Forms to sign before having sex. Progress or madness?

Summary: A benefit of age is watching the succession of generations, each inverting the values of those before. The young boomers campaigned for free love and the right to say “f**k!” in public., and rioted against the war and racism. Five decades later campuses activists enact legalistic codes regulating speech and sex that Puritans would die for.  This post looks at the cutting edge in control of sex, and what these things show about America.  {1st of 2 posts today.}

Sex kit

Will this become standard equipment for Millennials?

 

Affirmative Consent =
………“Yes Means Yes”

The Affirmative Consent Project produces
a consent game changer:
the Consent Conscious Kit

 

Tomorrow, or next week, or next month, how can you prove that you had her affirmative consent? If you are students, you might find your self before a kangaroo court with rules that the barons at Runnymede would consider primitive, without counsel, and without the ability to confront your accusers. The Project’s leaders say “We are here to get you talking, and keep you safe.” If you talk enough there will be no sex, and you be safe.

The kit contains a Consent Sex Contract, a condom, breath mints, and a pen. The easy way to attempt to prove consent is to have her sign this form, and then take a selfie (remember the blood samples to prove she was capable of giving consent). Keep the form and photo in your files.

Sex Contract & selfie

Sex Contract for signing

Everyone would benefit from regular use of this kit! Videos of sex have already saved men from rape charges (e.g., the Hofstra incident). Women too benefit, too. A guy who whips this out at the key moment provides a girl with definitive evidence of his beta-ness in time for her to bail out.

“Consent is to be determined from the perspective of the complainant.
— A common interpretation of the 1999 Canadian case of Regina vs. Ewanchuk.

Berkeley 1968: marching for free speech

Berkeley 1968: not like today’s docile students.

What this means

This package is a logical development in our increasingly legalistic society, as the Left’s progress-through-litigation strategy inevitably turns its attention to sex. Men have few defenses campus “star chambers” given the widespread belief that the woman’s perspective defines consent, that women seldom falsely accuse of rape, and the lack of evidence needed to prove guilt.

These calls for men to obtain explicit consent at each stage in the bedroom nicely demonstrates American’s gradual domestication during the past 50 years. Imagine the reaction if these were read to Berkeley’s students in 1968! Whatever their excesses, they had convictions and energy missing from our time.

These campaigns — and the inevitable regulations and laws (like California’s) that follow — are rich fodder for comedy by people like Lenny Bruce or Woody Allen (e.g., in “Bananas”). If America had such people today. But the closest we have are Trey Parker and Matt Stone of “South Park”.

For a larger perspective, in Closing of the American Mind (1987) Allan Bloom explains the deeper forces at work. In this excerpt he foresees trends that were only embryonic in his time. Later chapters speculate about our future.

—————————-

… Now we have arrived at one of the ultimate acts in our drama, the informing and reforming of our most intimate private lives by our principles. Sex and its consequences … have finally become the theme of the national project, and here the problem of nature, always present but always repressed in the reconstruction of man demanded by freedom and equality, becomes insistent.

… The change in sexual relations, which now provide an unending challenge to human ingenuity, came over us in two successive waves in the last two decades. The first was the sexual revolution; the second, feminism. The sexual revolution marched under the banner of freedom; feminism under that of equality. Although they went arm in arm for a while, their differences eventually put them at odds with each other, as Tocqueville said freedom and equality would always be.

… {Feminism} ends, as do many modern movements that seek abstract justice, in forgetting nature and using force to refashion human beings to secure that justice. … Just as smoking and drinking overcame puritanical condemnation only to find themselves, after a brief moment of freedom, under equally moralistic attacks in the name not of God but of the more respectable and powerful names of health and safety, so sex had a short day in the sun before it had to be reined in to accommodate the feminist sensibility.

In this case the project is overcoming what is variously called male dominance, machismo, phallocracy, patriarchy, etc., to which men and their female collaborators seem very attached, inasmuch as so many machines of war must be mounted against them. Male sexual passion has become sinful again because it culminates in sexism. Women are made into objects, they are raped by their husbands as well as by strangers, they are sexually harassed by professors and employers at school and at work, and their children, whom they leave in day-care centers in order to pursue their careers, are sexually abused by teachers. All these crimes must be legislated against and punished.

There are no blurred lines in rape

What sensitive male can avoid realizing how dangerous his sexual passion is? Is there perhaps really original sin? Men had failed to read the fine print in the Emancipation Proclamation. The new interference with sexual desire is more comprehensive, more intense, more difficult to escape than the older conventions, the grip of which was so recently relaxed.

