mead berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn bayles
Culture Wars
Is ‘Yes Means Yes’ Unstoppable?
Features Icon
show comments
  • qet

    Today’s Left does not read past the title. “tl;dr” is its motto. This is just another in the endless series of Left positive law that will be honored only in the breach. It will simply hand a woman an option, a card playable at a time and place of her own choosing, to call down the might and fury of the State onto the head of whatever man has displeased her. TAI and the ALI can deceive themselves with as many paper examples as they like of the woman being the “accused,” but it would take a real moron to actually believe that this law is not intended, and will not in fact operate, to advantage one gender at the expense of the other. One would hope that the GOP-controlled state legislatures would pointedly not enact this nonsense, but if the GOP behaved like that there would be no Trump.

  • Beauceron

    Well, Obama said he would transform the country.

  • Blackbeard

    The idea of the Administrative State is to make everything illegal. Then our dear leaders who can decide who to prosecute.

  • jeburke

    This is one of the most extraordinary and inexpicable hobby horses of the ascendant Left. With sex at quite young ages, casual sex and sex with multiple partners over time now the standard of behavior, all of a sudden comes this. The only possible explanation for it is that it is an accidental outgrowth of the ludicrous but successful effort to persuade people that one of every five college girls is a victim of rape. Outrageous.

    • It’s backlash, baby! Snap-back. It is reactionary in the most literal sense. Thesis, antithesis….. synthesis. That’s how oxymorons wind up in charge.

  • Crayv

    Since the only way to prove innocence is to basically have it recorded. Once men catch on it will probably start to be a common thing, which will then lead to people being “hacked” coincidentally when they get angry at their ex.

    I predict Porn Hub will benefit greatly from this.

  • FriendlyGoat

    Maybe someone at TAI “wonders” if “yes means yes” is comparable to enforcement of sodomy laws, but sensible people do not. What you’re seeing is a brake pedal which women can use on men and boys who have been raised on porn and who need to be told they are not entitled to push women sexually. I predict it is a matter of time before “yes means yes” is well understood by talked about by both genders in the fifth grade.

    • WestCoasterGuy

      Goat, my friend, “no means no” is a brake pedal. All a woman need say is “no” and everything thereafter becomes unpermitted sex and potentially a crime. “Yes means yes,” by contrast, is simply not a standard of behavior which is at all consistent with happy, healthy, meaningful human sex. It reduces a transcendent experience to a series of contractual legal arrangements, each one of which is potentially life-destroying if not upheld by a third party at a later date. If you have actually had sex, please think back to when you had a good sexual experience and consider how good it would have been had you and your partner been asking each other for permission at every step of the way, and (preferably) finding a way to document that consent. Sound like a relationship built on love and trust?

      • Everything must be videoed. That is where this is going.

      • FriendlyGoat

        I was married within days after I turned 20. Any other sex with any other people would have been ill-advised and “yes means yes” would have only been helpful to the culture of my teenage surroundings (the sixties.)

    • Jim__L

      FG, listen to WestCosterGuy. Please. You and the rest of the faux-chivalrous fellow-travelers still think that somehow men have all the power and these totalitarian measures are necessary.

      Women have more power than men, now, both de jure and de facto. The power differential has NEVER been all that great, because for the most part women have had men voluntarily looking after women’s interests. Nowadays your point of view does far more harm than good. You’re a dinosaur.

      There will certainly be more destruction caused by this law than good. (Certainly more destruction than buggery laws have ever caused, unless you believe that an entire judicial philosophy should be based on a single one-sided anecdote from Berger.)

      No Means No is enough.

      • FriendlyGoat

        It’s really (REALLY) hard for me to understand why any people who might ever wish for less of a “casual-sex culture” in America would be dissing this. The value of it is in the prevention of misadventures before they occur. The last thing on earth I would have ever wanted to do is have sex with someone who wasn’t sure at the time and who might later see her experience with me as regrettable.

