TFW there is no notary public around so you can get it in

Every woman I know would dry up immediately if you asked for permission like a little b-word. "Uhm is it okay if I kiss you ma'am?"

Women want their men to be decisive. Shocker, right?

Getting consent papers is bad enough but imagine how much of a mess everything will be once bureaucracy gets involved

You'll need your s*x permission signed three times with a blue pen on A4 paper, date entered correctly, and your names written clearly otherwise it won't be accepted in court. Oh and it must also be stamped by some official the next day after both of you will give an additional declaration of consent

It's what bongs deserve, I hope this will become a law

They said the line!

People forget that these women hate s*x with men. The wing nuts should not be defining laws

There's nothing hotter than signing a lengthy NDA, having it notarized, and filed away before getting it on.

We are in the age where everyone has a camera phone. how hard is it to record the consent acceptance video message on the phone before proceeding?

wasn't there a chappelle's show sketch about this

This would backfire on women horribly because if it got normalised that guys get you to text them "I Consent" before s*x women immediately lose all their power. Can't decide to fake the r*pe claim after dumping him because now he's got the receipts and foids were the one who said the receipts count, so tough shit b-word

Of course it will boil down to he said/she said, the same as all crimes without definitive evidence do. What this campaign is pushing for is defenses like "she was dressed like that" and "she didn't say no" not being enough to imply consent.

Yes because the court accepts those defenses all the time

It'll probably never be relevant to you, just sayin'.

he fact that you feel that suggesting that people seek affirmative consent for s*x is enough to cause "attacks" on the left deeply concerns me.

If you bothered to read the rest of the article though it'd explain why the current system is clearly not sufficient and why they want to move the onus on the male feminist rather than on the victim as it currently is. In simple terms it's not acceptable that victims can be accused of implicitly giving consent then needing to prove they didn't consent. A lot of your takes on this resort to reductio ad absurdum, such as implying that a couple trying for a kid would need to explicitly get consent every time. But the reality is that the vast majority of regular long-term couples would know how to communicate properly. What the campaign is really trying to do is reduce the massive number of male feminists getting away with it based on them assuming consent, not couples trying for a kid.

This is absolutely psychotic. Needing to prove something happened is the very bedrock of any legal battle

Even better /u/psychovagabond is defending trains and muslims in his post history

Why don't we have a state magister come and personally witness any act of fornication lest you be punishable under law by 30 years hard labor in a penal colony?

>And yet, she “felt like she was on trial” and had to prove “that she had adequately resisted”, she told The Standard.

>She said: “There was a really brutal defence questioning that made me wonder: ‘Am I responsible for what happened to me because I didn't say no? Was me crying not enough?'.”

I don't like this woman.

Exactly what society deserves for condoning premarital s*x. Enjoy getting convicted of r*pe and/or having to sign a contract on video before fricking the guy you meet in the club.

Making a giant close-up of her face the poster for the campaign is peak Proudman lmao

OI YOU GOT A LOICENSE TO FRICK THAT CHAV INNIT?

Just because I said I wanted s*x when we started doesnt mean its not r*pe two minutes later

So stupid, even Redditors are against it.

Foids are desperately trying to make consensual s*x more complicated and potentially punishable than straight up r*pe

Another day I thank God for making me gay

>Dr. Charlotte Proudman

>Proudman

You can't make this shit up

Lmao guys will just start lying and say she said yes. It's not reasonable to assume they could prove it unless they set up a hidden camera to jerk off to the recording later.

But remember, foids are totally not responsible for the complete destruction of society

Proudman lmao

Hello Dahncer_the_reindeer, or should I say r*pedeer? 8 letters, fitting huh. If this life were perfect you'd have known nothing but milk and cookies since you left your birthers c*nt. However, it's not- that's where I come in.

You have no say anymore, no freedom, no volition- I am Santa. You now worship my Christmas tree. You can call me Nicholas. A saint? No, but I come with more conviction.

Dahncer_the_reindeer you are my r*pe sleigh-ve now. And that's your greatest achievement- all you've ever amounted to, tugging and pulling my sleigh as we break the space time continuum together you complete fricking slut. I'll find you.

Snapshots:

https://old.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/1b7bpvc/im_asking_for_it_calls_for_law_to_require_clear/:

• undelete.pullpush.io

• ghostarchive.org

• archive.org

• archive.ph (click to archive)

The only person of colour in the royal family isn't present because Meghan Markle was bullied out.:

• ghostarchive.org

• archive.org

• archive.ph (click to archive)

SHOW MORE

Horse shoe theory of s*x should only be for reproduction when you get you state issued liscense

LONGHOUSED.COM

well, if any s*x is going to be considered r*pe anyways.....

I hope this shit becomes law everywhere just from an accelerationist perspective, the idea of people having to argue in a court of law whether given consent was "enthusiastic" enough is hilarious.