Description

What if every time you had sex, you had to sign a contract giving your consent? We ponder this hypothetical as well as the case of a male athlete who was expelled from college for raping a woman who claims he never raped her. We also stumble across our first (and possibly second) billion dollar idea. Somebody fund us!

See More See Less

Subscribe

Leave us a review, comment or subscribe!

Meet the hosts

discussions

  • This is basically a response to: Beyond ‘no means no’: the future of campus rape prevention is ‘yes means yes’ “No means no” and “Yes means yes” may seem like good, simple, and commonsense advice, but I can’t imagine anyone who honestly observes their social interactions can’t see that most communication (especially in the realms of “seduction” and “attraction”) is completely nonverbal. To start, let me begin by saying that I used to be super careful about ever crossing another person’s boundaries without their permission. In reality, I was too careful. I used to never initiate with women ever. I was too afraid to do something that they didn’t want. If a girl wanted to be with me, she had to do all the initiation (I somehow magically got some action this way, but it ultimately hurt my chances). As a result, I can count on more than one hand when I’ve been in situations where women are giving me a 100% nonverbal “yes,” but I never acted on it, because I never got a verbal “yes.” It got so bad, they would even contact me later in the night and say things like, “You know, you could’ve kissed me/fucked me if you wanted.” Consent is a much bigger grey area than feminists want you to believe. But ignoring how consent usually happens in the real world is ultimately destructive toward an honest conversation about what “consent” really means. To bring this around full circle, this also means that if a girl is giving a verbal “Yes,” but a nonverbal “No” (hesitation in her voice, closed body language, doesn’t seem “into” it) it’s probably better to lay off even though you technically have verbal consent. Please Note: This was originally a post for straight men, but feel free to switch the genders however you like – it’s not relevant.

    Jump to Discussion Post 4 replies
  • I recently read Hoppe’s Democracy: The God That Failed and it brings up a number of questions. I sent him an email with these questions and am still waiting for a reply. But I thought I’d put them out there in this group as well. There are five series of questions and this is the first batch. Is a covenant community binding for all time? Or can a member of a covenant society secede from it just as he ought to be able to secede from the state? Can the terms of the covenant be changed in the future and if so how? Can the covenant specify that all rules and restrictions covered in the covenant can be changed through democratic means – in other words through voting? And if so, can they do specify that this be done by simple majority rule or other ways as specified in the covenant? Further to this – am I correct in assuming that the terms of the covenant inhere to the property and not the person?  For example, I own property in a strata development which is covered by such a covenant. It binds me to the bylaws of the Strata Corporation and these rules can be changed by the members democratically at a meeting. The strata council enforces the rules, manages the budget, etc. I also pay strata fees which are analagous to taxes if this were a municipality. (The strata fees are actually more than the municipal taxes I pay, though the city provides a lot more services.)  And these rules inhere in the property, so if I sell it, the buyer is bound by the covenant. But I cannot secede from the covenant. In effect, a covenant community is really a mini-government, but organized as a contract rather than as a political entity. But in practice, is there really any difference? I have written on my blog about this a few times. Most notably here: http://jollylibertarian.blogspot.ca/2015/10/private-government.html and here: http://jollylibertarian.blogspot.ca/2015/10/consent-of-governed.html and here: https://jollylibertarian.liberty.me/is-consent-a-sufficient-condition-for-a-society-to-be-considered-libertarian/  The latter contradicts the first two as I have had some change in thought on this. Feedback appreciated.

    Jump to Discussion Post 0 replies
  • In absence of a state monopoly with its blanket mandates what should be the case for any party that does not or refuses to enter any contracts? Should it be factored on a case by case basis, use the most popular contract in the given DRO, or could there be a general rule for how to deal with people outside of contract.

    Jump to Discussion Post 2 replies
  • Australia has had its first case in ages, of fake cops trying to pull someone over, a woman. Its a very dangerous situation because the only solution suggested by the police is to run from the Police! It also, in this case, may have been terrorist related. One of the incidents that started the balkan war was a set of police attack on Serbs and Muslims by what are now believed to be fake cops. People were attacked by cops claiming to be from the other ethnic group but seem to have been the same people. Agent provocateur’s.

    Jump to Discussion Post 0 replies