[ccday]

One of the professors quoted in the article suggests otherwise:

> The system promulgated a definition of sexual misconduct so expansive that it “plausibly covers almost all sex students are having today,” as Gersen wrote in an article in the California Law Review.

[mirimir]

Yes, and TFA also quotes this from her:

> "Lots of people disagree about where to draw the line. But most people would want to draw a line so there is such a thing as consensual sex."

Also this amazing quote from some activist:

> As Catharine Mackinnon, the progenitor of the school of feminism from which this movement proceeds, once put it, "Politically, I call it rape whenever a woman has sex and feels violated."

So basically, there is no sex (no matter how consensual it seems) that might not, at some indefinite future time, become rape.

So damn, if I were a college student, I wouldn't be having any sex. Maybe just with other guys. Or maybe just porn.

[alexis_fr]

This is correct. That’s what is called the MGTOW philosophy. A lot of men are disengaging. However, I have very few data to understand whether this is as new as they present it, or whether there has always been 30% of men who disengaged from the dating pool throughout history.

[mirimir]

More useful, perhaps, would be peaceful non-violernt demonstrations. Something like mourning the coming of men and women raising children together.

[gregimba]

The standard at my college was any alcoholic consumption meant you could no longer consent. If I had a beer and had sex with my girlfriend it was considered sexual misconduct under the definition of consent the school provided.

[cadlin]

Are you certain of this? It's a common misunderstanding about campus consent policies and it might be true somewhere, but it is far from standard. It might be a part of lower quality consent literature, but that's different from the actual standards determined by school policy.

E.g., The University of California's policy around alcohol and consent is:

>The Respondent knew or a reasonable person should have known that the Complainant was unable to consent because the Complainant was incapacitated,in that the Complainant was... unable to understand the fact, nature, or extent of the sexual activity due to the influence of drugs, alcohol, or medication

[balfirevic]

What if you both had beers? You'd both be considered to have committed an offence?

[esyir]

Of course not. He would have been the offender.