S15 E12: [Consent Awareness Network] Consent in Our Lives and Laws
44:26 Share

Wunder plus subscribers can listen to something was wrong early and add free right now. Join wonder plus in the wander APP or on apple podcast audibles. Best of twenty twenty four picks are here.

Discover the year's top audio books and original als in all your favourite genres from memories in saifi I to mysteries and thillard audibles created list in every category is the best way to hear twenty twenty four best in audio entertainment like a stunning new forecast production of George or wells ninety eighty four heart felt memories like supreme court justice Jackson. Lovely one or the year's best fiction like the woman by Christian hanna. Audible there's more to imagine when you listen, go to audible dark com slash S W W and discover all the year's best waiting for you.

Mark something uncommon this holiday with just the right gift from uncommon goods. The busy holiday season has already started. I can't believe IT, whenever i'm looking for a one of a kind gift, I always had uncommon goods.

What I love about in goods is they scour the globe and create the most beautiful, original, hand made, absolutely remarkable things. They have something unique for all the hobbies in your life, like a pick ball paddle, snack tray, choose your own dog salt pepper shakers or a hand painted Floral flat candle. Many of their handcrafted products are made in small batches, so shop now before they sell out this holiday season.

And with every purchase, you make IT uncommon goods, they back a dollar to a nonprofit partner of your choice. They've donated more than three million dollars today to get fifteen percent of your next gift. Go to uncommon goods. Dot com flash S W W, that's uncommon.

Gds, what's dark? Com flash S W W for fifteen percent off, don't miss out on this limited time offer uncommon in goods or all out of the ordinary something was wrong is intended for mature audiences as a discusses topics that can be upsetting, such as emotional and sexual violence content warnings for each episode and confidential and free resources for survivors can be found in the episode notes. Some survivor names have been changed for anonymity purposes.

Sudanese are given to minors in these stories for their privacy and protection. Testimony shared by guests on the show is their own and does not necessarily reflect the views of myself. Broken cycle media or wondering the or any linked to materials should not be construed as medical advice, nor is the information a substitute for professional expertise or treatment. All persons are considered innocent unless proven guilty in a court of law. Thank you so .

much for listening.

I am so, so excited about today's episode because bringing education to empower ourselves, make change, bring change in the legal system, that's very much a huge part of what motivates the work that I do. And working with survivors each day has taught me how many holes there are within our system and how necessary the work that can, the consent awareness network does.

They have been following and supporting the pod and survivors for several seasons now. I've had the pleasure of connecting with nina lucas, who's joining us today. Enjoy short, and they have wonderfully and to all of our benefit agreed to come on and educate us and help all understand more about consent and our rights and need for change in the legal system.

So without further do thank you so so much joy and nina for joining me for the special episode. Your time is so valuable and the work you do is extremely important. And i'm probably thankful for your time and the resources that you bring to survivors.

Well, thank you tifany for having a son. And thank you for all the work that you do to raise awareness and to supports survivors.

We're very excited to be here long time listener, so i'm excited to talk to you in real time.

Well, the pleasure is all mine, joyce, if you don't mind kicking us off and sharing a little bit about yourself and how can begin.

but i've done a few things in this realm. We have a organization called the consent awareness network that is a coalition of many survivors, many of them from high profile cases like the wind skin case and the cosby case and X, P, M, and cases of cut abuse. People that have really learned that the word consensus really not not to find in our laws.

And so we have a coalition that works with legislators in order to correct that clearing flaw in our law and make consent the byword of how these cases are prosecuted. I'm a tedx top presenter. I've offered four books on the subject.

My most recent is your consent, the key to concurrent sexual assault. The revised tradition was just published in january. IT really serves as the bible for the work that we do.

And of course, I will be linking to all of these important resources, the look and the ted talk, which is absolutely incredible. It's around seventeen and eighteen minutes, and IT is so brave and inspiring and highly recommend. Now I know you're a listener and I know you're chief of staff, but i'd love to hear how you began to work with can .

absolutely I mean, the luis, I am the chief of staff. I we can send awareness network. My background is I was looks to just say for a purposes now that I was the victim of an incredible consent violation.

