I've got good news for ya, Kid: this is completely unenforceable, so it doesn't matter. Unless the CA police have potential sexual couples under constant microdrone surveillance, the only people who can say for sure whether consent was given are the defendant and his accuser. This holds true regardless of the standard for consent, so it will be he-says-she-says, and any competent lawyer will advise both of the standard. "Yes, your honor, I did build her a bower of grass and shiny stones, just like certain exotic birds, and she most certainly did dip her head and walk through it."

As I understand it, this law is geared more towards helping men... "yes means yes"... not... "yes means yes until she changes her mind and says she didn't consent... after the fact."

As Elok pointed out, it's unenforceable... and may likely get overturned.

I briefly visited the "two X chromosome" subreddit yesterday. Women, even dreaded feminists, don't seem to be happy about this law for much the same reasons. Though, I'm sure you'll only focus on the random actual man-hater(s)... and ignore the overwhelming majority... as per usual.

The media hasn't told them it's a bad law yet so I will wait and see.

Colleges are in a tight spot here. They might have to tell the WH and feminists what idiots they are.

KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK

It's mostly a response to college campus cases where men have sex with women who are passed out or too drunk to really know what is going on. The problem is the guys claim she said yes while the women say they were too blacked out drunk to remember or just plain passed out and were raped while passed out. Usually this devolves into a he said, she said, and the guy walks because by the woman's own admission she doesn't remember anything. Yes, there needs to be some sort of law to protect women from these sorts of rapes but I'm not sure this is the right law especially since it 1) doesn't solve the central he said, she said problem and 2) seems open to abuse while there may be another better way to work the legal system. I'd like to see a review before the law is put into effect.

BTW there are many cases of women agreeing at the moment but then later being ashamed or changing their minds and then claiming it was non-concentual after the fact. The NC football team case with the false claims is a prime example. A chick happy agreed to have sex with multiple members of the college football team in a gangbang but then later, after videos surfaced and she got labeled as a "slut", she changed her mind and claimed rape because she was so ashamed. Except it wasn't rape (as she later admitted), she was a willing participant, and the videos even showed her agreeing to it.

Perhaps because the majority of the prosecutions under the law would be men? I somehow don't see women getting charged under this law.

How many women rape men?

YOU ****ING DIP****

So you're conceding the point that the legislation would, almost exclusively, arrest men? You should be arguing against this law, since y'know you believe in free love and everything. This law would seriously harsh your mellow.

Not reading your shit posts anymore.

If you don't start from a position of complete outrage against rape and acknowledgement that it's a much bigger problem, you are truly sick in the head.

The idiotic law brought to mind that image. Sorry.

I think rape is wrong. I also think false reports of rape do much to damage the reputation of all women who have been raped. Both destroy lives.

I think the main problem, aside from the extreme difficulty of proving sex was non-consensual, is that rape is seldom reported, and when reported is not always taken seriously by authorities--was she dressed kind of slutty or something? Maybe she was asking for it, after all! False accusations, like Dinner mentioned, are presumptively rather rare. Suppose you're a woman who has sex and regrets it. Do you:

A. Keep quiet about it and hope anybody who knows will let it go with time, or
B. Take it to the police, file a report, have a doctor poke around in your lady parts, tell a made-up story to a series of people who may or may not be inclined to believe you and can be expected to notice any discrepancy in your different tellings, all for the privilege, some time down the line, of telling the damn story again in front of a judge and a crowd of people, including presumptively your friends and family who came to support you, while a lawyer painstakingly goes over every detail to try and establish a credible case that, yes, in fact, you did have totally consensual sex with that scuzzy dude (whom you apparently hate enough to see him go to jail for years)?

Despite it's rarity, option B isn't completely unheard of.

This only applies to universities. The students there should be studying instead of having sex anyway.