I regret to inform you that the “Yes Means Yes” proponents have reached their second milestone. The disease of feminism has swam across the Pacific and onto Hawaiian shores to infect its second host, the college campuses of Hawaii.

Recently, a mass email has been sent to all students and faculty informing them about the newly revised statutes regarding rape and sexual harassment. I fear it may be more strict than in California. The link is here if you wish to read it in it’s entirety.

1. How consent is now defined

Any college campus accepting federal funding is required to adopt this rule. This is a case of extortion, (e.g. “We may not be able to force you by decree, but we can take away your food and drink, AKA funding”). I have no doubt that they did so without blinking. College is a business. As long as you pay your tuition, and purchase your mandatory $200 textbooks, they don’t give a shit.

How can you provide evidence as the defendant to prove your innocence beyond hearsay? You can’t, here’s why. Though it states in the second sentence that you can use “(picture/video)” as evidence of affirmative consent, Hawaii state law says it is unlawful to, “install or use equipment in a private place for observing, photographing, recording, amplifying or broadcasting sounds or events…without the consent of the person or persons entitled to privacy therein.” The only way possible to prove your innocence is outlawed.

Even if the girl miraculously continues to have sex with you after demonstrating massive betamaxness with your constant reassurance, you can’t prove it. You’re allowed to save text messages and record phone calls, but that can’t prove affirmative consent, so it doesn’t matter. There is a video, “Feminism for Bros – 105,” about a beta going through the motions of pre-coitus with respect to “Yes Means Yes.”

I want everyone to see how repulsive it is to witness in action. This is how the government expects you to conduct all sexual encounters.

2. Affected Areas

In other words, this doesn’t apply outside of college campuses. Something tells me that it’s because it’s unconstitutional or they’re experimenting by easing its way into the federal law, waiting for it to be the new normal, then escalate to state laws, finally federal laws. Boil the frog slowly. Convincing the populous to relinquish their rights in the name of security of the divine female.

Also, the majority of the students are between the ages of 18-21, kids still dependent on their parents for provisioning. As you can imagine, most of the voters were probably parents, specifically those of daughters (anyone with a brain knows that this law wasn’t intended for females). A parent’s ideal path for their daughters would be virginity until marriage with a rich, handsome man. Then bland, innocent, clothed missionary sex would only occur for the sake of reproduction, and cease to exist there after.

That’s a fantasy, but this allows them to provide a roadblock to their daughter’s vagina, a meta-chastity belt if you will. The government knows that no parent would hesitate or protest. I bet if the government pitched this idea for the rest of the populace, with the video above as instruction, their would be an uproar.

3. Redefining Sexual Assault


As all red pill digestors here know, one of the goals of feminism has been to expand the definition of harassment, sexual assault, and rape to keep men’s balls in a vice grip in order to complete their dual-sexual strategy successfully, while maintaining no responsibility for their actions.


First highlighted in the picture is “indecent exposure.” The act of flashing your genitals to unwanting persons is unacceptable, yes, however, this does not constitute as assault. Assault on the senses, possibly, but not bodily harm as the name suggests. May I pull out my cock madam? The second highlighted is “voyeurism.” A third party peering into anyone’s sexual activities without consent is also clearly unacceptable, but likewise does not cause bodily harm.

Feminism is doing the same with domestic violence in the new movement referred to as “Purple Purse,” the act of controlling how a women spends your money is “financial abuse.” Expanding the definition of abuse and who qualifies as a victim. Your wife and children are covered under domestic violence, but guess who else is being pushed to qualify as a victim? Intimate partners—AKA your girlfriend.

There’s a link below to the website, and also a video of it’s campaign. The “victims,” are referred to as “survivors,” another example expanding the definition of a term without appropriately editing the label.

4. Standard of evidence

In other words, “Preponderance of the Evidence” instead of “Beyond a Reasonable Doubt”. Many rape, abuse, and harassment accusations are false and the evidence cannot survive the scrutiny when upheld to the standard in the court of law where this should be handled in the first place.

The university can expel you from school, which is on your academic record (banning you from all schools), and publicly label you, while keeping the “victim” anonymous without any real evidence to support the notion. Your reputation can be forever ruined and may have physical consequences – assault by a group of white knights.

5. Anonymous tips

This is perhaps the most dangerous part of all. An anonymous third-party who knows you’re sexually active with a female, can send a “tip” that you, a male, have sexually assaulted a female, not including themselves, to the administration of the school. The school can then interview the female who may confess that you guys did indeed have sex AND it was CONSENSUAL.

The school may then ask how did she consent and if her consent didn’t meet the standards of the “Yes Means Yes” rule, they must take action on her behalf. ON HER BEHALF! This is a hypothetical, but based on the wording, I don’t see why it couldn’t.

6. Long arm of collegiate law


The school will determine whether or not they have jurisdiction over the area in which this supposed event occurred, nothing wrong with that. However, if it has continuing effects on its jurisdiction, they can “prosecute.”

I’ll tell you what I think “effects” really means. I believe it means if both of you are college students from the same school and are accused of a rape that supposedly occurred outside of campus, and her emotional “trauma” from said event lingers on university jurisdiction, they can “prosecute” you. Over reaching at its finest.


This propaganda is everywhere: school (all grades), Hollywood, professional sports, prime time television, and even video games. The government is putting their nose in my sex life, and that’s none of their business. I take what I can from my courses since not all of it is brainwashing, but it’s tiresome to weed through the nonsense.

I used to approach and have gotten laid a few times before affirmative consent law here, but I may have to stick with self-pleasure and monk mode while on campus for the rest of my college attendance. It’s almost as if this was the intended consequence…

The only way to win is not to play. If your school adopts this law, and you want sex, do it off campus with a non-student, outside of work, and ask for ID. I would even add that you photograph or videotape your encounters with a smile on her face just to cushion the blow to your reputation.

Yes, it’s ridiculous a man must go through such extreme measures to satisfy his natural carnal desires in a manner that doesn’t dry up vaginas, get you expelled from school, tarnish your reputation, placed in a cell with Bubba, or get you fired. But you’re a man, you must adapt. Withdraw from the system and work on yourselves because if you’re a man, the only person you can ever rely on is yourself.

Read More: When Her No Means Yes 

Send this to a friend