And what I was doing is I was trying to find out what I could do about IT, how I could pursue justice. Because when I happened to me, I thought i'm not going to left this stay, and I don't know what i'm going to do, but i'm going to fight back somehow. So I started to do a lot of research online.

I went to turney, got their council, and I ultimately found the work of joyce short. And I have to tell you, when I did, I had the most incredible yuga moment because I said, oh my gosh, this is what i've been trying to express. This is what I ve been feeling all along about consent.

But I I certainly didn't have the words or the war with all to come up with the work that he had already done. So ever since then, let's been about four, four or five years that we've been working together. And along with choice, this has really become my life's work as well.

Thank you both so much, and my heart goes out to you both. As a fellow sexual assault survivor myself, I can certainly relate to some of your sentiments about getting involved and how that can help in our healing journey, in our process. As a survivor of sexual sult myself and learning more about the systems and the process and our legal system, i'm often surprised by how many gaps there are. Joyce, can you talk about what consent is?

Absolutely, our laws. I like determine a swiss cheese umbrella. And that swiss cheese umbrella is just full of legal loops. Uh, the offenders just dive right in those legal blue holes and there's no prosecution for them.

Or there is really prosecution that doesn't succeed literally, because there is no definition for the word consent in our laws. Keep in mind that consent is actually unknown to consent is a bird. And in order to two consent, you actually have to have consent right? To consent means to convey consent to another, but you can't convey consent to another unless consent is actually taking place.

So our laws need to establish what consent actually is and the simple definition. And this is supported by number code, by general data protection regulation, by model panel code. It's really given knowledgeable and informed agreement by a person with the capacity to reason. And if we understand that that's what consent is, then it's easy to apply that definition to all of the varying things that people question about whether or not they actually consented.

If you look at the definition for consent, then you can see that if you use, i'd like to call them the three efforts that should never take place in sex, if you use force, beer or fraud, or if you use the eye d, which is in capacity. So if you exploit someone's in capacity or you use force, fear or fraud, that person is not consenting no matter what they say or what they do. And that's one of the very, very big problems that we have today in society.

A lot of people that think that they're helping and think that they're going to convey concensus, affirmative consent, enthusiastic and or and the other adjective that you're going to add on to the term is misleading. It's really blame the victim rhetoric because it's not how you speak, it's not what you say. It's whether the person who has motivated you has done so through malicious influence or whether they've done so in a way that doesn't include malicious influence.

So if they have used malicious influence, such as boys, beer, broad or exploit of your incapacity, no matter what you say or no matter what you do, you are not consenting. And the reason that is criminal is that the offender knows whether they've use force, fear fraud or exploded your incapacity. IT doesn't happen by accident.

There is what we call men's ra under the law. And mens rea means intent. But do they intend to motivate you in a way that's unlawful ful? So this nonsense about what you said or what you did IT is focusing on the victim's behavior and not on the offenders behavior. And we have to stop that. We can only stop IT by correctly defining consent in our laws.

So powerful. So helpful. Thank you. I'm just i'm so glad we're doing this. I'm learning so much, oh my god. Na, as a listener, is there any tips that you would hope listening ers would know about consent in their rights?

Yeah, absolutely. What I want to let everyone know is society know your listeners to know is that we are consent provision disrupters.

We're coming to you with a message that hasn't been pressed previously, and we're coming to you talking about the issues and problems and the non protection we receive through a lot of concepts that are in legal language presently and in consent education, as joyce was saying, the term enthusiastic consent, that's problematic. Yes means yes. Well, victims know that yes doesn't always mean yes.

So when we have that qualified into law, we are in trouble and we're not protected against the malicious influences that can be present. We are also speak against no means no. And these other kinds of catch raises and hashtags.

