Coastal Carolina University Thinks All Drunk Sex Is Rape: Requires Sobriety, Enthusiasm

Colleges don't understand consent.



Anyone who still believes that affirmative consent policies don't mislead students or restrict their sexual autonomy should visit Coastal Carolina University—where consent can only be given when all participants are both enthusiastic and sober.

That's right: a simple "yes" is not good enough from the standpoint of CCU administrators. Students who want to hook up must agree to each and every sex act beforehand, they must express consent enthusiastically, and they must be sober.

The university's definition of consent is at odds with the legal one—as well as any common sense understanding of how sex happens. If complete sobriety were required before every sexual encounter, than any person who was even slightly drunk could be branded a rapist. In fact, it's incapacitation that renders consent invalid, not mere intoxication.

This reality—and much else—is lost on CCU.

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education recently took notice of some outdated posters advertising CCU's consent policies; the poster proposed the following scenario: prototypical college students "Jake" and "Josie" got drunk before they had sex. "Josie could not consent," insisted the poster. "The next day Jake was charged with rape."

The gender disparity here is obvious: why would Jake be charged with rape, but not Josie? Of course, neither should be charged with rape, since drunk sex is not a crime. Incapacitated sex is a crime.

A spokesperson for CCU explained that the posters have been updated. But the new one isn't much better: It still asserts that consent must be "enthusiastic" and "sober."

FIRE's Colin Crossman wonders whether a simple "sure," is enthusiastic enough to signal consent under CCU's policy:

One might think that simply receiving an affirmative response to a sexual entreaty would be sufficient, but according to CCU, the consent must be "enthusiastic." This makes it virtually impossible for students at CCU to know if the consent they have received is sufficient to satisfy the university. If you heard "okay," or "sure," have you received consent? Or must your advances be so irresistible that you hear nothing short of "Yes! You are so amazing; take me here and now!" Are you willing to stake your academic and professional future on the answer to that question?

I emailed CCU's president to ask if the university really meant to suggest that all drunk sex constitutes rape. If he responds, I will post an update.

In the meantime, I would advise CCU students to be careful about combining alcohol and sex, even though almost everyone else does.

NEXT: Is the NYC Lawmaker Leading the Charge Against Uber Getting His Information on the Company From Random Google Searches?

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 or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Are you willing to stake your academic and professional future on the answer to that question?

    Yes! I am so amazing; take me here and now!

    1. I can remember a few encounters that began with: “oh, what the hell”!

  2. It’s like we’re living in some Ayn Rand cartoon world.

    How is this possible? How have things gotten like this?

    I try to listen to passionate people in my profession and 90% of what they say doesn’t have any meaning whatsoever- and the last 10% is evil if taken to it’s logical conclusion.

    1. Part of me thinks that this is simply overblown hysteria on the part of the media, and that the vast majority of colleges aren’t doing shit this stupid.

      But then I miss Reason for a few days and come back and my theory gets shot full of holes.

      1. Even if the “vast majority of colleges ” weren’t this insane, what does it say that even one college would be this crazy? I mean somebody said “If you’re drunk you can’t consent” and nobody piped up and said “bullshit, I consent while drunk all the time, drunk isn’t incapacitated”. That means everyone understood that the crazy was in charge.

    2. I try to listen to passionate people in my profession

      So, you’re a psychiatrist?

      A theater critic?

      1. librarian. i meant, i try to listen to other people in my profession who are passionate.

        1. I’d settle for a just naughty one.

          1. “just a naughty one”

        2. librarian

          I dated a librarian (in training via college) back 15 years ago or so and had EXACTLY this argument with her. She said quite plainly that if a woman and man are drunk when they have sex, the man raped her. We were on a long walk and I talked over and over with her about this.

          Her: Wouldn’t you agree that having sex when drunk is a bad idea?
          Me: Well I would certainly think people’s judgement is impaired
          Her: Then why should the guy be allowed to have sex with a woman whose judgement is impaired?
          Me: Because his judgement is impaired too?
          Her: That’s no excuse
          Me: So why does a girl get a pass on her judgement but the guy does not?
          Her: Because he should not be making that judgement. Wouldn’t you agree that having sex while drunk is a bad idea?
          [repeat ad nauseum]


          1. You broke things off immediately I hope?

            Otherwise it isn’t her judgement that I call into question.

