[b] [/b]

[quote]Us little Amerifags evidently need even more bubble wrap and red tape, except you know that old saying "wrap it before you tap it"? Well now our willies are soon to be getting wrapped in red tape instead if you live over in California thanks to this new bill that's on it's way to getting passed into law. According to it almost any sex had on campus can be legally labeled r@pe unless [i]"an affirmative, unambiguous, and conscious decision by each participant to engage in mutually agreed-upon sexual activity.”[/i] and this has to be done ether written verbally or written kinda ruining the "heat of the moment" sexy times because that's soon to be illegal. "Lack of protest or resistance does not mean consent, nor does silence mean consent. Consent must be ongoing throughout a sexual encounter and can be revoked at any time. The existence of a dating relationship between the persons involved, or the fact of past sexual relations between them, should never by itself be assumed to be an indicator of consent." Ain't love grand? "Consent must be ongoing..". Does that mean every tooth on a zipper? Each hook on a bra? Do socks count, or is that only if someone has a foot fetish? And again, this is even intended for those in an ongoing relationship. And it PASSED the Senate and will now go to the State Assembly. [quote]Under California’s new proposed law, the people who might or might not want to -blam!- you – will be required to repeatedly check in with you during the act. Do you want me to -blam!- you? Yes please. Do you want me to unbutton your jeans? Yes, kindly do that, since I lack any capacity to do it myself. Shall I slide your panties off? Would you? Thanks, I was hoping somebody might do that, glad you came along! Is that a yes? If not, I’m going to have to leave, and file a twenty-seven-B-slash-six, damned paperwork! Yes! Slide my panties off! Ah excellent! Now then, shall I press my erect penis against your labia, sliding the shaft against you for a minute or so, but not quite penetrating? Uh-huh. Sorry, what? Mmm-hmmm. Unfortunately, that’s an ambiguous response. Under state law, only with a clearly enunciated yes can I continue, otherwise, this becomes a violation of the criminal code. Oh, right, I forgot about that, yes, please, and yes to -blam!-ing me, too. Thank you, unfortunately, under section 4.3.a.iiiv.24 of California’s department of education code, I have to ask at each step, so, if you don’t mind, now, would you like me to…. Sounds like a hot Saturday night, doesn’t it.[/quote] (sauce in spoiler for space) sooooo many potential lawsuites based on abuse of this soon to be law flood [spoiler]http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/feminist-governance-feminism/californias-senate-to-declare-women-are-houseplants/ https://www.thefederalistpapers.org/education-2/california-liberals-pass-bill-to-regulate-sex-requires-specific-verbal-or-written-consent https://www.govtrack.us/states/ca/bills/2013/sb967 [/spoiler] [url=http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140SB967]And the bill itself[/url] Tl;dr (as per requested) Feminists just got a new weapon to store in their hoochie vault of castration Final quote works real well too as a short summary[/quote] You forgot to ask Obama to come here to talk about if you wanted to. But yea i see your point.

[u]HERE IS YOUR TL:DR[/u] Errybdy in Cali is bout to have to confirm that it is not -blam!- while having sex (during every stage of it) Example: You want to have sex? Yes You want me to unzip your pants? Yes You want me to take off your shirt? Hmmm *guy takes of her shirt* Thats -blam!-, she didnt say "yes" This will [i]totally[/i] not be able to be abused by woman who want something

That's the scariest picture I've ever seen.

I have a feeling that women might abuse this somehow....