And of course, we can elaborate as we go along about why all of those are problematic, but they all circle LED back to being victim blaming and shaming, which is, those concepts say that whether or not a crime has been committed is based on the words and actions of the victim. And this is completely backwards. And it's all about the causation of the malicious influence of the. And as we're trying to push back and let everybody know what happens is they get a lot of the victim blaming in shaping .

mentality. The word yes always means yes, but the word yes doesn't always mean I can send that is a difference. Yes is an affirmative. But if someone use boys peer fraud or explained during capacity to get that, yes, you're not consenting.

And the other concept and law of no means no is just as inaccurate because of times the victim is so terrorized that they are frozen that they're not capable of actually saying no. Or if you're too afraid to say no, you are not consenting, you have to have the ability to really good your agreement. There are different types of agreeement that can take place in sexual contact.

One of them is a and accent means basically agreement on the face of IT. So no matter what is going on, when you know your head, yes, your assenting, but assenting is not consenting scientist agreement on the face of IT aquae sans is agreement under the rests. So if the person is using force or using conversion, uh, is scary you or is hitting you, then no matter whether you say, yes, yes, yes, please stop.

That is not consent, although in many states, IT is. And we have to change that. We have to get our laws to recognize that it's not what the victim does.

It's not whether they are sent. It's not whether they acquires. It's whether they consent freely give knowledgeable and informed agreement. One thing that would help clarify IT is in the state of missouri second degree rate states, a cent is not consent when induced by force to rest or deception. And so that really is the end result of an awareness of what consent actually means, that you cannot use force beer rod, and you can't explain someone's in capacity and call that intent so powerful.

So informative. Hearing your ted talk, which just kept going in my mind, is, why isn't this being taught to our children as well?

In school we actually have a cartoon would be created. And so if any of your listening ers wanted teach what consent means to your children, it's very easy to do. It's a fun cartoon, but has nothing to do with sexual conduct.

It's definitely dead. Yes.

it's all about whether a person can gobble up somebody else's Brownies when they say you can have one Brownie and all the Brown is disappear, or whether you tell the person, yeah, you can ride my bike and then the next minute they're riding your bike even though you haven't given the information or different things kicking you off the swings. So it's all about what consent means from a child's perspective. And if we can teach them what that means at the age of six or seven or eight, then that lesson is going to Carry them through for a lifetime of understanding what consent is and how to respect other people. And their limits and their boundaries and be able to secure consent as you age and and to become Young adult, right?

Because constant is the same everywhere. The definition never changes. I would say it's the bedroom, the bedroom, the Operator in the playroom, the locker room is always freely given knowledgeable, informed agreement.

I mentioned a little earlier about nerd code and general data protection regulation. Couple of things that you should be aware of. The reason that you sign a consent form when you go for your copied vcs ation has to do with nurses.

G code and nurse or code was created as the result of the nurse org trials against the nazis during the second world war. They were, I don't even call them doctors. They were just horrible human beings that were conducting bozo medical experiments on concentration camp captives.

And they were tried for war crimes after the second world war. In numbers germany, the n result was nurtured. Code, which really sets the standard for getting people involved in medical experimental, and now has actually become the watchword for any kind of medical treatment. So when you go for medical treatment, you must sign a consent form.

And even though you sign that consent form, if someone tricks you into signing IT or converses you into signing IT or forces you signing IT, that consent form has nobody able to do whatsoever because of neuberg code and the language that we use in our definition for consent is very, very similar to the definition in member code. Freely give a knowledgeable and informed agreement. It's also the same in general data protection regulation, which regulates your data input on the internet when you sign up for any new platform, most of us ignore all of that boiler plate because we know they are gona tell us the same thing we're going to sign in anyway.

We're just onna add our name and we want to use the platform and we're pressure fingers and hope that they do things in an above board fashion. But one of the things that you'll see if you actually read the thing and delve into what it's actually telling you has to do with their inhearse to general data protection regulation. G D P, R was created in the european union and IT was created in may of twenty eighteen.

And what's ironic for me is that my tedx talk was also delivered in may of twenty eighteen. And I found in ironic when I learned about gdpr, which is, after I created and presented this text talk, that we both define consent in the same way, freely, give an knowledgeable and informed agreement. And the way I learned about gdpr really came as a result of the bill cosby trial.