    3. How is it possible? Ask the parents of daughters. They’re part of the problem, IMO. And with the % of females going to college eclipsing males, expect it to continue.

      1. yep.

      2. Parents of daughters are the worst.

        Some dirty boy is going to fuck the shit out of your daughter and she is going to be a willing participant. Get over it.

        1. Parents of daughters are the worst.

          I think the generally heightened level of parental protectionism has only exacerbated the problem.

          I’d like to think that the parents of daughters needn’t clean their shotguns when my boys show up if they knew that I’d break thumbs and/or officiate a shotgun wedding if the situation warranted. My boys will certainly show up with that understanding implied, if not explicitly stated.

    4. It’s like we’re living in some Ayn Rand cartoon world.

      Really. In Ayn Rand world, rape would be mandatory.

    5. You know HR is a gendered sector, right? Over 80% women. And you’ve seen all those job ads looking for people who are passionate about their work? Not skilled or experienced, mind.

      Well, those are the ingredients that go into the witch’s brew being forced on us. And here we are.

    6. The sex scenes I’ve read in Ayn Rand novels seemed like concentual rape fantasies.

  3. “One might think that simply receiving an affirmative response to a sexual entreaty would be sufficient, but according to CCU, the consent must be “enthusiastic.”

    So… to be safe… only fuck cheerleaders?

    1. Pic?

        1. That photo is about 1/3 acceptable.

    1. I suppose the Chanticleers have blue balls.

      1. Well, based on their policy, do you blame them?

        By the way, have you ever seen rooster testicles?

        1. I don’t know why people are surprised when I name check you regarding that chicken fucker video.

          1. You make it sound like a:) I was in that video, b) I haven’t linked to the videos of the guy fucking a snake or the guy getting a blowjob from carp.

            1. Oh man, the guy fucking a snake. That’s some transgressive performance art.

              And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

              He’s bruising something all right.

            2. So I’ll have to revisit this thread from my home computer then.

  4. This is exactly why I never drank in college and totally unrelatedly never had sex.

    1. Would you like to come over for a beer?

      1. Have you got any ‘ludes?

        1. He’s trying to lure Hugh, not Nicole over to his house.

          1. Qualudes: the consentmaker.

  5. is there some contest within academia to see which school can create the most stupid and legally illiterate means of pretending to prevent sexual assault?

      1. Title IX probe


        1. I’m going to assume that’s consentual.

          1. That’s the problem with you rapists – you *assume* its consensual.

            1. That’s a specific application of the general problem with men: rapists, all of them.

      2. it’s March Madness for SJWs.

        1. A social worker at our hospital always has a copy of “Therapist” magazine on the shelf as you walk into her office. Times being what they are, and not wanting to be reported for sexual harassment, I always have to refrain my urge to say, “Why do you subscribe to ‘The Rapist ‘ magazine?

      3. I checked to see if Penn State was on the list, and I was not disappointed.

        1. Though a little checking shows the investigation isn’t related to Sandusky.

          The department did not cite the Sandusky case in its announcement, although the university used the Sandusky effect as context when it publicized the 2012 Clery Act report in September. The university had said some of the sex offenses reported in 2012 occurred from the 1970s to 2011.

    1. They aren’t trying to prevent sexual assault.

  6. Is great as long as everyone is stone cold sober, everyone has a permission slip on file with the Dean’s office, and nobody has any fun.

  7. The current narrative is that colleges are rape factories. Why is this move surprising?

    1. Rape factories that everyone should be able to attend for free.

      1. Exactly – why should I pay to be raped? I should get raped free of charge.

        1. STEVE SMITH can arrange that.

  8. lets charge everyone involved in drunken sex with rape. Problem solved.

  9. This type of legislation is already law in the state of California–for everyone, not just college students. Expect these types of infantilizing laws (for women, at least) to become the law of the land in the years ahead. You have been warned!

  10. Something something rape or incest.

  11. My advice is for guys to start responding with an enthusiastic “Nah, not right now”. A small part of me wants to believe that when women realize they can’t just have fuck toys whenever they get randy things might change a little bit.

    1. I doubt men, as a group, have the self-discipline necessary for a reverse Lysistrata. Not even counting the opportunistic lesbianism factor.

