Read about it here, from FIRE:
"Duke's vastly overbroad definition of non-consensual sex puts nearly
every student at risk of being found guilty of sexual misconduct. Students are
said to be able to unintentionally coerce others into sexual activity through
'perceived power differentials,' which could include otherwise unremarkable and
consensual liaisons between a varsity athlete and an average student, a senior
and a freshman, or a student government member and a non-member.
Further, students are said to be unable to consent to sexual behavior
when 'intoxicated,' regardless of their level of intoxication. Duke has turned
mutually consensual sexual conduct, which might merely be poorly considered,
into a punishable act. Adding to the confusion, if both parties are intoxicated
at all, both are guilty of sexual misconduct, since neither can officially give
consent. North Carolina law does not support this definition of consent.
'Of course, there is no way that everyone who was
intoxicated during sexual activity, let alone 'perceived' as more powerful, is
going to be charged with sexual misconduct,' said Adam Kissel, Director
of FIRE's Individual Rights Defense Program. 'Add to that
the provision about an unintentional atmosphere of coercion, and anyone can see
that Duke's policy is impossible to rationalize or to fairly and equitably
enforce. As a result, this policy effectively trivializes real sexual
misconduct, which is a gravely serious crime.'"
"It seems to me that the most powerful group on
Duke's campus is the group of feminists that got this policy passed. If you have
sex with one of them, you have obviously been raped and need to file charges. "
More at Protein Wisdom:
"Women’s Center Director Ada Gregory was quoted in Duke’s student
newspaper The Chronicle justifying the new policy, saying, 'The higher [the] IQ, the more manipulative they are, the more
cunning they are … imagine the sex offenders we have here at Duke—cream of the
What is WRONG with these people?