Well that pasted all wrong. 

Let me try that again :

( (Now maybe it is because it is so early in the morning, but this looks rather murky to me)  

If signed by governor, legislation would make California the first state to define when "yes means yes".

Al Jazeera and The Associated Press

 america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/8/29/california-lawmakerspasscampussexassaultbill.html 

State lawmakers on Thursday passed a bill that would make California the first state to define when "yes means yes" while investigating sexual assaults on college campuses.

The Senate unanimously passed SB967 as states and universities across the U.S. face pressure to change how they handle rape allegations. The bill now goes to Gov. Jerry Brown, who has not indicated his stance on the bill. Sen. Kevin de Leon, D-Los Angeles, said his bill would begin a shift in how California campuses prevent and investigate sexual assault.

 

Rather than using the refrain "no means no," the definition of consent under the bill requires "an affirmative, conscious and voluntary agreement to engage in sexual activity." Earlier versions of the bill had similar language. Silence or lack of resistance does not constitute consent. The legislation says it's also not consent if the person is drunk, drugged, unconscious or asleep. Lawmakers say consent can be nonverbal, and universities with similar policies have outlined examples as maybe a nod of the head or moving in closer to the person.

Advocates for victims of sexual assault supported the change as one that will provide consistency across campuses and challenge the notion that victims must have resisted assault in order to have valid complaints. Some critics say the legislation is overreaching and sends universities into murky, unfamiliar legal waters. Gordon Finley, an adviser to the National Coalition for Men, wrote an editorial asking Brown not to sign the bill. He argued that "this campus rape crusade bill" presumes the guilt of the accused. The bill passed the state Assembly on Monday by a 52-16 vote. Some Republicans in that house questioned if statewide legislation is an appropriate venue to define consent. 

 Monday by a 52-16 vote. Some Republicans in that house questioned if statewide legislation is an appropriate venue to define consent. There was no opposition from Senate Republicans. The bill would apply to all California post-secondary schools, public and private, that receive state money for student financial aid. The California State University and University of California systems are backing the legislation after adopting similar consent standards this year. The bill also requires colleges and universities to adopt "victim-centered" sexual-assault response policies and implement comprehensive programs to prevent assault. In January, President Barack Obama vowed to make the issue a priority. He announced a task force chaired by Vice President Joe Biden that created a website providing tips for filing complaints, www.notalone.gov, and issued a report in May naming 55 colleges and universities across the country facing investigation for their responses to sexual abuse and violence. 

Report in May naming 55 colleges and universities across the country facing investigation for their responses to sexual abuse and violence. The University of California, Berkeley was included on the list. The White House Council on Women and Girls reported (PDF) the staggering fact that nearly 1 in 5 college women is sexually assaulted by the time she graduates, with just 12 percent of them reporting the assaults — a much lower rate than the estimated 40 percent of assaults that are reported by the general population, according to the Department of Justice. In addition, students from a number of colleges and universities — including the University of California at Berkeley and the University of Southern California, Dartmouth College, Columbia University, Harvard College, Occidental College, Swarthmore College — have filed complaints in the last year that their schools violated the Clery Act and Title IX of the Civil Rights Act by mishandling their sexual assault cases.

 

Ditto!

 Take this article right here for example and some of the challenges (the rest of the article can be found at the link :

 

america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/america-tonight/articles/2014/4/17/nonconsensual-sexwhenrapeisreworded.html

 