      1. So, prior to the survey, the prevailing opinion was that more education = more sexual experimentation. The working assumption being that dumb people were less sexually curious?

      2. Don’t men, as a group WANT to witness some opportunistic lesbianism?

        Also, who do you charge with rape if two drunk women have sex with eachother, unenthusiastically?

        1. Both.

          There is *always* a victim.

        2. The guy with the video camera.

        3. No, because women can’t be victimizers. And without a victimizer there is no victim.

          1. Incorrect. In many cases, society and/or culture and/or the institution is the victimizer.

            1. Easy. Charge the most proximate male. Even if he may not technically be 100% guilty in this particular case, he is rapist and so justice is served. We must focus on the larger truth of rape culture and not get caught up in mere facts.

      3. It’d be a lot easier when you’re expelled from school or in prison for rape…

    2. My girlfriend didn’t talk to me for a full day after I refused to turn off Mad Men and perform a sex act on her this last Sunday afternoon. I told her to wait 20 minutes for it to be over, but that wasn’t good enough. So, in this scenario who is the victim and who is the perpetrator? I think I already know the answer, but I hope I’m surprised.

      1. My wife and I have been together for 26 years, shitstorms happen. We’ve gone several days without talking to each other. The sex is always pretty great afterwards.

        1. Never enjoyed ‘makeup sex.’ Just like I’m slow to get riled I’m also slow to forgive. We did have sex after making up but I didn’t enjoy it as much as I usually do.

          1. This, I was never down for the makeup sex

            If we’re fighting it is pretty good odds I’m pissed and when I’m pissed sex is the last thing on my mind

      2. Look, King Lear I could understand, or Blues Brothers, but Mad Men?

        1. Hey, it was the finale of Season 6! I’d only seen it once, my memory was fuzzy, and I wanted to see how it ended. Besides, it was only 20 more minutes…

          1. Multitasking dude.

            1. Comma not included.

    1. Is Robby the one in the bikini?

    2. the guy on the left could almost be him a few years ago.

      1. Throw a puka shell necklace on him, and I won’t be able to tell the difference.

        1. Now I’d like to know what that green liquid is that they are drinking out of unlabeled bottles.

          1. Could be Mountain Dew and Vodka, which is blasphemy. I never mix business and pleasure.

            1. I would have thought HnR-ers would’ve recognized absinthe when they saw it!

              1. Too yellow to be absinthe. I’d guess urine after someone took a hefty dose of Vit B6 or B12 (I can’t remember which one makes your pee so bright).

                1. Always with the watersports with you!

                  1. What of it?

              2. That’s a lot of absinthe.

            2. I never mix business and pleasure.

              Full bottle on front of me;
              time to roll up my sleeves
              and get to work.
              And after many glasses of work,
              I get paid
              in the brain.

  12. The “entusiastic” part is both dumb and insulting.

    Yes, good sexual experiences will generally involve two (at least) enthusiastic participants. But people have sex for lots of reasons. And even if some of those reasons aren’t entirely wholesome, they aren’t illegal. There are plenty of reasons why a person of either sex might decide to have sex even though they aren’t entirely enthusiastic about it.

    1. There are plenty of reasons why a person of either sex might decide to have sex even though they aren’t entirely enthusiastic about it.

      Exactly. It’s like eating, or going to the bathroom.

    2. Huh. You know my wife and I don’t always get over the enthusiastic consent barrier. Sometimes she wants it and I do it because I love her. Sometimes it goes the other way. Sometimes we’re both enthusiastic.

      1. Yeah. I think that’s kind of how it’s supposed to work. People do like to do things for the people they love.

        I think that the whole enthusiasm thing is aimed at stopping people pressuring people for sex until they reluctantly consent. Which does happen. But that’s still consent unless there is some threat or “implication” (as Denis Reynolds might say). If someone won’t leave you alone and you don’t like it, go somewhere else or kick them out if you are at home. If they still won’t leave, then you are being assaulted. It’s just ridiculous that it is some great burden for someone to say “no”.

        1. Nah, nah, its not dark. You’re misunderstanding me bro. If the girl says no, then the answer is obviously no.

  13. Malice or stupidity?

    That is, do they not want girls having sex, or do they not realize that voluntary consumption of alcohol is some people’s way of quieting the voice of guilt so they can do what they’d like to do but for that guilt? And that this is especially so for women, so this is basically standing athwart female sexuality, yelling “Stop!”