        • Tom

          Because most of us are well-aware of the cardinal rule that teenagers are idiots.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Yes, that seems to be the case and I would admit to being as much an idiot then as others. One thing I don’t remember hearing then that we do hear now, though, is that scientists don’t think now that we achieve full brain development until into our twenties. That may really matter on risk-taking, on prioritizing our wants and perhaps on love emotions. I fell pretty hard for a girl at 16, not the one I would later marry. Thankfully all of our “parking” was in the basement at her house with her folks home and upstairs. It was sweet, it was hot and it was harmless because it was not taken too far. Completely HOT nonetheless.

            She was a nice girl and I loved her so much (as best my 16-year-old brain could) that I was operating on “don’t hurt her or scare her” in such a way that “no” was completely unnecessary. Our first kiss was initiated by her and it was its own “yes” that I was dying to hear, delivered by her with enthusiasm which shocked me silly in the moment. She somehow trusted me and knew I wasn’t a wolf who would misinterpret and have to be told “no”. She gave me the right “yes” at the right time. That’s one personal reason I am not opposed to this whole idea. I think there is magic in it.

          • Jim__L

            FG, by the logic of “yes means yes”, you were assaulted. That is why people believe “ymy” is insanity.

            Also, please consider the age of majority for most of history has been 21. Turns out, once again, tradition is smarter than ’60s radicals give it credit for.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Well, in my story I guess I need to tell you that I said “yes” too, and quite immediately. So I didn’t go file an assault case.

          • Jim__L

            Riiiiiiiiight. Change your story now, sure.

            The fact is, in the case that you provided your answer to her with something other than words (which seems most probable), **that would not have made her behavior criminal**.

            YMY is worse than useless.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Jim, I’m not changing my story. My story is now and was then that a certified “nice girl” wanted to trust me when she was barely 15 and I was barely 16. She gave me a big “yes” to hot kissing and hugging that I needed and wanted to hear. She helped me with that to feel a real sense of responsibility to not abuse the privilege by going on to groping and more which I am certain she was not at all ready to say “yes” to. I really loved her. We talked about everything between kisses. If YMY had been a “thing” then, we would have talked about it together, I’m sure. We probably would have thought that one of us asking the other “May I kiss you?” would have been over-the-top sweet.

            We were both kids in mainline churches, NOT marinated in porn because it did not exist in our worlds. For boys today to be put into a new paradigm of asking—–I think it’s the best thing that can possibly happen for the present culture.

        • Jim__L

          If you want to tell someone to slow down, the words “slow” and “down” are available. The letters “N” and “O”, similarly.

          There is no one with the slightest respect for rule of law that wants to hand Leftist ideologues a weapon with which to destroy Due Process. The ends do not justify the means.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Due process will be fine. If some women misuse this for spite, that will be out soon and we will all be tutored by some males suing some females into oblivion in high-profile cases—-very possibly over the administrative action of some college over-pursuing some girl’s falsehood, let alone anything having to do with criminal law.

            As for whether YMY gains steam, I predict it will and I predict that most of the consequences will be positive. The best of it will be a whole bunch of ill-advised sex that never happens.

          • Jim__L

            The “Rolling Stone” case? The Duke Lacrosse case? The prospect of “suing … into oblivion” isn’t helping. The only ones who benefit from your approach are the trial lawyers. None of the rest of us are done any good.

            No Means No is enough. YMY adds nothing.

          • FriendlyGoat

            As more and more YMY is adopted in more and more places, we will have some more cases. We need them and this will all sort out.

          • Jim__L

            We have to pass it before we know what’s in it?

            No. We’ve seen the impact of YMY and it’s bad.

            No Means No is enough.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Would it make you happy if I told you that I only discuss YMY in the comment sections and that because I’m an old married man that I am not out helping anyone institute it anywhere? (There is also a women’s rights movement called freethenipple with a dotcom site of the same name which crusades for repeal of laws against women being topless in public and a more impressive list of OTHER women’s rights issues around the world. Even though I am in sympathy with what they are saying, I don’t go rally with them either.)