I met the author of chasing cossey, who explained to me that the woman who was the poor person for the jury was familiar with definition for consent in GDP r. And so I contacted her. Her name is hero car mail and nina and I had scheduled an appointment with the legislators in pensylvania.

We actually had introduced the concept and delicate their support in defining consent in the laws of pensylvania. So we were meet with them in Harrisburg. And I thought, well, wouldn't be great if we could bring shero with us so that he could explain to them what happened in the jury room during the cosby trial.

And loan behold, what happened was the jury actually asked the judge or the definition for consent. And what the judge said was, that's a question that cannot be answered. Your reasonable people use your common sense.

And the reason he told them that, number one, he spoke to them about being reasonable people because that's actually the function of the jury. The function of the jury is to represent what twelve reasonable people the peers of the offender would consider to be a crime or not a crime. And that's why we have jury decisions in our criminal cases.

The jury deliberated at the end of the trial whether or not cosby was guilty or innocent. And in that deliberation, the first question that came to their mind was, did he have consent? And so they asked the judge for the definition, and that was the answer that the judge gave him.

Unfortunately, because Sherry was on the jury, SHE knew what the definition of consent was from general data protection regulation. And the end result is because they had bad definition, which is freely give a knowledgeable and informed agreement by a person with the captain. Reason they were able to convert bill cosby of sexually assaulting and recommend what happens subsequently was a terrible overstepping of the supreme court in pensylvania, completely contrary to the laws of pennsylvania. Quite Frankly, they should have been able to overturn IT by the supreme court, but the supreme court refused to listen to the case, which was a horrific carriage of justice.

In the wide steam case in new york, the jury asked the judge the same question, what is the definition of consent? And the response was similar because new york's state has no definition of consent. And we have to keep in mind, when we are talking about cases of sexual sault in particular, the whole question boils down to, was consent present? And consent is not defined in the law.

And this is just making so many predators, they just will go through the legal loops. And they know very well, by the way, predators, they know very well that in most cases, the law reflects legal language that says, if you say yes or agree, you have consented. Predators know very, very well that all they need do is to illicit yes from you, and that they are within the letter of the law and not the spirit of the law.

And so many of these laws are written with the intent to assist and to protect, but because they're not using the correct definition of consent, they further in bed and qualify victim blaming and shaming. That happened in the L A. Trial of wine stein as well.

There were four survivors involved in that, and only one to receive justice. One of the women involved with the governor s. Wife of california, Jennifer a. Newson and SHE, had described how he had fained in orgasm to stop bothering her.

And so the a defense tourney sorry yeah I am sorry yeah I had a hard enough time saying in the big, big word so anyway, um the tourney mark works' was grilling Jennifer on the stand and saying, okay, can you find that orgasm now? Can you do this? He was pulling up the fact that california defines consent, or you know, doesn't define consent as positive CoOperation.

And his point was, well, if you did that, what else could be more positive than that? So when we're talking about defensive tourneys and times, even prosecutors are all enforcement. When we talk about them having this toxic practice of who ripping apart witnesses on the stand, they're not only just being moral and creepy and wrong, they're being effective.

They're working within the law and how the law handles this, the legal language respecting consent. And they're using IT to their advantage because it's not to find correctly, they're able to find these legal loops. We have many, many stories this, but that's just one of them that really got a lot of attention recently.

And there was an article or an interview done of some of the male jurors of that trial. And they were saying things like, well, I didn't like the fact that he emailed him afterwards. Those were the attitudes of some of the men on the jury. And I just can help you think if we are defined consent, that's just certainly something that they would not be able to get away with our side.

If we define when we define consent would be positive fear. When we when we define consent, what will happen is that model jury instructions will have to be rewritten. And what will happen is that the trial will involve, simply, was the motivation done through malicious influence or causation, or was IT not done through malicious influence or causation.

Model gurian instructions would then inform both the prosecution and the defense in regard to what the admissible in a court of law. So things related to what the victim was wearing or whether the victim had previous sexual contact with this person would become irrelevant and inadmissible in accord of law. What the courtroom will focus on is, what was the causation that brought these two people together in sexual conduct?

