The Connecticut Senate this week approved a probably unconstitutional bill requiring all Connecticut colleges and universities to adopt the “yes, means yes” policy when it comes to sexual consent, similar to California’s cypto-fascist law. The bill dictates a completely unenforceable standard for sexual consent It was bi-partisan fascism, and passed 34-1. Sen. Joe Markley, R-Southington, was the lone vote against it.
According to the bill’s champion, Sen. Mae Flexer, D-Killingly, it is “is redefining the definition of consent.” She explains that under the law, college students would be required to “say yes” or indicate nonverbally through “physical cues” that they are willing to have sex with another college student. And what “physical cues” would qualify? How about eye contact, and the kind of communications that we celebrate in the arts and literature? What about the “look of love” that Dusty Springfield sang about? Enough, Mae? How would schools enforce such a law? Cameras in every room? A panel of “physical cues” experts, watching every possible sexual encounter?
Each institution of higher education shall adopt and disclose in such institution’s annual uniform campus crime report one or more policies regarding sexual assault, stalking and intimate partner violence. Such policy or policies shall include provisions for: [(1) detailing]
(1) Informing students and employees that (A) affirmative consent is the standard used in determining whether consent to engage in sexual activity was given by all persons who engaged in the sexual activity, (B) it is the responsibility of each person to ensure that he or she has the affirmative consent of all persons to engage in the sexual activity, (C) the existence of a dating relationship or past sexual relationship between persons shall not constitute consent to engage in the sexual activity, and (D) it shall not be a valid excuse to an alleged lack of affirmative consent that the accused believed that the victim consented to the sexual activity (i) because the accused was intoxicated or reckless or failed to take reasonable steps to ascertain whether the victim affirmatively consented, or (ii) if the accused knew or should have known that the victim was unable to consent because the victim was unconscious, asleep, unable to communicate due to a mental or physical condition, or incapacitated due to the influence of drugs, alcohol or medication and, as a result, was unable to understand the fact, nature or extent of the sexual activity.
Affirmative consent is defined in the bill as an active, informed, unambiguous and voluntary agreement by a person to engage in sexual activity with another person that is sustained throughout the sexual activity and may be revoked at any time by any person.
Otherwise, the male is apparently a rapist.
Sen. Markley, the sole sane and competent Connecticut senator, noted that college students are not a special class of citizens who are exempt from the Constitution’s protections of freedom of speech, due process and the presumption of innocence for the accused, all of which this idiotic bill threatens. It dictates speech, you see. A college can declare that sexual relations between students were not permitted, as colleges often did when I was in college, not that they ever enforced them, but they have that right. They do not have the power to dictate what people say before or during sex, nor can the government demand that an institution do so.
This is what the “war on women” rhetoric has done to legislators in liberal communities. It has caused them to abandon basic Constitutional rights so that women can tar men as rapists and sexual criminals at will, claiming that what a reasonable male would take as consent was, in fact, not. It will also leave colleges wide open to lawsuits for violating students’ civil liberties, not that the students caught in this trap won’t be deeply harmed as well. It is particularly disgusting that the impetus for such laws—other states are considering them—has been fueled by high-profile false accusations, like the Rolling Stone attack on the University of Virgina‘s fraternities, or that of “Mattress Girl” at Columbia.
A poll last week suggested that a majority of Democrats and about a third of Republicans don’t agree with the concept of Freedom of Speech. This unethical bill, and the rampant political correctness insanity that it embodies, is consistent with that result.