    1. did you get consent before standing athwart?

    2. standing athwart female sexuality

      Nice album name.

      1. Nice band name.

    3. I think the sole purpose of these types of rules/laws is to take power away from men and give it to women. We all know one of the core tenants of Progressivism is payback and revenge. The young men of today must pay for the ‘crimes’ of their grandfathers. That’s the only explanation that makes sense.

      1. Perhaps they’re trying to restore to snatch some of the value it lost when The Pill came into common use.

        1. Heh. You said “snatch.” Heh heh.

          1. Should I have said “lady parts”, or “intimate zone”?

            1. I’ve always liked “naughty bits.”

              1. That’s much better than my vulgar choice of term. Henceforth, it shall be “naughty bits”.

            2. Muscle tunnel.

            3. Lady Pocket.

      2. I think it’s more that there’s a certain type of woman who wants to ruin it for all the other women.

      3. Another explanation, not very different from yours, is that it is based on rabid misandry. The really active feminazis are mostly rabid lesbians, and they hate men.

        Both our theories do explain these lunacies. It makes perfect sense when viewed through the lens of hate.

  14. That picture looks like a still from a bisexual porno. I’d love to read the Google Search History for Reason writers.

    1. Let me tell you, you would not want to see my Stock Photos search history. “Sad children,” “more sad children,” “more sad children + crying,” is only the half of it.

      1. Please, this is in my Youtube watched history. I’ll wrek u m8, I swer on me mum. You filthy prio hacking mutube player. Let me tell you, Xxx_HM_xxX is the best 420 dank meme noscoper you will ever see in these comment sections. Nevertheless, for the effort, I tip my fedora to you, sir. Smoke weed every day!

        1. Heroic, every time you link something I am both horrified and glad that you’re in the academic system.

          1. Indeed. Would you rather have our children learn of ‘looner fetishists out there on the streets?

            I think not!

  15. Sounds like you could make some money offering off campus romper rooms when the bars close.

    1. You could call them “safe spaces”.

  16. How does the policy cover a situation where I’ve got sober girls around me but they be actin’ like they drunk?

  17. Semi related: When my brother was a freshman at Yale, they had a party in the dorm and the genius in charge bought a keg of non-alcoholic beer.

    People still banged.

    1. See above.

  18. Seriously, are you trying to protect students from having “RAPIST” on their record? If so, more power to you.

    Or are you saying that students at residential colleges should be allowed to engage in any sexual activity which isn’t criminal? Because as a landlord and pedagogue, a university need not be confined to the bounds of the criminal law. They can impose (OMG HE’S ACTUALLY GOING TO SAY IT!) parietal rules and other rules in favor of responsible behavior (OMG HE SAID IT!).

    1. a university is a school. It’s not a parent, it’s not a baby-sitter, it is sure as hell not a law enforcement agency.

      1. Of course not, the real-world cops and courts should enforce the law.

        The college should enforce its rules which go beyond legal requirements – eg, academic honesty, parietal rules, etc.

      2. It’s not a parent, it’s not a baby-sitter,

        In the case of private institutions, Gott v. Berea College came to the opposite conclusion.

        1. rules gain moral authority from being reasonable and from some grounding in morality, not because some court offered its version of FYTW, which is pretty much what that ruling reads like.

          1. Which is fine. However, outside of the Universidad Francisco Marroquin in Guatemala, boards of college trustees don’t have the luxury of getting their natural rights on.

      3. Also, let’s not even get into the question of whether universities are competent enough to actually manage those policies correctly.

        Spoiler alert: When said institution is pursuing kangaroo courts against accused rapists they’re not competent enough. That, and I know university environments. Will never happen outside of specifically religious institutions.

    2. Proggies say education is a right, just like the right to get a gay wedding cake from a Christian bakery. Private businesses are public accommodations and therefore cannot deny someone their government-granted rights. This goes against everything they claim to believe, but that’s not so surprising, is it?

    3. You are suggesting we go back to the “old school” rules that were pretty much abandoned in the 60s. Segregated dorms, no cohabitation, and students expelled for exhibiting loose morals.

