California SB 967 Supporters Ignore Due Process Concerns | FIRE ( Afraid to exist, all men remained inside till death–Awesome is as Awesome does)

All the world is a stage, again. Thus the frantic spinning and spinning of relentless simulacra, fatal strategies, viruses, contagions—a “wilderness of mirrors”, to quote Eliot.
==Empire of Chaos: The Roving Eye Collection (Pepe Escobar)

7453176587646504c87a44eda61019bbBack in February, FIRE expressed concerns about California’s Senate Bill 967, which attempts to address the issue of campus sexual assault by requiring colleges receiving state-funded student aid to implement an “affirmative consent” standard in their sexual assault policies. Yesterday, KPBS in San Diego shared FIRE Legislative and Policy Director Joe Cohn’s comments about why the bill will endanger due process for students accused of sexual assault, as well as statements from supporters of the bill that are worth discussing.

To review, SB 967 defines affirmative consent as “affirmative, conscious, and voluntary agreement to engage in sexual activity” that is “ongoing throughout a sexual activity.” Supporters praise the bill for allowing an accused student to be found responsible for sexual assault in cases where the accuser didn’t say “yes,” but didn’t clearly say “no,” either. But as my colleague Samantha Harris pointed out in June, the bill goes further than that, requiring VDMSticks249Webnot just consent but continual reaffirmations of consent.

How often must an initiator—presumably a male student, at least according to some victims’ rights advocates—ask for consent? That’s not clear. And how could an innocent student demonstrate he or she received affirmative consent? In response to this question, the bill’s co-author, Assemblywoman Bonnie Lowenthal, simply said, “Your guess is as good as mine.”

[gview file=”https://troutinmilk.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/California_SB_967_Supporters_Ignore_Due_Process_Concerns.pdf”]

via California SB 967 Supporters Ignore Due Process Concerns | FIRE.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Brave New World vs 1984: Huxley Tells Orwell “I Was Right”. By Bypassing the …Rational Side of Man and Appealing to his Subconscious and his Deeper Emotions and his Physiology even, and so Making him Actually Love His Slavery. This Is the Danger.

History, unfortunately, is not rational or strictly logical, but a process which takes place in a Vale of Tears. ==Liberty or Equality: The Challenge of Our Time (LvMI) (Erik von Kuhnelt-Leddihn) What

February 22, 2020
There is a kind of optimism built into our species that seems to prefer to live in the comfortable present rather than confront the possibility of destruction’, with the result that ‘Human beings are never prepared for natural disasters’.’

Richard Fortey, a paleontologist, has observed that ‘There is a kind of optimism built into our species that seems to prefer to live in the comfortable present rather than confront the possibility o

February 21, 2020
%d bloggers like this:
Skip to toolbar