Was IT malaise, or was IT not malicious? If IT was not malicious, then IT was not a crime. If IT was malicious, then IT was a crime.

So IT will simplify these cases. IT will stop the victim blame. IT will stop people from casting all of this heavy weight of responsibility on their own shoulders and Carry shame with them.

For years and years and years, IT will really simplify being able to get sexual predators off the street. Sexual predators, for the most part, are serial rapist. And the rapid and this national network kills us that on average, the rape between thirty and seventy people in their lifetime. So getting one rapist off the street can help thirty to seventy additional victims. And that's why it's so important to get this right.

absolutely. Because this is stands now. Mentions of printed in the law are just qualifying further these many concepts exactly and rap.

And that's hard, fine. Because we always ask, gosh, why is there so much ict m blaming and shaming? Stop the tim blaming and shaming.

Well, because it's in the law. I mean, I don't mean to lab, it's not amusing. But I mean, that's where IT starts. IT is in our laws.

You and I see victims stories all the time. People come to us with their cases, and unfortunately we have to tell them, look, we know what consent is, but your laws don't know what consent is. And so the likelihood that you're going to be able to build a case on what you just told me is unfortunately unlikely because these cases, uh because trials, they're not based even on on truth, they're based on on proof. And you not only have to have a considerable amount of proof, but you also have to have laws that make the action that took place a crime and in most states, but but simply not a crime to define someone even defrays them of their pet pig and we'll go to jail, but you do frame them of sexual contact with your body. And that's no big deal in most states across the country.

right? And that's why we're saying that defining consent in the law is a human right, that we need to make a civil right, and that we now know in the world finally, for the most part, that everyone is entitled to their body, we autonomy and personal agency, and to be free from bad actors and seek to undermines rights.

So we really have a long way to go as far as human rights go and the concept of consent there are so many were being delves job the time with new laws that they are trying to make or initiatives that they're trying to do to cover up one good pole like stelling intermit image abuse um fertility fraud, sex and human trafficking. These are all based on consent. And one of the reasons why we're trying to make up these laws as we go is because we're trying to plug the legal loops wear.

If we had just defined consent properly in the law IT would be very, very apparent where these offences would be. Model unethical, but illegal that in course of control laws as well. I've seen some course of control initiative that are on the books in some states.

Now they even tion. And consent is just such an integral part of really most crimes. In new york, they mentioned consent in the statutes one hundred and sixty two times, all without a definition.

Most of the outside of the sexual assault round is even in the law of r like do not burn someone's house down without their consent. But it's not defined. IT just affects everything. IT affects really every offensive. And we ve got to get that in there.

In our laws, when you're dealing with consent and changing our laws, the reality is that there are so many ways that a person can be violated. It's infinite. We define rape and sexual assault by whether the person does a specific act that is identified in a specific snatch with pino code.

And that has to change. We have to have abroad understanding that non consensual sexual conduct is a sexual assault, and there are different levels of sexual sault. To keep in mind that not all sexual results arise to water considered rape.

In many states, there are degrees that we describe to every type of case based on the level of harm. So not all cases, if you're covers ing someone, you are not necessarily going to get the same sentence. You are not going to be convicted based on the same degree that is recovering ing someone as you would if you had violated them through putting a gun to their had.

There are different ways of dealing with the levels of harm that people are subjected to as victims. So people ask me all the time, well, what you're claim ing is that all everybody should go to jail for twenty years. That's that's just totally incorrect.

There are levels of are appropriate for each and every type of crime. And our lawmakers, part of their function is to determine what level of degree is going be assigned to specific type crimes. And what joyce .

are talking about, all the legal groups, if you've ever read any kind of sexual assault, the legal in in the piano code, it's very groce m reading obviously. And the the fact of the matter is that if you are particular sexual assault is not outlined in law, you are out of luck.