      There may be good arguments for that, but students fought long and hard to be treated like adults. Perhaps they really aren’t up to the responsibility.

  19. This is not about making campuses safe. It’s about liability. The college is afraid they’ll be sued if they don’t have a draconian policy, so they have a draconian policy.

    1. First, woodchip all the lawyers.

    2. I think they’re far more likely to get sued for these ridiculous rules. Far more likely. After all, they don’t control what the kids do, and I think most schools are already very restrictive about alcohol consumption. There is already a system in place for prosecuting criminal and civil complaints.

    3. This is about power for radical feminists. They’ve probably convinced the university it’s a liability issue, but it’s really about power.

  20. How are these silly rules enforced? Do women get kicked out for taking advantage of drunk men? If the answer is virtually never, there’s a case to be made for institutional discrimination, as the issue of consent is not inherently a gender-based one.

    1. Universities which do no expel drunken, whoring women are violating Title IX?

    2. It’s one of the ongoing tensions in higher education: women are the equal of men in all ways but are also weak and pliable and need to be protected from men.

      1. Oh, I get the bullshit identity politics, as much as a sane person can understand them, anyway. But, as a matter of law, this is highly suspect and discriminatory territory.

      2. Plus, a single allegation from a woman can get a man expelled and possibly arrested. There’s nothing a man can say against a woman (in college or otherwise) that has a commensurate effect. Equality indeed.

        1. You know, some evil plaintiffs’ attorney is going to sign up about fifty male clients and have them push claims of non-consent. When the university treats those claims like bullshit, then evil plaintiffs’ attorney’s dream of a deluxe apartment in the sky will be realized when he sues the fuck out of the university.

          1. I hope you’re right. And I will have ZERO sympathy for the university if that ever happens. The recent ruling in San Diego gives me some hope this insanity is approaching a breaking point. Because if they can impose these rules on college kids the next step is to impose them on everyone (as California has).

            1. Well, humanity has had a good run. Might as well stop breeding now and let the next species step up to the plate. Squirrels? Perhaps other primates?

              1. Probably whatever that thing is that’s living on top of Trump’s head.

                1. That thing is living? I’m scared now. Really scared.

              2. Extraterrestrial reptiles, if Mr. Lizard is to be believed…

          2. It is happening already. There have been several cases of individual students, having been expelled and stigmatized for sexual impropriety based on kangaroo court hearings. Some pretty fat settlements, and lawyers buying new boats.

            I’m not a great fan of our sue happy culture, but that appears to be the only way we can correct these abuses.

            Sue, baby, sue!

          3. “…some evil plaintiffs’ attorney…”
            Did you have someone in mind?

    3. …the issue of consent is not inherently a gender-based one.

      Well if the people who make the rules point-blank disagree with that assertion, then any hypocrisy goes away.

      1. They’ll probably attempt an end run by expelling gay men. See? Not discrimination!

    4. Do women get kicked out for taking advantage of drunk men?

      Hahahahahaha! Heh, heh!. (Snort.) (Giggle) (Recovering breath:) That’s a good one.

      Wait a minute. You were serious?

      1. Nope, men get kicked out for being taken advantage of by women while drunk. See: Amherst.

  21. If intoxicated sex= RAPE!, then shouldn’t bars be illegal?

    That’s the whole point of them right? If you just want to drink, it’s cheaper, easier, safer,and more comfy doing it at home.

    1. Shouldn’t booze be outlawed (again) too?

      1. Yes. Yes. Absolutely.

        /El Chapo

    2. Also is getting high automatically mean non=consensual? Bad news for pot legalizers.

      1. In California any intoxicant (booze, weed, prescription drugs) renders a woman’s consent null and void.

  22. “where consent can only be given when all participants are both enthusiastic and sober.”

    They’re just getting around to making sure that the consent was consensual.

    1. You wouldn’t *believe* the perversions that go on at the Teetotal Undertakers’ Convention.

      1. All fully in compliance with relevant policies.

      2. That was even more disgusting that I intended, yea me!

    2. I would agree with you, if both drunk parties were prosecuted. Otherwise, it is completely discriminatory and illegal, as well as heinously immoral.

  23. If complete sobriety were required before every sexual encounter, than any person man who was even slightly drunk could be branded a rapist.


    If he responds, I will post an update.

