Myth #1: “This is a radical, new idea.”
Myth #3: Boys and men will be unfairly penalized for easy misunderstandings and miscommunications.
Myth #4: “The law ignores situations when both people might be drunk.”
Myth #5: “‘Yes means Yes’ ‘fixes’ a problem that doesn’t exist. Why can’t a person just say ‘no’ or fight back?”
Myth #6: “This law, and others like it, will change everything about how we prosecute rape claims.”
Read details here about why these are myths and how rooted in not understanding the crime, predatory rape and how people respond while being assaulted. In the end, what much of these objections seem to come down to is a discomfort with one thing: shifting the onus from survivors of sexual assault, mainly but not by any means exclusively, women, to perpetrators, who regardless of the gender of the person assaulted, remain mainly men. Yes means yes is a challenge to the cultural entitlements that allow serial rapists to function with impunity. Less than 3% of rapists are ever jailed. On campuses, less than 2% are ever sanctioned in any way.
As Amanda Hess put it, “If you think it’s easy for a person to just say no, then why would it be so hard for his or her partner to just ask?” Why does that worry people so much?