Yale's Comprehensive Sexual Misconduct Guide

[LAblondeGPhi]

Originally Posted by Low D Flat

It's troubling to me that there's no expectation of reasonableness here when the consequences to the sexual partner are so severe. I think it's unreasonable to invite a (recent) former lover into your bed, wish for him to stop his second attempt at intimacy, and say and do nothing to convey your wishes. In fact, I think it's insane. Of COURSE there are circumstances where women reasonably fear physical or emotional punishment for saying "no," and of course it's rape if they stay silent due to that intimidation. But this survivor didn't claim any fear of this kind -- not even based on earlier trauma, much less this guy's actions. It's not clear to me that this guy knew that she didn't want to have sex at the time it happened. (If she'd even shaken her head, I'd want him in jail. But she didn't.)

I support an affirmative consent rule that's clear to everyone as a community standard. I applaud schools working to establish that standard explicitly. But it wasn't in place at the time and place of that case. I don't think expulsion and the "rapist" label are the right consequence for these facts.

I agree with your assessment.

Originally Posted by DrPhil

In addition, I find it interesting that discussions of rape lead people to believe humans are truly rational, logical, and reasonable. Most discussions of offending and victimization consider the inconsistencies and complexities of humanity (while still maintaining that even an irrational person can be a victim who didn't deserve to be a victim even if there were misunderstandings on the part of the offender and/or victim). Discussions of rape conveniently do not.

This all sounds like a supporting argument for Low D Flat's statement - that there is room for genuine, not malicious, misunderstanding on the part of both parties.

To me, one of the most tragic circumstances would be a woman (or man) who truly feels violated sexually, and an alleged perpetrator who truly believed that the encounter was consensual. Parallel circumstances happen all the time in all kinds of other non-sexual instances. In such cases that go to court (or arbitration, or something similar), one has to start making judgements about what constitutes reasonable behavior/responses given certain situations.