progress of "yes means yes" laws and policies

Post Reply New Topic

There's a young woman at Columbia University who's got an interesting bit of performance art going; it's to do with the fact that her rapist was never dismissed from campus. Apparently she'd not reported the rape until she met two other girls who'd also been raped by the same guy, and the university's response to their complaint left much to be desired (as has been the case at nearly 80 other universities now being investigated by the feds). Here's a piece that describes her project and also the larger question of "yes means yes" legislation and where it might take us.

Worth paying attention to because this is changing and will continue to change dating/sex manners and the understanding of what acceptable behavior is.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... -means-yes

You?ve already made it abundantly clear that, in order to be marginally safe, a man has to assume ?no? means ?no?, ?yes? means ?no?, too, and any kind of close contact with a woman means ?watch out, because, from now on, I can choose to ruin your life any time I want to by claiming you took advantage of me?. Well, the last part probably doesn?t even require close contact.

why is Columbia so determined to sweep this under the rug? are they so swimming in people wanting to enroll that they can just ashcan any student who becomes "inconvenient"? why was the serial rapist at the center of this allowed to repeatedly get off scot-free? does his daddy own some bigwig therein?

It's a problem at all the universities. They're all desperate for money (admittedly their idea of 'desperate' is different from most people's) and top students/faculty, so they've started spending gargantuan sums on PR and advertising. Rape, bad PR. They also have to report sexual assaults, and many of them simply haven't been doing it.

I'm glad this girl is doing this, but quite a lot more needs to be done.

eta: I would not be surprised, a few years from now, to hear that there's been a high rate of unreported rapes of Chinese women at American universities. We recruit very heavily in China and Chinese students now make up a significant proportion of students at many US schools. Frequently those students don't have a good understanding of either English or US law or social codes, and are isolated and vulnerable.

He is an alleged rapist, not a convicted one. And frankly, even if he did rape her, without evidence, I don't want him to be expelled from the college-- unless, of course, some evidence is produced. That would create a terrible precedent. A precedent that would make it acceptable to eject people from schools based only on someone's word.

I am also skeptical of the "yes means yes" law. What good does this law do? It's still his word against hers, only now instead of "she never said no" it's "she said yes". It assumes guilt until the accused proves their innocence, which is patently abhorrent. The author of the bill has responded, when asked what evidence could be used to prove one's innocence, "your guess is as good as mine". The definition of rape this bill uses is so broad that it's practically meaningless. This law is going to be a train wreck.

then how do we stop these pigs from raping women?

I don't claim to have the answer to that question, and I don't claim to know that there is an answer, but this certainly isn't it. We do not assume guilt based only on someone's word.

are you saying a rape kit was never used?

To what case are you referring? I'm just addressing the "yes means yes" bill as a whole. It shifts the burden of proof to the alleged rapist.

my guess is that somebody like the perp with his history of rape, should have been DNA tested to match the rape kit.