05-11-2018, 10:29 AM
(05-11-2018, 10:04 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: That's interesting, because that is not how we have defined consent for our Title IX proceedings, and this definition of consent has been tested in federal court.
That is what I am saying. There should not be special rules for sexual behavior.
If I had a roommate who let me ride his bike to class every morning I could not be convicted of stealing that bike just because he woke up on morning, changed his mind, and called the police.
If I am a business man who has always accepted late payments without penalty then I can not impose a penalty on a late payment unless I inform the other party that I am changing the rules.
As far as consent to sex if I am in a relationship with a woman I should be allowed to assume sex is consetual unless she says "no". "No" means "no" but it is ridiculous to say that the rules can change without one party notifying the other. Why should the laws regarding sexual conduct be different from the other laws that are deemed fair and just by the court system?
Based on your suggestion if a man touched his wife's breasts without asking permission first he could be charged with sexual assault. That is absurd.