    Don’t hold your breathe Suave, maybe if you’d gone to Columbia Journalism School you’d be worth responding to, but you didn’t.

  24. ‘Thank you all for your candid responses on our questionnaire. Based on the results, Barry and Rebecca you are cleared for state sanctioned fornication. You have 12 minutes before the contract expires.’

    1. That reply would arrive 3 weeks after the 12 minutes were said to have expired.

      1. Having worked as an academic at a major university, I rather suspect that the last people on the entire planet you want judging anything are professors and university staff. Crap, the professors are trying to get their students drunk for sex probably as much as the students are doing it to each other.

        1. Thankfully I never had any attractive profs at college.

          I did have a couple of out in the open communists. Belonged to an outfit called the “Progressive Labor Party”, which still has a functional website I believe.

          At the time I was in a very…shall we say, open…frame of mind, having decided that the two-party duopoly was shit, but not knowing what to do about it. I hung out w/ them for awhile, and when they weren’t spouting Marxist nonsense, they were normal people just like anybody else. No horns or tails, nothing to give away the fact that they were essentially advocating for mass murder.

          Though of course they always claimed that the number of Stalin and Mao’s victims were wildly over-exaggerated by western propagandist media, and that most of the deaths taht did occur were due to naturally occurring famines that just hit at particularly bad times (in the case of the Great Leap Forward).

          1. Didn’t they also say shit like ‘they did good things for the population’?

            That’s been, other than that, my experience with leftists too when I was also ‘open minded’.

            Then I became a son of a bitch over the years. I refuse to compromise on any intellectual level with commies.

  25. Not wearing a burka is enthusiastic consent.

      1. Didn’t read the article – have to go out for ice cream and will read later – but please tell me the gist isn’t ‘Naive Western girl reports rape thinking justice will be served because she’s too stupid to grasp Muslim law isn’t Western law.’

          1. But HM.

            Israel makes them do rape.

            You know that. I expect more from you.

  26. Can a lawyer answer this:

    Does Title IX not matter in cases of alleged man-on-man rape?

    1. Since men can never be a victim, man-on-man rape would be considered a victimless crime. Therefore, the ‘rapist’ could not be punished.

  27. The gender disparity is a huge problem because it implies that only women can be incapacitated by alcohol consumption, or that only women are rendered incapable of giving consent. By contrast, an equally drunk man is not only considered capable, but is expected to make legally responsible choices about his sexual activity, or he could be charged with rape. I don’t see how someone who is incapable of consenting to sex is nevertheless legally responsible for obtaining it from others. You have two people, one drunk man and one drunk woman, and the drunk man is considered legally responsible but the woman is not only not responsible but incapable of consenting, despite the fact that they are both experiencing the same amount of impairment.

    1. You’re trying to apply logic to an illogical situation. I’ve become convinced this is just payback for the abuses women suffered at the hands of men in the past. The Proggies can’t change the past, but they can punish men in the present because they’re all about revenge and punishing their enemies. Would love to hear about some SJWs son getting screwed by these rules, but I suspect that will never happen.

      1. What’s going to happen is that stuff like this will help add to the appeal of education by other means. Why attend some school with tuition that’s about 100X the value of the education delivered? They have “virtual school” for high school, why not for college?

      2. So the proggies would be fine with modern Germans being shipped off to Israel to be gassed?

        1. No, Jews are the automatic exemption. Jews are NOT allowed to defend themselves, redevelop their own land, or spout off in any way. Except for left wing Jews, they are ok (though they are still “dirty Jews”).

    2. A person gets an MIP at 17 for having alcohol but is charged as an adult if they consuythe same substance and injure someone. There is no logic to alcohol laws.

      1. The term ‘tried as an adult’ always riles me. In an increasingly infantilizing society the only way for teens to be treated like adults is to do something really, really bad (no amount of good behavior can achieve the same thing). How about lowering the age of consent to 13 and treat everyone above that age like an adult for everything?

  28. Uh, hello? Where have you been for the last 5 years? Leftists actually believe this, so why is it a shock that places run by leftists are putting policies based on their beliefs into action?

  29. “must express consent enthusiastically, and they must be sober.”

    OK, I can see the blood test for sobriety (administered how long before the fucking?), but how is enthusiasm measured?
    Do you have to give three cheers in front of a witness?