The July 14 of the sexual revolution was really only a day between the overthrow of the Ancien Regime and the onset of the Terror. The new reign of virtue, accompanied by relentless propaganda on radio and television and in the press, has its own catechism, inducing an examination of the conscience and the inmost sentiments for traces of possessiveness, jealousy, protectivenesss — all those things men used to feel for women.

There are, of course, a multitude of properly indignant censors equipped with loudspeakers and inquisitional tribunals.

—————————-

Men and Women linked together

For More Information

If you liked this post, like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter. For more information see all post about society and gender issues, about feminism, about rape, and especially these…

 

 

21 thoughts on “Forms to sign before having sex. Progress or madness?

  1. Andrew Roth

    The more cynical elements in the men’s rights activist/pickup artist communities insist that “affirmative consent” is a “shit test” used by women to disqualify milquetoast beta males and select for alphas who have the confidence not to play by the written rules. I suspect that they’re on to something with this gloss. I suspect they’re also correct that some of the women promoting this legalism secretly want to be raped, or at least taken forcefully, and that they’re projecting their obsession with rape onto others.

    Hallucinating a rapist behind every bush is crazy, and it’s a sign of dysfunction that such a crazy fringe has been allowed to take over sex policy with so little popular resistance. It’s telling that the moral panic about “rape culture” focuses so on university campuses, which are exceptionally safe, and not on the much more real threat of rape faced by less privileged people: prisoners, streetwalkers, women living on Indian reservations, etc. It’s of a piece with the maudlin “human trafficking” obsession with sexual slavery and the studied indifference to the horrific enslavement of male construction laborers in Dubai, thousands of whom have literally been worked to death, or even to the enslavement of female domestic workers in the Persian Gulf, who face a much greater threat of rape at the hands of their bosses than American university coeds face from anyone.

    Many activists against human trafficking can’t be bothered to worry about anyone but (nubile) damsels in distress. We end up with church groups from San Diego flying to Central America to concern-troll local hookers in decriminalized regimes, and at the same time we apparently feel no sense of national embarrassment that a group of Secret Service agents got so drunk and rowdy with an escort in Colombia that she felt compelled to call the police on them. The American media made a big stink about these feds hiring a prostitute, but nothing about their belligerently trying to stiff the help in a foreign country.

    Maybe we’re just the latest imperial power projecting its sexual perversions onto the periphery. This calls to mind C. S. Lewis’s comment about robber barons being less trouble than moral busybodies. Not content merely to run Latin America as a constellation of banana republics, we now send missionaries to bother its working girls. Really, though, this is just an imperial fractal of the same officiousness that drives campus busybodies to interfere in the sex lives of normal students stateside.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
  2. Irving

    Nicely put Mr. Roth, I agree completely. Though I do think that the MRA position, as you’ve put it, though essentially true, is simplistic. It is simplistic because there’s another side to the issue that they are neglecting to give an account of.

    It has always seemed to me that feminists, though (in my opinion) they typically tend to really hate men, also in a certain sense hate women as well. The problem is that women, when you really examine the issue closely enough, generally make decisions that feminists plainly don’t like. Nowhere is this more evident than where it comes to sex. Feminists are not stupid. At one time, they thought that sexual liberation would guarantee the downfall of “the patriarchy”, as men would no longer be able to control female sexuality anymore, and the control of female sexuality (they believed) was the means by which men kept women domesticated and oppressed. What has actually happened, though, is that women have simply been left in an incredibly vulnerable position. Women have not used their sexuality to achieve power and control, as feminists wanted them to do. Instead, as MRAs have rightly pointed out, they have largely given up their positions as sexual gatekeepers, which was formerly the only power they had over men, and many men — not just the alphas, but also other men who have caught on to the fact that all one has to do to have consequence-less, commitment-less sex with women is to imitate the alphas — have taken so much advantage of the situation, that women are in many ways worse off then they were before. Feminists see this and want to change it.

    Personally, I’m kind of torn on this issue. It really breaks my heart to see the way young women are treated by those young men who are in a position to take advantage of our sexually permissive culture these days. The problem is bad enough, and I think these young men exacerbate the situation by doing what they do. So, in principle, I would support anything that would ameliorate the situation in a fair and equitable way. But of course, it was (in my opinion) largely the fault of feminism that we are dealing with this problem in the first place, and not they are trying to correct this problem that they are responsible for by oppressing men. I cannot accept that.

    Like

    Reply
  3. The Woman in the Red Dress

    MRAs are clearly weaponizing feminism agaisnt women, Its brutal, yes. Some sections like the red pill , CH and TRM are plain out irregular warfare.

