California recently passed a law that requires some kind of written or recorded consent for college students to engage in sexual relations. While the law is probably gender neutral as well as sexual preference neutral, it is a law designed to target heterosexual white men. They are devils, if you believe what Leftists believe. Except for the white, heterosexual, cisgender men who share Leftist ideals.
And really, are they men or just human beings who happen to be male?
This new law is just one more step toward government-directed reproduction with the feminists and other assorted assholes at the helm. In other words, it is an incremental step toward eugenics and population control (emphasis on the control part).
The biggest problem with implementing the Eugenics agenda is primarily the male sex drive. Without the male sex drive, our species would have died off centuries ago or there would be less than one million people on the planet. You see, when a woman submits to her husbands sexual advances whenever he asks, she tends to have more children. Enough children to grow civilization actually.
So by limiting the male sex drive, the world elite can abandon their responsibilities of leadership and instead live a life of luxury with their boot on the throats of the few who remain. A large population is hard to control, after all.
More than that, this law was passed with the idea to curb rape. But the premise is bad because it presumes that all rapes are committed against white, heterosexual, cisgender women by white, heterosexual, cisgender men. The truth is, the feminist definition of rape (which expanded until it included 25% of all men) occurs equally among the sexes (I won’t go down the race route right now as it is irrelevant here). Women are just as likely to rape men as men are to rape women.
There are plenty of stories of men who are sexually assaulted and humiliated by women. In many cases, these are committed by women who don’t give a damn that a man did not give his consent and instead taunt him about his lack of manliness. If a man demanded sex from a woman and called her a prude in the process while she refused consent, feminists would call that rape.
Of course, feminism isn’t about equality of the sexes. It never was.
I suspect that this law will backfire. What is more than likely going to happen is that women will become more and more selective in who they fuck. There will be an elite few Alpha males who will enjoy the benefits of pussy while several men will be left to their own devices. These men will either start reading up on the manosphere, look at a lot of porn, build sex robots, or, in rare cases, buy some guns and shoot up a sorority.
This is because women tend to pine for men who are way above their own attractiveness. They can’t help it really. They want the Alpha male whose good-looking, charming, and a natural bad boy. They gush over that kind of thing.
What will probably happen is that many of these women will have pre-printed forms ready to be signed and will hand them out to men they wish to be fucked by. It will probably list parameters too as to what can and can’t be done (oral, anal, vaginal, etc.). It may even have checkboxes for such things.
Unfortunately for men, even this contract will ultimately not protect them from the perpetual victimhood culture of feminists. What will happen, as with every relationship contract, is that the courts of both campus rape squads and the actual criminal courts will throw those consent contracts out.
How do I know this? Well, a similar contract is established in all 50 states already: the marriage license. And this contract can be tossed whenever either spouse feels like it (usually the wife when she’s not happy). And given the State’s own track record with handling marriage, I doubt their handling of random flings will be much better.