This article refers to the terms “nonconsensual sex,” as well “nonconsensual sexual intercourse” and “nonconsensual sexual contact.” Brett Sokolow originated the latter two terms, which are now used at hundreds of schools and often shorthanded, in school reports and colloquially, as “nonconsensual sex.” In subsequent communication, Sokolow made it clear that he objects to the term “nonconsensual sex” without the modifiers, because “sex by definition is consensual,” he said, while “sexual intercourse” and “sexual contact” are not.  “In an ideal world, we should call [rape] what it is,” Sokolow explained. “To water down the language a little bit, to get more hearing panels to hold these guys accountable, I think it’s worth the trade-off.” Around 15 years ago, Brett Sokolow was touring universities and advising them on how to deal with sexual assault on their campuses. On these visits, he noticed something strange. The schools had policies about rape, and recognized that rape happened. But when it came down to it, they just didn’t want to believe their own students actually raped. “I trained hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of hearing boards, and [listened] to them get squeamish about it,” Sokolow said. “The hearing board would say, ‘We’re not willing to label this guy a rapist.’” Sokolow, the CEO of the consulting and law firm the National Center for Higher Education Risk Management, decided colleges needed another word. But on the issue of sexual violence, almost every word is loaded. “We tried out ‘sexual abuse’ for a few years,” Sokolow explained. “Then the priest scandals in the Catholic Church captured the meaning of that.” Nonconsensual sex is sexual assault. Several schools make that clear. In Princeton University’s policy, for example, next to the category “non-consensual sexual penetration,” it states in parentheses that the act is “commonly referred to as rape.” And next to “non-consensual sexual contact,” the act is “commonly referred to as sexual assault.”  But the reason that hearing boards winced at the word “rape” is the exact reason activists think the term is important: It’s violent and powerful, and does justice to the violation that victims experience. Anti-rape campaigners have pressed their communities to understand what rape is, and how much it happens. Many see “nonconsensual sex” as a harmful euphemism.  But that’s one of the reasons Sokolow, who defends schools in lawsuits, doesn’t think campus policies should use the word “rape.” “It’s very off the cuff to say ‘rape is rape,’” Sokolow said. “If women walk around campus saying they’ve been raped, they could be sued for defamation.” Rape is a serious crime. And colleges aren’t in the business of determining what is a crime. They can’t send a rapist to prison. They can only decide if a student violated school rules, and the worst they can do is kick the kid off campus. In making that decision, most colleges use a much lower burden of proof than a criminal court — “preponderance of evidence,” or “more likely than not,” as opposed to “beyond a reasonable doubt.” If they start treading into legal language, Sokolow warns, schools open themselves up to trouble. A student expelled for “nonconsensual sex” is far less likely to lawyer up and hit back. It’s rare for a college to seriously sanction a student who commits sexual assault. According to a 2010 investigation by the Center for Public Integrity, only 10 to 25 percent of students found “responsible” for sexual assault were permanently kicked off campus. Sokolow believed “nonconsensual sex” sounded less bad, which could actually encourage schools to punish rapists. But some experts think toning down the language has the opposite effect. “It just gives the school the ability to not expel students,” said Colby Bruno, who has assisted thousands of colleges and universities in addressing sexual assault as the senior legal counsel at the Victim Rights Law Center. “That’s really what it’s about.” In the first half of 2013, Yale University reported four cases in which the school found "sufficient evidence" that students had engaged in “nonconsensual sex,” and all of the perpetrators were allowed to continue pursuing degrees. (Only one was suspended.) When this information came out in Yale’s biannual report on sexual misconduct last summer, the backlash was swift and loud. The headlines read: “Yale Fails to Expel Students Guilty of Sexual Assault.” A Change.org petition collected 1,500 signatures. In response, Yale did something unprecedented in the world of college sexual assault policy: The school published detailed descriptions of different nonconsensual sex scenarios and their corresponding punishments. The school wanted to make it clear that it wasn’t letting rapists roam freely on campus.  Nonconsensual sex was not, in fact, sexual assault. According to Yale Deputy Provost Stephanie Spangler, the phrase allowed the school to punish behavior that may not meet the legal standard.  One of the scenarios describes a couple, Harper and Sidney. Harper knows Sidney isn’t ready to have sex, but starts moving toward it. “We shouldn’t do this,” Sidney says, continuing to touch Harper intimately. “This is a bad idea,” Sidney says, as Harper proceeds anyway. Sidney starts to cry, still embracing Harper. The new ‘gray rape’ Activists have long cringed over terms for “different types” of rape. In the late 2000s there was “gray rape,” the not-exactly rape-rape, in which mixed messages and alcohol muddied the very idea of consent. Before that, there was “date rape” — a phrase first used by activists, trying to shatter the myth that most rape was committed by strangers. But then that phrase began to grate on advocates too. “Do you call it date murder?” said Bruno. “No, you call it murder.”  

 

It's about fucking time there was a blow back. For too long the justice system and politicians have been pandering entirely to women without giving a fuck about men. And this bullshit rape culture crap too.

You go out on a date, both have a few drinks, sleep with each other, and then the next day she decides she was drunk and unable to give consent and was raped. Fucking ridiculous. Like the guy was any less drunk, and therefore more capable of giving consent.

If you're going to go out and drink, you take the chance that you wake up next to a beast. That's the way shit works, whether you're a boy or a girl. You shouldn't be able to ruin someones life just because you had beer goggles on when you fucked them.

Or you can just hire a hooker. Most of them are cheaper than lawyers.

I got trashed once with a Marine buddy down here in Orlando on a 96. We partied with Bill Murray and were on our way back home when these two hookers flagged us down. We pulled around to get them but two squids were trying for them too.

We got lost on the back streets and found two black hookers walking around. They had a hotel room already and we went back to fuck but we were both drunk and passed out. When we woke up our wallets were empty and we lost over $400 in cash.

Those two squids we later found out had been arrested by undercover cops and got busted big time by the command at the base in Orlando. So it was a trade off.

 

  If some one walks through a high crime area while foolishly displaying large amounts of cash and they get mugged, I would say the victim is partly responsible for their misfortune.   In no way did they deserve to be a victim, but drawing attention to yourself in that manner is like throwing raw meat in front of a wolf.    Knowing your surroundings and minding appearances is indeed a legitimate plan of defense.  I personally have no problem in resorting to stealth mode to ensure my safety whatever the perceived threat may be.