          • dfenstrate

            If you want to ensure that ‘a whole bunch of ill-advised sex… never happens’, returning to old expectations of chastity, chaperones, and curfews, is a more honest and sensible means of achieving the same ends.
            This entire ‘campus sex crisis’ consists of ill-taught children painfully relearning why the old expectations where put in place to begin with. You all could have just paid heed the first time around, but you decided you were too smart and sophisticated for all those stuffy rules your great-grandparents had.
            Now, after much personal pain- mostly borne by young women- you seek to correct the problem with an insane set of rules that make it wise for any young man to avoid any campus woman.
            Why don’t you just admit we had it right 90 years ago?

          • FriendlyGoat

            Well, what I did with a girlfriend stated above when she was 15 and I was 16 as a matter of fact was not very far from 90-years-ago standards. But, as you know, times have changed for the worse during 50 more years from even the 1960’s to now
            I see YMY as one means to help us retrace backwards to a better sense of sexual respect and kindness from boys to girls. That’s why I like it. Nothing else is going to turn back the clock, as far as I can tell.

  • Lewis

    The hypocrisy of these ‘liberals’ in the West is astounding. We see something that borders on a mass rape in Cologne and years of sexual predation of minors in the United Kingdom, and the so-called intelligentsia searches for the most convoluted ways to evade or even justify these actions. They are not rapists, no, they are the oppressed ones. These are cries for help; they are re-enacting the psychological trauma and humiliation they suffered during the period from 1897-1902 when the British brutally, brutally administered their state by signing a commercial exchange with the Sultan of Nizambad. Let them work through it.

    But the real evildoers are these sexual predators that somehow keep getting into our universities. These frat boys with their houses of rape. Banish the lot to some cold and isolated place away from their victims.

    It should be interesting to see how many Saudi’s or GCC students will be subject to the ‘yes means yes’; somehow I feel it will not translate well into Gulf Arabic, and given the English skills of these ‘students’ I think much will be lost in translation.

  • Frank Natoli

    For decades, Liberals have screamed of the Religious Right having gained total control of one political party, whose goal was complete control of all sexual behavior. As a practical matter, the worst case plausible scenario, from a Liberal point of view, was that the law be amended to absolutely protect the most innocent and most defenseless who are created in consequence of sexual behavior. Nothing of that sort has occurred.
    What has occurred is Liberal legislators and un-elected administrators imposing micro-control, not over the human life consequences of sexual behavior, but over the sexual behavior itself. Now we can all see who are the real fascists.

  • White Knight Leo

    Luckily this isn’t a legally defensible standard, by definition. It fails the “innocent until proven guilty” standard.

    • m a

      Not only is it unenforceable, under the left/gender studies’ theory of ‘regret rape’ it serves no useful purpose. Even if affirmative consent is obtained throughout the encounter and taped as evidence, the woman can retroactively decide months or years later that she regrets it and therefore it is rape.

    • But the university lives aside from the law. The punishments are expulsion, suspension or lesser censures, all of which come with a scarlet letter R. The schools in turn are impressed to adopt these deranged criteria whether they like it or not as a requirement to drink deeply from the federal money spigot. That’s all NICE and legal.

      • And mostly they do not dislike the new kangaroo sex courts at all.

      • White Knight Leo

        With the result being that more young men will simply refuse to attend colleges in the first place. My point was that this won’t fly in the courts.

      • Jim__L

        So… break the universities.

  • Perhaps these philosophies are an evolutionary dead end as they seem to preclude reproduction.

    • Jim__L

      Yup, almost certainly an evolutionary dead end. In the Western world, a new type of woman is evolving — one that has a bad reaction to The Pill. A new type of man is also evolving — one that is not rational enough to use a condom when in the presence of a fertile woman.

      These ideas will fall of their own dead weight. The only question is how much of Civilization we allow them to take down with them.

  • Companion

    You know that this isn’t about a girl planting a surprise kiss on her boyfriend.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service