    I would not intervene…

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
    1. Irving

      The Woman in the Red Dress,

      That’s exactly what they are doing. Their strategy, which has hitherto worked with phenomenal success, is to push the costs of feminism onto women, rather than allowing those costs to be pushed onto men, which is what feminists would obviously prefer.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. infowarrior1

      MRA. Men’s right activists.
      Their contention is that No Fault divorce, Violence against women Act and Family court is biased against men and destructive to families.
      They also had common cause with Pickup Artists.
      And there is a new Right Wing Synthesis movement called Neoreaction which are united in their opposition against feminism.

      Neoreaction as far as I know oppose equality. Given its impossibility in reality and its effects on producing real injustice. They seem also to oppose democracy as dysfunctional in the long run and defaulting to the lowest common denominator.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. The Woman in the Red Dress

    MRA’s——–Male Right Activists
    CH —————-Chateau Heartiste
    TRM——————–The Rational Male

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
  5. The Woman in the Red Dress

    Example Given from the cubScout camp

    Women are all playing a game. Like a casino in Vegas, they’re given chips in the form of sex and companionship to put into games and machines (men) to try to win a good relationship. A good looking girl gets chips that go from 20 to 1, and she has to start out using the 20 only ever going downward to 19, 18, 17, and so on, hoping for a big score.

    But, this casino is a special, one time casino. It opens at noon, and closes at 2 a.m, forever. So, they have to collect their winnings by then or leave with nothing and be forced to fend for themselves, broke in the outside world.

    Furthermore, once she hits 10 p.m. management starts taking away 2 chips every following hour, but she’s not worried about that. That’s not for another 10 hours.

    So, she learns the rules and is so excited to get into the casino, hoping for a jackpot. She’s so sure she’s worthy of hitting a jackpot. It will happen for her. She’s been told her entire life.

    She enters the casino and sees thousands of machines ushering her over all vying for her attention. She is delighted. She’s never felt so loved or validated. She immediately walks past the begging 1-5 chip machines, morbidly obese men, fat thugs, funny looking gas station attendants, 35 year old pizza delivery men, and she laughs as she passes them. The idea of her putting a 20 chip in a 1-5 is laughable, she understands this completely.

    She then sees the 6-10s men, a lot of them are blue collared, some are college students on the up and up. She’s more impressed by them, but she at least wants a college educated man, no she deserves one, she thinks, and she’s got more than enough chips to get one.

    So, she keeps going. She gets to the 11-15s, college graduates, a lot of confident young men. A lot are just starting their shitty careers, some are more alpha than others. She doesn’t care for the nerds, but she finds some alpha med school student at 15 chips. He played college lacrosse too! And he’s just starting med school, so he still is only 15 chips for a hot girl like her. What a bargain.

    But she decides to continue, she has a few more chips than that, after all. She gets to 16-20. Fairly tall, attractive professionals. A lot of doctors, lawyers and stock brokers. They’re mostly in their late 20s or early to mid 30s. They’re surrounded by and turning down a bunch of girls offering lower numbers to them, but she has just enough to pull it off if she acts right now! But she sees the back of the casino. There are thousands of women gathered around these machines. “What’s going on back there?” She wonders. She decides she can come back to these machines later. It’s barely been three hours! So, she’s still not at risk for getting any of her chips taken away.

    She gets to the back and finds a ton of girls surrounding these machines. There are some movie stars, athletes, authors, millionaires and billionaires at 40 chips, who are communicating with these models and all these other girls who pass by. Then she sees some guys who cost 25-30 chips, and the price is crudely written in pencil on a paper hanging by a string around their neck.

    She sees other girls handing them their 20 chip and questions why to herself briefly. She walks up to one of them and asks, “Why if you cost 25-30 are these girls handing you their 20 chip when they can never have you?”

    “Price is relative,” he answered. “We just priced it at what we wanted. Personally, I’m not really looking for a relationship right now, but if I met the right girl, maybe it could happen.”

    “Well, what do you do?” She asked.

    “I’m lead singer in a band I started.” He answered

    She didn’t question his pricing. He seemed confident he was worth that much, after all. “Do you think maybe we could have a long term relationship?” She asked.

    “Anything is possible,” he said. “But like I said I’m not necessarily looking for a relationship right now.”

    She looked past his scruffy face into his dreamy blue eyes and handed him her 20 dollar chip. He looked up at her. “Thank you,” he said. “But you lose.”

    “What!” She yelled, as she could hardly control herself, reaching quickly and grabbing her 19 and handing it to him. “What about now!”

    “Wow, thanks again for coming back for more. Unfortunately you lose again.”

    “Unbelievable!” The girl screamed. “Do you know what you’ve taken from me?”

