm.html
    It's worth checking out. That attendant is flaming so hard I'm surprised he doesn't set the plane on fire.

  • Paul.||

    My body, CALPERS' choice!

  • ||

    HOLY SHIT IT'S COMMENTER DOOMSDAY.

    I say we grab all our guns, take off to Montana or alternately Sloopy's new place in VA and draw straws for who has to be dinner.

    Or, alternately, ask them to raise the bar this year for the Drowning The R webathon so they can hire an IT guy.

  • Jerryskids||

    There's a big difference between inserting yourself into someone else's business for good reasons and inserting yourself into someone else's business for bad reasons. It just so happens that all my partys reasons are good and all the other partys reasons are bad. I have no idea what those reasons are, mind you, but that's the nice thing about belonging to a party - you don't have to actually know the reasons to know whether they're good or bad.

  • db||

    God that would be horrible to witness. People don't just break when they hit, they rupture.

  • cyrus765||

    its awesome,,, Start working at home with Google. It’s a great work at home opportunity. Just work for few hours. I earn up to $100 a day. I can’t believe how easy it was once I tried it out. www.Fox81.com

  • dorothy||

    i like this topic. this is very thrilling that we have no law
    doragames

  • Michael Ejercito||

    The bill was introduced following serious allegations about inadequate campus responses to sexual assaults


    the only appropriate campus response is to cooperate with the police.

    Graham Spanier is no longer President of Penn State because he thought he and his people can handle accusations of rape without involving outsiders.

  • GILMORE||

    My clock is running backwards....

    and my god, you're all so *young*!?

  • JW||

    YOU MANIACS! YOU BLEW IT UP! OH, DAMN YOU! GODDAMN YOU ALL TO HELL!

  • MasterDarque||

    Personally I think we should only be allowed to fuck in state monitored facilities just to be on the safe side. New federal job sex affirmation analyst. GS15 to start. Sign me up baby.

  • sarcasmic||

    NY woman, 34, nearly kills her neighbour after hurling herself to her death from 16th-floor apartment as he walked below

    Samantha Cohn jumped from a building on Manhattan's Upper West Side on Thursday morning and nearly crushed Matt Kovary
    The Julliard graduate was a Pilates instructor with a love of fashion
    Kovary said she fell 'at his feet' and it sounded like 'a loud explosion'


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new.....tment.html
    What was the last thing to go through her mind? Her ass.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement