VA - Freshman daughter, mom 'good time drop off' outrages VA university

[katydid23]

It's quite possible she didn't revoke her consent.

However, it would be wise for all the horny young male students, and everybody else for that matter, to remember that sex with someone who is in no state to consent, could be a felony.

Inability to consent because of excessive intoxication effectively means no.

Of course , horny young men have to be cautious. But this happened 5 years ago, and I think boys are more cautious now.

And I have been researching the intoxication angle and it is very subjective. The prosecutors admit there is no actual line or test or agreement on what exactly is 'too intoxicated.' So that is a problem.

http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/pub_prosecuting_alcohol_facilitated_sexual_assault.pdf

When deciding whether to charge based on the theory that it was rape because the victim was too intoxicated to consent, it is crucial to analyze the elements of the crime being alleged. As in all cases, prosecutors must ensure that they are proceeding under a valid legal theory.Although intercourse with someone who is too intoxicated to consent always con- stitutes moral rape, it is only a crime if it meets the legal definition of rape.


The primary challenge in prosecuting rape cases where the victim is vol- untarily intoxicated is that society tends to have difficulty distinguishing between drunken sex and rape. Instead of assuming that it was probably rape because the woman was too drunk to consent, people tend to assume that the woman consented because she was intoxicated and simply regretted the sexual encounter later. In these cases, the defense tends to argue:“It’s not rape; it’s regret,” or,“It’s buyer’s remorse.” Prosecutors must overcome the tendency to focus on and blame the victim and re-direct the focus back to the offender’s actions, and thus on the elements of the crime. It is the prosecutor’s job to show jurors why the case before them is a case of sexual assault and not just drunken sex that was later regretted.

Generally, there is not a bright-line test for showing that the victim was too intoxicated to consent, thereby distinguishing sexual assault from drunken sex. In drunk driving cases, the prosecution can show that the driver had a certain BAC; therefore, the driver is guilty. Sexual assault cases involving alcohol are not as clear cut.There is not a universal BAC at which the law or the experts agree that people are no longer capable of consenting to intercourse. Instead, the equation involves an analysis of the totality of the circumstances and numerous factors.

The factors dis- cussed herein are divided into two parts: (1) general factors and (2) predatory behavior on the part of the defendant. By analyzing these fac- tors and considering the totality of the circumstances, the prosecutor can determine whether the case is sexual assault or not.

 

[jjenny]

It's quite possible she didn't revoke her consent.

However, it would be wise for all the horny young male students, and everybody else for that matter, to remember that sex with someone who is in no state to consent, could be a felony.

Inability to consent because of excessive intoxication effectively means no.

Except when the drunk is a male, like in Amherst University. Then female student who performed oral sex on him is considered a victim, and he is expelled even though University believed he was drunk to the point of blacking out.

 

[Donjeta]

I wonder why he did not report her for sexual assault.

 

[jjenny]

I wonder why he did not report her for sexual assault.

He didn't remember what happened due to his state of intoxication.

 

[gitana1]

Well I cannot agree, I think it's perfectly possible and allowed to consent to, say, kissing and heavy petting, and refuse to have intercourse. I have done so and never got raped for that.

Me giving someone a total green light involves me saying yes, and consenting to sex, instead of me saying no, I want to sleep instead. In any case, I wouldn't think someone who does the latter is giving me a total green light.

False accusations have nothing to do with whether a girl, or a boy, for that matter, has the right to refuse certain sexual acts if s/he consented to doing something else. Of course they do.

It's rape, if it's non-consensual.

ETA: and where would you draw the line? After what kind and how much foreplay would you lose your right to refuse intercourse in a fair way? A few kisses? Undressing? Touching him there? Letting him touch you there? Then by the same token, if you've agreed to vaginal intercourse or a , have you also totally given him the green light to do anal that you don't want?

Excellent, excellent post.

Wow, did you never make out without having sex? It's fun, and reasonable to expect in a relationship, even if you have been married for years. Is there some epidemic of drunk girls crawling into bed with a drunk guy then leaving him with blue ba!!$? And if so, even if it's a premeditated, purely on purpose "teasing," even if the girls had a freaking online group whose sole purpose was "tease and pass out," (NOT REAl, just making a point), IT IS NOT OKAY TO HAVE SEX WITH AN UNCONSCIOUS PERSON. No matter how horny you may be!!!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Thank you. I mean are we kidding with this nonsense? Yes the freaking onus is on the guy who remains awake to not rape the drunk girl in his bed, even if she was engaged in a make out session or heavy petting. WTH?

Men, even teens, are fully capable of controlling themselves. To pretend otherwise really angers me. And you know what? Normal males are not turned on by sexual activity with a sleeping person. Or a totally drunken one. Normal, nice males want a functioning, willing partner, not some out of it chick (or dude for that matter).

Over the years I've heard that sentiment so many times by male family members of all ages as well as male friends.

And you know, college is a time of first sexual experiences for many people. Some might not be ready to "go all the way". And some may not be ready to jump from heavy petting to intercourse with a particular person they are dating.

But according to some, if a person ends up in a
private area with another person and engages in any level of sexual activity, apparently they have given license to the other person to take it to any level that person wants, regardless of consent, if the other person is an 18 year old male, because teen males cannot control themselves or stop once they get any taste of any sexual activity.

How damn insulting to young men, really.

And ignorant. I dated a couple guys, frankly, when I was young, who stopped ME when I wanted to go forward. One was just super shy and scared of being inadequate and wanted to feel more comfortable in the relationship first. The other was not as experienced as I, it turns out, and didn't want to go all the way yet. (We were very young and he was still a virgin).

But they revved me up so I guess I should have been able to rape the hell out of them. I mean it was cruel of them to get in bed with me and not go all the way after all that! Oh wait, I forgot, women can control themselves, just not men.

Ugh. I'm really disappointed that intelligent females in the United States are having this debate.

 

[katydid23]

wow. Even NPR is looking at the unfairness factor---calling it a rush to judgment and a witch hunt:

http://www.npr.org/2014/09/03/34531...pus-assault-say-the-system-works-against-them

Some Accused Of Sexual Assault On Campus Say System Works Against Them
SEPTEMBER 03, 2014


Dozens of students who've been punished for sexual assault are suing their schools, saying that they didn't get a fair hearing and that their rights to due process were violated. The accused students say schools simply are overcorrecting.


"Right from the start, they treated me like I was the scum of the earth," says one young man, who was a sophomore at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst this past fall when


In his complaint, the male student alleges that the hearing process was inherently biased against men, and violated Title IX by denying his rights to equal protection. The university, he says, withheld information he needed for his defense, and wouldn't let him have an attorney to speak for him.

This student is one of several dozen now suing. He filed as John Doe, fearing damage to his reputation, and agreed to talk on condition of anonymity. The lawsuit identifies the victim as Jane Doe.


He says he was grilled by a hearing board that he says was hostile and poorly trained. The panel ruled against him and he was expelled, which he says was emotionally devastating.

"I had some dark days," he says. "It's hard, you know? It hurts down to your bones."

"I think 'witch hunt' is a dramatic phrase, but I would tell a group of young men right now, 'woe is to you if someone makes an allegation,' " Miltenberg says. "This young man was in the wrong place at the wrong time, in the sense that there was an attempt by the university officials to say, 'Oh, yeah? Well, watch how we do this one!' "

Some rush to judgment is inevitable, says Robert Dana, dean of students at the University of Maine, speaking generally about the current climate on campuses.

"I expect that that can't help but be true," he says. "Colleges and universities are getting very jittery about it."

 

[LinasK]

If they have to tell you they changed their mind, that's no longer affirmative consent. If you demand ongoing affirmative consent, they have to constantly affirm they are still consenting. Geez.

BBM. Right, then you stop pursuing them, makeout session is over. Problem solved, it's as simple as that if only guys would listen...

 

[LinasK]

If ongoing affirmative consent is required, your own opinion of what you think other person wants or doesn't isn't enough.

Then you ask. Noone expects mind readers...

 

[katydid23]

Excellent, excellent post.



Thank you. I mean are we kidding with this nonsense? Yes the freaking onus is on the guy who remains awake to not rape the drunk girl in his bed, even if she was engaged in a make out session or heavy petting. WTH?

Men, even teens, are fully capable of controlling themselves. To pretend otherwise really angers me. And you know what? Normal males are not turned on by sexual activity with a sleeping person. Or a totally drunken one. Normal, nice males want a functioning, willing partner, not some out of it chick (or dude for that matter).

Over the years I've heard that sentiment so many times by male family members of all ages as well as male friends.

And you know, college is a time of first sexual experiences for many people. Some might not be ready to "go all the way". And some may not be ready to jump from heavy petting to intercourse with a particular person they are dating.

But according to some, if a person ends up in a
private area with another person and engages in any level of sexual activity, apparently they have given license to the other person to take it to any level that person wants, regardless of consent, if the other person is an 18 year old male, because teen males cannot control themselves or stop once they get any taste of any sexual activity.

How damn insulting to young men, really.

And ignorant. I dated a couple guys, frankly, when I was young, who stopped ME when I wanted to go forward. One was just super shy and scared of being inadequate and wanted to feel more comfortable in the relationship first. The other was not as experienced as I, it turns out, and didn't want to go all the way yet. (We were very young and he was still a virgin).

But they revved me up so I guess I should have been able to rape the hell out of them. I mean it was cruel of them to get in bed with me and not go all the way after all that! Oh wait, I forgot, women can control themselves, just not men.

Ugh. I'm really disappointed that intelligent females in the United States are having this debate.

Gitana,

I am sorry that I am disappointing you. I have great respect and admiration for you. But as I posted upthread, my son's best friend was falsely accused of date rape in college , and his life was nearly ruined. It was a total nightmare. She eventually admitted that she LIED about it all. But he had already been charged, arrested, been in jail for a bit, been fired, humiliated, shamed, expelled from school, embarrassed his family, lost most of his friends, and been suicidal.

It outrages me the way males are being treated now by these new 'tribunals.' As an attorney, I would think you would be outraged too. But apparently I am one of the only ones who are upset about the loss of due process, the rush to judgment, and the bias.

I think there is a knee jerk reaction to jump to conclusions that the males are evil predators and the females are innocent victims. And it makes me very angry.

 

[jjenny]

Then you ask. Noone expects mind readers...

How often is one supposed t o ask? Every 30 seconds? Every minute? How long does the previously given consent should last? Should female be asking if male still consents?

 

[Donjeta]

Of course , horny young men have to be cautious. But this happened 5 years ago, and I think boys are more cautious now.

And I have been researching the intoxication angle and it is very subjective. The prosecutors admit there is no actual line or test or agreement on what exactly is 'too intoxicated.' So that is a problem.

Yeah, apart from being totally passed out. I think there's probably little disagreement that it's kind of weird to have sex with an unconscious person. If the person was still talking and moving it would be much harder to prove one way or another. You could find out how much alcohol was consumed, but even that affects people a little differently...

But I guess if people are old enough to drink they're old enough to be responsible for their actions in court, and if there's any reason to suspect that someone might possibly be too intoxicated to consent they might find that it might not be absolutely necessary to have sex with him or her after all, before sobering up. If young people wise up and err more on the side of caution when in doubt it's very much a good thing. They will survive feeling horny and live to have sex another day.

 

[LinasK]

Yeah it is understandable that young people who are still giving this sex thing a test run could be confused and have more trouble interpreting their partner's signs and utterances. But even so, I don't think "she didn't say anything but I thought she wanted it" cuts it as an excuse for sexual assault. I think it's important for sex education to cover issues of consent, and remind people that what they think what their partner wants or what they think s/he rightfully should be wanting (because come on, dude, you're so hot, all the girls want you...) isn't necessarily true just because they think so. Maybe some role playing exercises.... consent ...

It's not rocket science IMO. Most people have a mouth and two ears and they can talk. If they're not too shy to hop into bed naked with a stranger, they shouldn't be too shy to communicate. If you're worried that your partner might report you for rape three years later maybe your relationship is not at the sex-is-advisable stage yet.

I dunno but so far my system seems to be working, I have been pretty certain that my partners were consensual and I have never been accused of rape after a consensual encounter.

How often does this really happen? People have consensual sex and the woman suddenly decides to report the guy for rape years later?

Maybe sometimes it really was rape and the guy got away with it for years?

BBM. Shades of Bill Cosby all over again...:sigh::notgood:

 

[LinasK]

Yes. You may think it's "cruel" for an 18 year old boy not to be able to have non-consensual sex with a passed out girl who "teased" him but that's the law.

I hope we all tell our daughters that certain behaviors are very, very risky and unsafe and that they can easily be victimized if they do or don't do certain things. But I hope we also teach all of out kids that stupidty, ignorance, or inebriation do not cause a person to "deserve" it.

Goodness gracious. This is an attitude that blames the victim of rape. This is an attitude that states men are not in control of their sexual passions (which is pretty much what every extremist, fundamentalist religion believes, which is why women are segregated and covered in those cultures). This is also an attitude that can lead one's sons to be charged with and convicted for crimes that lead to prison time.

Let me be clear:

Yes, it is rape if it involves sexual penetration/sodomy of a person who cannot consent due to being a minor, or passed out or otherwise too incapacitated by drugs or alcohol to know what they're doing.

Damn that awful third wave feminism that led to such evil laws! Our poor teenaged boys don't even get to screw a passed out drunk girl! Even though she was flirting! Even though she was dressed like a ! Even though she stupidly went to his room, made out with him and passed out in his bed! Man she deserves to get the hell raped out of her by that poor 18 year old! I mean she essentially seduced him, poor guy! And he can't be expected to withstand blue balls, or even take care of his "excitement" by himself! Come on, he has a right to have sex with her floppy, drunken body!

Wow.

And then we have the popular Robin Thicke song, "Blurred Lines". While catchy, this song has done women a major injustice.

 

[LinasK]

It's quite possible she didn't revoke her consent.

However, it would be wise for all the horny young male students, and everybody else for that matter, to remember that sex with someone who is in no state to consent, could be a felony.

Inability to consent because of excessive intoxication effectively means no.

Amazing how many times we have to point that out on this thread. Seems like a simple concept to me!!!:gaah:ullhair:

 

[LinasK]

How often is one supposed t o ask? Every 30 seconds? Every minute? How long does the previously given consent should last? Should female be asking if male still consents?

How about every time you move to a new "base" for lack of a better term or new action? Even still a "does this still feel okay" works too.

 

[katydid23]

Yeah, apart from being totally passed out. I think there's probably little disagreement that it's kind of weird to have sex with an unconscious person. If the person was still talking and moving it would be much harder to prove one way or another. You could find out how much alcohol was consumed, but even that affects people a little differently...

But I guess if people are old enough to drink they're old enough to be responsible for their actions in court, and if there's any reason to suspect that someone might possibly be too intoxicated to consent they might find that it might not be absolutely necessary to have sex with him or her after all, before sobering up. If young people wise up and err more on the side of caution when in doubt it's very much a good thing. They will survive feeling horny and live to have sex another day.

I don't think anyone is talking about 'unconscious' people. They are talking about 'drunk' sex. I think that is pretty much the only sex I had in my college days. Except when I had a steady boyfriend.

 

[katydid23]

Amazing how many times we have to point that out on this thread. Seems like a simple concept to me!!!:gaah:ullhair:

OK< so if BOTH people are intoxicated, can they both be charged with rape? Or only the male will be charged?

 

[LinasK]

I don't think anyone is talking about 'unconscious' people. They are talking about 'drunk' sex. I think that is pretty much the only sex I had in my college days. Except when I had a steady boyfriend.

Inebriated counts as unconscious. They are not sober, you're not going to go give them a BAC. So if in doubt, don't sleep with them. The female is under NO obligation to have intercourse with the male, not even if there's been foreplay, or she's crawled in his bed, or wearing nothing. Blue balls is not a valid defense. All of your hypotheticals seem to point back to what happened to your friend's son. It's regrettable, but a rare occurrence compared to the sexual attacks on women.

 

[katydid23]

If the girl cannot or does not provide consent then yes, absolutely. Or possibly be charged with rape. No means no regardless of anything and everything else.

Statutes vary based on jurisdiction but most states have a clause in their sexual assault definitions for consent of people under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol - some also include sleep and mental disabilities under the same umbrella. If someone is so under the influence that they are unable to provide valid consent or if they are unaware of what was occurring (like 'having sex' with someone unconscious), it is considered a lack of consent, and that constitutes rape. Remember, it's these same laws that also protect victims who are incapacitated through other means, like date rape drugs.

Blaming the victim for the circumstances surrounding his/her sexual assault, regardless of what those circumstances are, usually does get brought up by defense attorneys, sometimes law enforcement or medical personnel, family and friends - it's one of many reasons sexual assault is so under-reported. In one current rape trial, the defense attorney has implied because the victim allowed the alleged perpetrator to remove her top and kiss her breasts, she obviously would have consented to sex as well. The alleged perpetrator states sex never occurred while she has testified under oath she said no shortly after the removal of her clothing, when she realized it wasn't stopping there.

JMO and FWIW

What do you think about this man's argument, that the intoxication laws are biased in favor of women?

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/02/11/3275721/taranto-college-rape/


In a Wall Street Journal column published on Monday, conservative commentator James Taranto argued that a “balanced” approach to the college sexual assault crisis involves placing equal blame , if both of them were drinking alcohol. The fact that intoxicated rape victims aren’t held responsible for their assault is “self-evidently unjust,” according to Taranto.


“If two drunk drivers are in a collision, one doesn’t determine fault on the basis of demographic details such as each driver’s sex. But when two drunken college students ‘collide,’ the male one is almost always presumed to be at fault,” Taranto writes. He goes on to conclude that efforts to address sexual violence on college campuses are creating a culture in which “women, but not men, are absolved of responsibility by virtue of having consumed alcohol.

 

[jjenny]

Inebriated counts as unconscious. They are not sober, you're not going to go give them a BAC. So if in doubt, don't sleep with them. The female is under NO obligation to have intercourse with the male, not even if there's been foreplay, or she's crawled in his bed, or wearing nothing. Blue balls is not a valid defense. All of your hypotheticals seem to point back to what happened to your friend's son. It's regrettable, but a rare occurrence compared to the sexual attacks on women.

So if both male and female are drunk, are they raping each other? Should both be expelled? As far as I can tell, Universities would expel a male, but consider female a victim, even if both were drunk, and even if male was more drunk than a female and had a sex act performed on him.