Duke University and the Accidental Sex Offender

The Atlantic ^ | April 12, 2009 | Wendy Kaminer

[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."

[usslsm51]

By saying “good moaning”

[taxcontrol]

So to comply, you will need to exchange prior to sex disclosure and approval forms, signed and notarized, have the entire sex episode videotaped for evidence, plus have an advocate for the female and an advocate for the male watching at all times prepared to step in and stop the whole episode if in there opinion, the person they are advocating for, indicates that they no longer want to continue with the sex.

[/sarc]

[gusopol3]

Duke had a highly -placed helth care official, a homosexual, who was offering his 5 yo adopted son on the internet for sex; he was going by the name of perv dads for fun. It should be as highly celebrated case as Matthew Sheppard was, or at least as much so as some of the priests’ cases. I don’t suppose the Duke policy addressed anything like that.