Let’s think about this. Over the years, the far left has worked hard to destroy the mores of society. When it comes to sexual relations, they have been pushing notions that it is A-OK for young people (including teens and pre-teens) to be not just sexy, but be sexual. The Leftists and their Feminist subset have pushed for these young folks to not only show themselves being sexy, but to not worry about having sex. They teach this in schools, on the Internet, in movies and on TV, in person. They have no problem with casual, meaningless sex, consistently pushing the boundaries further and further, including for teens, who generally do not have the emotional makeup to deal with that. They say they like kids to be sexual, especially young women. Show it! Flaunt it! Be it! They push women to be hyper-sexual.
Yet, this has all come back to bite them in the posterior, in terms of the supposed culture of rape, especially on college campuses, which tend to be very liberal. Kids pushing the boundaries of sex, as they’ve been taught, and then liberals get upset that they achieved what they wished for
Deeply divided over consent signals
Many embrace “no means no.†They have grown familiar with another three-word standard, “yes means yes.†But America’s college students are deeply divided on how to read the unspoken language of sex.
What if someone undresses? Or gets a condom? Or nods in agreement?
In each of those scenarios, a Washington Post-Kaiser Family Foundation poll found, at least 40 percent of current and recent college students said the action established consent for more sexual activity. And at least 40 percent said it did not.
Conflict and confusion about consent pose enormous challenges for colleges scrambling to prevent sexual assault. Many have discovered they need a new curriculum just to teach incoming students about the do’s and don’ts of intimate communication.
One of the biggest problems: Men sometimes see a green light when women are signaling yellow or red.
I don’t really find Dave Chapelle that funny, but, he makes a good point.
The rest of the article exposes just how muddled the situation has become. No means no, yes means yes, no means maybe, yes means no, etc. Sexual assault is never OK, but, if you teach kids to be sexual creatures, to think that casual sex anytime is A-OK, if you teach kids without the emotional makeup to always want sex, and tell them there is nothing wrong with it, what, exactly, do you think will happen?