    1. The witness has to be a notary.

      1. With this notary stamp technique? NSFW Hungarian movie scene.

  30. Do they currently rank colleges based on how retardedly puritanical/PC they are about Sex?

    because that might be a new, highly-relevant factor in people’s college choices.

    It was a thing when I went – at least the ‘hook up scene’ was a common point of discussion before choosing the school. It was a big enough factor that it affected where i ended up going.

  31. Psh. CCU is still salty that their effeminate mascot got sucker punched when they visited the #1 party school in the region: James Madison University. That’s the cause of this anti-party mentality so many years later.

  32. “FIRE’s Colin Crossman wonders whether a simple “I guess so, the wi-fi just went down,” is enthusiastic enough to signal consent under CCU’s policy…”

  33. Really? Seriously? Are you fucking kidding me? How could you stoooooopid mammals missed this one…

    You know who else wanted enthusiastic sex?

    1. Janeway and Paris when they were space lizards?

      *runs and hides from Pro L*

      1. We don’t talk about that cinematic event…

      2. Goddammit why does everyone here keep talking about shitty Voyager episodes? I expect that bullshit from Winston, but come on.

        1. I expect that bullshit from Winston, but come on.

          Hey now, no need to get mean.

          1. Between the shitty Voyager episodes and Cytotoxic’s new Star Trek idiocy it’s like every thread is trying to make me hate Star Trek. The only thing that helps is that there’s a DS9 fanbase here.

            1. You’re a fan of Deep Sleep 9?

    2. Khal Drogo

    3. You’re just jealous because you have a cloaca.

      1. Did you watch the video HM linked above?

        You can do a lot with a cloaca…apparently.

      2. Your mother rather fancied it

        1. Get real Lizard, the age of the macroherpophile is over. Godzilla bukkake isn’t even a meme anymore.

          1. See above

  34. British men?

    1. Supposed to be a response to Lizard. God dammit.

      1. The tree-dwelling mammals have thwarted you again.

  35. Students who want to hook up must agree to each and every sex act beforehand, they must express consent enthusiastically, and they must be sober. The university’s definition of consent is at odds with the legal one?as well as any common sense understanding of how sex happens.

    Dammit Robby, you’ve had a pretty rough sex life.

  36. Paint-by-number sex removes the organic coordination between merging emotions. It’s as if these legalistic fucks are striving to paint the sexes into disparate corners- guillotining the natural ebb and flow of the sexual experience. Sex ceases to be normal then. It is processed and boxed like a pile of fucking dry oats.

    Jesus Christ, who needs fucking Christian puritans when you have goddamn socialists stamping the fucking passion and worldliness out of human relations.

    1. When you’re mostly sober you’re a pretty good writer, cyborg

      1. Which is to say… when you’re fucked up? You’re a GREAT writer.

    2. “Jesus Christ, who needs fucking Christian puritans when you have goddamn socialists stamping the fucking passion and worldliness out of human relations.”

      We’re incubating the Junior Anti-Sex League, as Orwell envisioned it. He wasn’t in the Dostoyevsky league as a novelist, but he was a very astute political prophet.

    3. What about, what about… ant rights?

  37. Jake is drunk. Jake cannot consent. Josie has sex with him. Is Josie charged with rape?

    Women are supposed to be equal until some challenge of will or intellect comes up. But we don’t let either imbeciles nor the insane vote. Maybe we should repeal the women’s suffrage amendment and let it go state by state – but not let any women in any state vote where there is different treatment of men and women in cases like this.

    1. Exactly.

      I’m supposed to believe that if a man starts making sexual advances on a woman, she may become so overcome with fear that she can only pretend to go along with it, not even being able to choke out a single “no”. Yet, I’m also supposed to believe that women can muster up the bravery to serve as police officers, fire-women, and soldiers? Which is it? Those can’t both be true at once.

      1. I thort it was that their lizard brain takes over and they can’t be turnt aside from their animal urges, whereas male man is kapable at all times of withering the tortuous limb of his baser instinct by simply turning on it the cold light or reason. A man may chuse to act rationally in any situation; it’s simply a matter of will. A woman, in contrast, is too easily most entirely animalised at the drop of a hat given the right stimuli, at which point she just goes whichever way the lizard brain drives her, regardless of whether such a course is rational, preferable, or even less than highly likely to result in severe injury or death. But what do I know? Stupid me! Shut up! You don’t know what you’re talking about! You don’t have anything useful to say! Shut up!