    “Yeah,” he answered. “Your 20 and 19 chip. I don’t want you anymore though, so don’t bother giving any more chips, but my buddy over there said you’re hot. He’s a starving artist and he sells drugs on the side. He’s worth 22, but secretly I think you can probably get him for 18.”

    “Is he really worth 22?” The girl asked.

    “Well, a lot of people think so,” he answered.

    She headed over to the guy and immediately handed him her 18 chip.

    “Wow, I really appreciate that,” he said, “But I’m really doing my own thing right now, and there are others girls who still want to give me their chips, so I really hope you find someone else. You’re a nice girl.”

    “Men are disgusting pigs!” The girl yelled, heading back toward the front of the casino.

    She was stopped by the manager and she looked up at the clock. It was 11! She handed him her 17 and 16 chips and bolted toward the front, desperately looking for the med school lacrosse player. She found him. His sign read 17 now, though. Thank God I found you! She said as she tried to hand him her chip. “Thank you,” he said. ” But I can’t do a relationship with you now. I’m doing my residency, and I’m getting a lot more attention from better women.”

    “Asshole!” She yelled as she ran even further toward the front stopped again by the manager as she coughed up her 14 and 13 chip. She scrambled to find someone, anyone.

    She saw a nerdy IT guy and almost gagged, but she still approached him. He was low confidence, short, nerdy and gross and set himself at only 11. She approached really sadly and resignedly. “Will you take my chip,” she said, almost crying. “Gladly!” He said.

    She walked out with him and she cried, mourning all of the possibilities of good looking successful men she lost. She should have just gotten the med student or the stock brokers or lawyers, when she could. She ended up with a loser after all the possible chances. She secretly resented him and wondered if she should have taken her friend’s route and not settled at all after she was denied by the med student. Maybe she could still cheat on him though.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
  6. Thomas More

    These “epidemic of campus rape” claims seem to be based on statistics about rape, so I decided to investigate them. The more research I did, the more dubious the stats appeared.

    My bullshit detector went off as soon as I read an article claiming that “44% of women have been the victims of sexual assault in America.” That just sounds _way too high_. Stats on rape nationwide is 0.1%. That just doesn’t square with a claim that 44% of American women have been assaulted. We’d need 440 years to get to that rate, wouldn’t we?

    So I decided to check out how this article defines “sexual assault.” Turns out the definition includes “unwanted sexual advances.” In other words, if somebody hits on you and you say “No,” that qualifies as a sexual assault.

    Huh???!?!?

    Okay, so now I checked out the other widely quoted stat — “nearly 20% of women have been raped in their lifetime” in America. But how do they define “rape?”

    “Defining rape as “completed forced penetration,” “attempted forced penetration” or “completed alcohol- or drug-facilitated penetration,” researchers found that approximately 19.3 percent of American women and 1.7 percent of American men have been raped in their lifetimes.”

    Whoa, whoa, whoa! Hold on, there, buckaroo! “Completed alcohol- or durg-facilitated penetration” means “the girl was drunk when she had sex.” That might involves rape…but it might not. It could mean that the guy got the girl drunk and then took advantage of her…OR it could just as well mean “the girl got blackout-drunk and then woke up with a guy she didn’t remember, but had sex with consensually”…OR it could just as well mean “the girl got drunk and had a great time and then felt guilty about having sex.” One of those fits my definition of rape, but the other two don’t.

    Likewise “drug-facilitated penetration.” That could mean “a slimeball fed the girl roofies and then had his way with her”…OR it could just as easily mean “A guy and a girl went to a rave and they both did some E and had sex.” The first is rape, the second isn’t.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/09/rape-in-america-cdc-study_n_5784686.html

    Linked to from this article about the recent “Yes means yes” craziness on college campuses:
    https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/stress-and-sex/201507/letter-young-sexually-active-heterosexual-women

    This whole thing is just another example of moral panic caused by American puritanism. The “25% of women on college campuses have been raped” stat has been thoroughly debunked. And I don’t buy the bogus stats that are being slung around in these article because of the slippery outlandishly vague definitions of things like “sexual assault” and ‘rape.’

    Article debunking that crazy “1 out of 4 women on campus have been raped” canard:
    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/no-1-in-5-women-have-not-been-raped-on-college-campuses/article/2551980

    A new DOJ survey shows that women on college campuses are actually _less_ likely to be sexually assaulted than women in the general population — so we’d expect a less than 0.1% rape rate on campuses, as opposed to that absurd 25% rate:
    http://thefederalist.com/2014/12/11/new-doj-data-on-sexual-assaults-college-students-are-actually-less-likely-to-be-victimized/

    And so on. These moral panics keep erupting in America. Why can’t we just admit we’re a fanatically puritanical country and ban sex entirely and have done with it?

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment & share your thoughts...

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s