Once you start making bizarre Jesuitical rules about personal conduct, you have to face some bizarre Jesuitical situations. Like this one.
Duke's own policy is remarkably...bizarrely Jesuitical. It appears that if a male has sex with a female, and both are too drunk to give consent, then the male has raped the female. If the male is too drunk and the female is sober, there is no rape. And so on, as interpreted by Duke sex-Jesuits.
The cool thing is that this is all because of Title IX, which requires that there is no discrimination based on sex.
Very cool: a (plausible) requirement that there be no discrimination based on sex is being used to justify the claim that women are so weak and helpless that they are not responsible for their own choices, and need middle-aged Puritans to protect them.
Where will it end? It may not end. We asked for it, now we deserve to get it, good and hard.
Duke's own policy is remarkably...bizarrely Jesuitical. It appears that if a male has sex with a female, and both are too drunk to give consent, then the male has raped the female. If the male is too drunk and the female is sober, there is no rape. And so on, as interpreted by Duke sex-Jesuits.
The cool thing is that this is all because of Title IX, which requires that there is no discrimination based on sex.
Very cool: a (plausible) requirement that there be no discrimination based on sex is being used to justify the claim that women are so weak and helpless that they are not responsible for their own choices, and need middle-aged Puritans to protect them.
Where will it end? It may not end. We asked for it, now we deserve to get it, good and hard.