  38. What about getting high?

  39. What cracks me up is that the rape-hysteric feminists – perhaps without realizing it – are sharing a common premise with Islamic fundamentalists: that females are so stupid and weak that they’re likely to jump into bed with a man without knowing what the hell they’re doing.

    They share a lot of common ground with those who force women to wear burkas; they just disagree on the best “solution” to the “problem”.

    1. If they’d stop making decisions based entirely upon their emotions, even for just a day, they may stand at least a chance of seeing how ridiculously foolish and hypocritical they themselves are.

  40. Anybody watching Wayward Pines? Great portrayal of the kind of society these kinds of people want to build.

  41. For once the progs are right: Women are too weak and frail to have any business drinking alcohol.

    The ladies belong in the kitchen making sandwiches for me and my drinking buddies.

  42. Sometimes I get the suspicion that what these assholes are really trying to do is bring back de facto prohibition.


  43. Feminists want women to be the educated gender, while men can do the dirty and dangerous jobs. Phasing men out of academia is a strategy; making it a dangerous and hostile environment for men, a tactic.

    Keep suing them.

  44. Colleges and universities have been infected by the progressive communist bug.

    It is no surprise that politically correct is linked to the progressive communist.
    Politically they are progressive and a correct communist.

    Their foe is freedom, their friend is a mandate passed by central committee.

    Their logic is communist and changes from time to time to fit what central committee deems politically correct .

  45. Yeah those evil MRA losers get upset when men are charged with rape and women are not. Don’t get they get this is payback for women not being able to vote…and the fact they get periods and have to carry babies, etc. MRA dudes are unreasonable.

  46. They are basically adopting the moslem line, that men and women cannot control themselves and women are incapable of governing their own affairs. The must be kept in purdah, and only allowed out in public, covered and escorted by a responsible male.

  47. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ??????

  48. Start making cash right now… Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $8596 a month. I’ve started this job and I’ve never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too. You can check it out here…

  49. The underlying premise, that consent must be enthusiastic in order to be regarded as consent, is extremely nonsensical. Consent, whether enthusiastic, unenthusiastic, or simply vague, is still consent (this is not merely my opinion; it is a concrete, indisputable FACT). The university does not have authority to mandate that consent be enthusiastic, in order to be deemed authentic. I look forward to a judge explaining this to their attorney, as he awards several million dollars in damages to some young man who’s been pilloried by the “Social Justice” left.

    1. You know, if I thought a balding, middle age man, in alright shape (and getting better every day; I’m in the best shape of my life!), if I thought such a man could get laid in a college environment, I’d do it. Screwing a 19 yr old for a million bucks sounds like a sweet gig.
      Good work if you can get it.

  50. I considered returning to college to get a unnecessary degree for laughs in a subject I wish to discredit from the inside (out of pocket, and not adding to my income potential). My queries (especially since I practice and endorse drunk, rowdy aggressive sex):

    1. Should I abstain from sex while enrolled, just to be on the safe side?

    2. Should I just abstain from sex with other students? I am unclear whether nonstudents can use the Title IX kangaroo courts. But note with the Duke case, which went from and to outside authorities.

    3. Should I rely on the fact that I’m a smart enough lawyer to know when to shut up and stop cooperating with process? And financially endowed enough to hire smart counsel and media advisor? I don’t care about expulsion, since I got my license to practice law 20 years ago.

    4. Should I throw all caution to the wind to make myself a test case? I am endowed enough and sick enough of the corporate rat race, so retirement is an option, so I don’t fear social opprobrium as much as incarceration.

    My inclination is 4. Penn is my undergrad institution in the mid 1990s, I protested the Eden Jacobowitz/waterbuffalo persecution without putting myself on the line, and when I attended Columbia for law in 1997 political correctness was in a lull. I feel its time I made a stand for what I believe in at social and economic cost to me.

    If you have informed views (especially from criminal defense counsel) try me at

  51. Heared at TrustEssays that the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education recently took notice of some outdated posters advertising CCU’s consent policies

  52. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ??????

  53. Thanks for this super awesome article that helped me.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.