Posted on 04/19/2010 12:31:34 PM PDT by Arec Barrwin
The Atlantic
Duke University and the Accidental Sex Offender By Wendy Kaminer April 12, 2010
Celibacy is probably not a feasible option for most undergraduates, but students at Duke University may want to consider it anyway. Duke's new rules governing sexual misconduct and coercion are so vague, subjective, presumptive of guilt, and oblivious to the dynamics of consensual sexual relations that they pose a risk of prosecution even for students engaging in innocent foreplay. Sexual misconduct at Duke includes "inappropriate (or non-consensual) touching," as well as rape; "inappropriate touching" and "acts of a sexual nature" that require clear consent include ("but are not limited to") touching and "attempted touching" of an "unwilling person's" erogenous zones, "either directly or indirectly."
I don't know what constitutes a non-consensual, indirect, attempted touch, but I wouldn't try it at Duke, where actionable "coercion" may be unintentional and merely inferred, or imagined, by a self-proclaimed victim: "Real or perceived power differentials between individuals may create an unintentional atmosphere of coercion." This suggests that students risk inadvertently committing sexual offenses if they engage in sex with classmates perceived as physically or psychologically weaker, less intelligent, or simply less popular. How might presumptively powerful students avoid unintentionally exploiting this "unintentional atmosphere of coercion?" The university explicitly "mandates that each participant obtains and gives consent in each instance of sexual activity."
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlantic.com ...
Innocent foreplay. What kind of a defense is that?
Duke's policy is politically correct to the extreme but I doubt this phrase would hold up in court.
Any university where the Chairman of the Board of Trustees said, in explaining why he would not come to the defense of the falsely-accused (but unPC) lacrosse students, “Sometimes good people have to suffer for the good of the organization”,
is a place to stay away from.
non-consensual, indirect, attempted touch, but I wouldn’t try it at Duke, where actionable “coercion” may be unintentional and merely inferred, or imagined, by a self-proclaimed victim: “Real or perceived power differentials between individuals may create an unintentional atmosphere of coercion.”
Wow...that’s scarey. So all a woman has to do is Imagine that you are intentionally or unintentionally trying to get a woman in bed and you are guilty? THANK GOD I didn’t go to DUKE and Thank God women can’t read my thoughts.LOL...I would be GUILTY!!!
It's one of the best tricks in the feminazi playbook.
And if you're stupid, you'll get trapped.
Has "LegalZoom" made the appropriate forms available yet?
Or, as stated in another place, "You can't make an omelet without breaking eggs."
A roommate of mine in college was walking home from a bar one night and met a girl that he assumed, by the way she talked and walked, that she was very drunk and took her home and slept with her.
In the morning it occurred to him that she was not drunk at all but rather mentally retarded.
We are already at an extreme level of absurdity in the workplace when simply saying “good morning” can be interpreted as a sexual advance.
Now I know why.
I recently visited the Duke campus and was amazed at the number and prominence of day glo green emergency call boxes. They must be for calling and reporting an accidental sex offense.
They can likely also be used to report a completed rape or perhaps calling for help once the horse has left the barn.
This new sexual conduct guidelines sounds a whole lot like the totalitarian technique of making virtually everything a crime, so that every single (male) person can be prosecuted any time the ruling party finds it convenient. Of course, the unwritten part of this code is that it will only be used to persecute straight white guys. Duke, along with many, if not most, other universities in this country, is an anti-American, anti-freedom cancer.
Well, try saying it with your pants on.
Just sayin’ ;)
As a proud Carolina fan, I simply say Duck Fuke!
The solution is to let it become known known that no employer will hire graduates of Duke or any other school with such a policy on the grounds that anyone stupid enough to attend such a school is clearly not intelligent enough to work for the employer.
“Sometimes good people have to suffer for the good of the organization”,
and these people don’t want us to call them fascists...
Reminds me of the sign
“how did you get ‘racist’ from ‘good morning’”
From a post on another thread, regarding the psycho environment in the workplace:
On one of the construction sites I had worked, there were two electricians working on terminations in a junction box, one man, one woman. They were a good team, got the stuff done on time and accurately. One day the man says to the woman “Nice T-shirt”. She took it as a complement since the T-shirt had the Texas A&M logo, where his kids were at. Another woman was walking by, heard the comment, and filed a “third party sexual harrassment complaint”, claiming that the man was making an unsolicited compliment (and thus a sexual advance). The man was fired on the spot, even though the woman with the Aggie T-shirt claimed that such a complaint was frivolous.
The environment is such that people are afraid to have any kind of social interaction, else who will be offended.
So, the thought police on the college campuses are now at the workplace as well.
Even if she HAD been drunk, that alone wouldn’t have given him the green light to sleep with her.
So, if a girl sent a naked picture of herself to someone but she didn't give the OK for that person to touch the picture, then they would be guilty of "indirectly" sexually harassing the girl.
Sounds fair to me. Not.
Of course not.
In the morning my roommate, my girlfriend and I took her home and explained to her parents what happened. While the dad wanted to kill my roommate, mom explained that this was likely not the first time an event such as this had occurred, but that my roommate was the first to take her home, explain and apologize.
The girl continued to come by our house looking for her "boyfriend" and each time, including the night that he met his soon to be wife, he would have to explain to her that he was sorry and that they were not boyfriend and girlfriend.
We are still friends and when given a chance we will still give him grief about that night.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.