Mandatory USC sex training tells students ‘consent is never a blanket statement’

Article here. Excerpt:

'As students returned to campus for the fall semester, the University of Southern California rolled out a program set on instilling the concept of “affirmative consent,” in hopes of making a “yes means yes” attitude the “standard in every sexual encounter at USC.”

Brenda Ingram, director of Relationship and Sexual Violence Prevention and Services at USC Student Health, launched the initiative called “Trojans Respect Consent,” in which all incoming freshmen, were required, beginning Monday, to undergo 90 minutes of training on her concept of “affirmative consent,” according to a school news release.
The director emphasizes that it is “critical” to “check in with your partner or partners every step of the way and continually assess whether they are able to provide rational, genuine consent.”

“Though by no means a comprehensive answer to the problem of assault, creating clearer parameters to the definition of consent can help move the needle on the larger mission of eliminating sexual violence,” Ingram said about her plan to impress upon students that “consent is never a blanket statement.”'

Like0 Dislike0


... get on top of women and fuck them. Not one has yet to either object or accuse me of sexual misconduct. Though some do keep coming back, for whatever that means.

Nothing like feminists to make life miserable for everyone.

Like2 Dislike0

1. who decides these steps they require be followed?

2. what if one of my steps is diff from what she was expecting?

3. is ejaculating a separate step I will need to plan for ahead of time?

4. if there is a threesome, is there a diff playbook altogether?

5. is calling her afterwards a step or just an option?

6. is there an ap for this?

7. what if there is only one step involved? do I fail the course, or can I take a make up.

yeah, this is really going to solve ALL the problems. /sarc

Like2 Dislike0

If consent can be withdrawn at any time, why bother trying to get consent in the first place? In a contract, if both parties consent, both are expected to fulfill their parts of the bargain. If sex is treated like a contract, then both parties should be expected to fulfill their parts of the conract.

But can sex be treated like a contract? Frankly, I'm not sure. But if consent can be withdrawn at any time, it becomes meaningless--if it doesn't bind the consenting party in a meaningful way, it is basically meaningless. Even if one party gets it in writing, it can be withdrawn at any time without written notice.

It just seems to me consent must have some legal consequence or it's useless as a legal concept.

Like0 Dislike0

Affirmative consent is a nonsense, as it places an onus on one party to an act of sex to know at every point in the act what is in the mind of the other party, that the other party continues to consent, while only ever being able to enquire at point in time events. Affirmative consent is internally illogical and logistically impossible to achieve in any act, other than feminist gender hatred.

The issue of affirmative consent is less problematic than the feminist model of heterosexual relationships in which these kinds of rules are enforced on males but not females.

It is implicit in the feminist model that males are privileged and predatory, and must be compelled under threat of punishment to request and respect consent, while females are vulnerable and need to have their agency subverted by the State to protect them from male predation.

The outcome of this implicit sexism in the feminist model of heterosexual behaviour is that females have the power to either consent or not consent or withdraw consent retrospectively or reframe consent at will, while males have the burden of proving that the female consented at all times (clearly impossible).

Ironically, this feminist model of heterosexual relationships in the context of affirmative consent denies female agency and infantises women almost completely.

Go girls. In the rush to empower women, women have been disempowered and rendered childlike, more limited in their choices than ever before. The real power here, if news reports of college Title IX tribunals is informative, goes to the feminist academic intelligencia! The new marxist matriarchy.

Like2 Dislike0

Since feminists insist consent can be w/drawn at any time and for all practical purposes need not be communicated, this in principle leaves a man accusable and if they had their way prosecutable for any kind of sexual offense at any time.

That's the idea.

Remember for the feminist, the original SJW, the matter has nothing to do with right or wrong as such but about power and who holds it over another. Their model seeks to give women absolute power over men, period. All models of thought go in that direction.

"It was never about equality."

Like3 Dislike0