California high schools to be first in nation to learn 'yes means yes' sex policy

[Theodarzna]

SAN FRANCISCO -- Gov. Jerry Brown has approved legislation aimed at making California the first state in the nation to bring lessons about sexual consent required at many colleges into high schools, his office announced Thursday.

Last year, California became the first to require colleges and universities to apply an "affirmative consent" or "yes means yes" standard when investigating campus sexual assault claims. That policy says sexual activity is only considered consensual when both partners clearly state their willingness to participate through "affirmative, conscious and voluntary agreement" at every stage.

[...]

Parents would still be allowed to excuse their child from some, or all, of the sex education curriculum.

A 2011 report from the University of California, San Francisco, found problems with school districts' compliance with the current law on sex education. Among its findings, only a quarter offered the required information about emergency contraception and a quarter omitted required HIV-prevention topics.

Source

So, "Yes means Yes," continues its creep into day to day law. From the college grounds to our every day bedrooms this policy makes its way at least in California.

What say thee?

However when the writer of the law was asked how one proves consent is acquired or proved she said “Your guess is as good as mine.” So I am less than comfortable with such a vague law.

[Theodarzna]

I think it is a good idea.

When having sex with someone, you normally ask if they are ready, or ok, or something... at least I did...

I do not know if it will lower assaults, but it might, and if it does, it is a good thing.

idk, the language of the law and how its presented in Campus training is consent for every plausible set of the way. Which is sex I can't personally imagine being all that fun.

[Fritters154]

I was kind of under the impression that this was already policy in California as my undergrad university stressed it as early as at least 5 years ago.

[ShadowofVashj]

Amazing how such a colossal failure of parenting nationwide has led us to this point.

[Xandrigity]

Note it says yes at each stage. Which mean yes to this but no to the next step if he or she says no. So really I'm not sure what in reality it accomplishes. Still will end up being she said she said balony after the fact.

[Vightnic]

idk, the language of the law and how its presented in Campus training is consent for every plausible set of the way. Which is sex I can't personally imagine being all that fun.

I don't honestly think anyone is expecting such exacting detail in pursuing their sex lives. I think they're just trying to lodge the idea of consent in the social consciousness. Humans have a tendency to make a lot of assumptions when things are going well, they end up easily dismissing signs to the contrary. It's important to make people more situation-ally aware.

[Theodarzna]

If it is too extreme that is a problem... but just asking the person "do you want to?" or "are you ready?" or "can I stick it in now?" I think, is acceptable. Not all at once, but any one of those before the act.

Kind of feels like circumscribing sexual behavior on people.

[Azadina]

This is what I'd categorize into just common sense....What next, both parties are forced to fill out lenghty paper forms and multiple copies of each. Then have judge to sign them?

[TrumpIsPresident]

This counts.

[Mistame]

Seems like women are unable to be specific about how far they're willing to go so guys have to ask permission at each step. /s

Though it could mean justification for encounters to be on video. For proof. Also for upload. /s

[Deleted]

So that means basicly the whole law is hollow and doesn't change anything?!

This is what I'd categorize into just common sense....What next, both parties are forced to fill out lenghty paper forms and multiple copies of each. Then have judge to sign them?

You mean like this?

[Revi]

So if there's any issue, you have to prove your innocence, rather than them proving your guilt? If that's what they're going for, they're shitting all over the justice system and good sense.

If this is just to encourage asking for consent, I doubt it will change anything at all.

Personally, I've never asked for verbal consent. Stopping when we're both going at it to ask "are you sure you want to have sex with me?" seems like a major turnoff - I'm competent enough to know if there's consent from non-verbal ques.

[Xandrigity]

We're moving towards needing a notarized contract before engaging in casual encounters.

[TrumpIsPresident]

We're moving towards needing a notarized contract before engaging in casual encounters.

Reminds me of that episode of Futurama.

Hermes Conrad: Not so fast! While I was filing, I came upon a certain document filed by a certain Morgan Proctor. Form B, notification of romantic entanglement.

Fry: That's right, she fraternized me!

Morgan Proctor: That form wasn't about you. It refers to my high school prom date. It was a regulation date that ended in regulation disappointment.

Hermes Conrad: Yes, but you only stamped it four times.

Morgan Proctor: No! No! I was young and reckless!

[Gorsameth]

We're moving towards needing a notarized contract before engaging in casual encounters.

That's what you get when people start accusing others of rape because they had regrets days after the act.

[Feali]

At some point parenting failed and now the school system has to take the role.

[Theodarzna]

I don't honestly think anyone is expecting such exacting detail in pursuing their sex lives. I think they're just trying to lodge the idea of consent in the social consciousness. Humans have a tendency to make a lot of assumptions when things are going well, they end up easily dismissing signs to the contrary. It's important to make people more situation-ally aware.

Yeah but laws have consequences.

As State Rep. Lowenthal stated about how one could even prove consent under these guidelines in court her exact words were “Your guess is as good as mine.”

I mean If you have no clue how your law works, its a shitty law.

[Reeve]

Seems kind of excessive to me. I think the mood might be a bit ruined by asking each other over and over, "Do you want to have sex? Do you still want to have sex? Are you sure you still want to have sex?"

If she doesn't want to have sex, a simple "no" will do the job. If she's saying "No," as in "no, that's too good, no don't stop," then you can designate a safe word she can use when she really does want to stop.

But positive continuous reaffirmation just seems over the top to me.

[Underverse]

Awful policy. Consent to sexual acts is almost never given verbally; this is a departure from social custom and will allow for incredibly broad incrimination.

[s_bushido]

Guilty until proven innocent: Always a good decision. *holds up a glass of Sam Adams*