What world are you talking about exactly? Like it hasn't been in every form of media constantly since it happened?

This policy helps men too. It is not exactly uncommon for men themselves to be raped and a large contributing factor is usually that thy don't think they can say no. This makes it clear that if they were not positively consenting then they were raped.

Everyone is a hypocrite. How many people have pets that they love but still eat bacon? It's basically the human condition to hold conflicting beliefs.

The weird thing is that, for the last 12 months, the reported incidence of rape for men and women are practically the same. So it seems like rape culture is even more pervasive than it seems.

The weird thing is that over the past 12 months the rates are the same (1.6% and 1.7%, men actually slightly higher).

That would seem to indicate that, if you count that as rape (I imagine most of us around here would) then the 1 in 5 statistic applies for both men and women. Very surprising.

Ummm... how is made to penetrate not rape?

That's actually not true, it could be statistically significant. Significance depends on the a priori probability of the event as well as the size of the sample. 20-40% of teachers are men depending on which level you are talking about (elementary vs secondary), so the probability that 30 of them would all be women…

It says 30% of women orgasm every time, not they only orgasm 30% of the time.

Fair enough. Like I said, I don't give a shit about Chris Brown, he has made his bed. It just felt like the article was being a little disingenuous.

I'm not defending Chris Brown here, but the "already served" part was actually three months in jail. They probably should have put that in the article.

The "already served" part was actually three months in jail. Which is, yeah, pretty steep.

I mean, he did spend three months in jail. That's not a light punishment for a punch in the face that left no injuries.

I thought he looked awesome. Made me want to buy a suit just like it. Could be he has a career as a model for Men's Warehouse after he is done with the whole president thing.

I meant more like the person on top is obviously consenting because they are the ones driving the encounter. The other person, maybe or maybe not.

It says in the law "verbal or physical assent", which actually opens a stupid loophole I would think where the defendant is all "she totally wanted it because x, y, z", but it addresses your point. If you forcefully penetrate someone you are physically assenting.

These aren't criminal trials we're talking about though, they are university investigations. You don't have the same rights.

I think it is mostly supposed to represent a shift of the bar a little more toward the defendant than it was before. So you no longer have to prove that you rigorously resisted your rape, only that it was unwanted. I think you are right that procedurally it doesn't seem to change much, but psychologically it should…

It's not changing the requirements to legally convict someone of rape. It only affects college investigations and adjudications. Maybe they are using it as a kind of trial run? I imagine it would take a lot more effort to pass a law changing the way rapes are prosecuted.

You're right that it's bad, but not quite that bad. Here is some data from the National Women's Law Center. Note that black men are actually paid less than white women, implying that race is a larger consideration than gender.