If you watch my testis cock IT starts with the case in pure university. Where Young man, uh, by the name of Donald's rent ward, gets in bed behind Young lady who is a student did por IT was her boyfriends dorm room. And her boyfriend had invited some friends over.

They were on their devices. SHE was bored. He was tired.

He went up to the top bunk of the boyfriend's bed. He followed her rut and he he embrace her. He fell asleep in his embrace.

And SHE broke up with to a sensitive of a hand, stroking her breast. And the hand traveled down her body into her underwear, and they engaged in sexual contact. And I have loved the bathroom.

So SHE climbdown out of the bunk bed and went to the bathroom. And when he came back, instead of finding her boyfriend on the top bunk, SHE saw Donald grant ward smiling down at her. And SHE was still wildered.

SHE didn't get what was going on. So he decided he was gonna down to her room, which was down the hall in this coed dorm. Ory don't ask me what I think of coed dorms.

Anyway, he found her boyfriend a sleep in her bed, and SHE related to him what had transpired. The boyfriend down and confronted ward word admitted what he had done. The police arrested him, the jury acquitted him, and his conviction was. So we worked very hard at getting the law passed in inDiana. I was contacted by representative salary secrets.

We wanted help in getting consent defined in the laws of inDiana, and we work very hard at defining what consent was for inDiana, and also to get on the action of the Donald board had done, get that also criminalized in inDiana law. And we were not successful in doing so. Subsequently, I was contacted by additional legislators in the inDiana, and we worked again at defining the laws.

And unfortunately, there are too many enabling legislators in inDiana that refuse to actually define consent properly and instead adopted a yes means, yes concept of sexual assault in indian's laws. In fact, we worked with a last go on consent as well. They wanted to adopt the military law.

And the military in the united states is the jurisdiction that has the highest level of sexual result of any jurisdiction in this country. Alaska is the worst state in the country, and arkansas is the next worst state in the country. So we were very intent on helping alasia get consent correctly.

And instead they adopted military war. Military hadn't, even worse, record of sexual assault. And alas, he does.

And recently, fortunately, we were able to get a amendment actually introduced in the national defense authorization act through representative, any customer who is a congress woman from new hanchen to define consent in N. D. A.

A. We got a minute past in N D, A, A. And we were very, very fortunate and crossing our fingers that the senate would back in as well.

And unfortunately, the senate pulled our amendment out of the national defense authorization act in the coming two weeks, April, the twenty first, we are going to be participating in a rally and press conference that is being held by never loan advocacy. And these are people that have been sexually assaulted in the military. And we just found out yesterday that any customer is going to be with us.

We're gone to continue working on getting the definition for consent correctly introduced and past in the national defense authorization act so that we can control and minimize the amount of sexual assault that takes place in the military and protect the people who protect our nation. So that's really what it's going to take. It's gonna demand from the public.

We recently worked with representative Robin lung from in little rock, arkansas. W fortunately were out of there about two weeks before the tornado was struck. Unfortunately, represented lens from her home is intact, and he was safely and little rock without being hit by the tornados.

However, the tornado that hit us was the enabling mentality of the legislators in little rock, who we used to define consent in their laws. The other thing that we worked on with representative long strong was to eliminate the statute limitations on why felony rapes in arkansas. Now arkansas, keep in mind, is the second worst state in the nation on rape and sexual assault.

And yet they refuse to define consent and they refuse to drop the statue of limitations on rape. Right now, the statured limitations on rape in arkansas is six years. IT is second to the worst statue of limitations in this country.

The worst is three years in texas. If you walk through the door of the present with five other victims, then there, then there's no sketched of limitations. It's bizarre.

If you look on our web page, the one page contains a list of every state, the order of your rank in terms of where your rape statistics land for capital. And you'll also see the statute limitations that applies in your state. Fortunately, seventy percent of the states across the country have no statute of limitations on rate any longer.

Unfortunately, arkansas is not one of them, but will be back. We, we haven't. We haven't given up on arkansas.

They had a problem with their great kids. They were not actually processing or properly maintaining rape kits for anonymous victims. Sometimes when a victim reports are rape, they determine that they don't want to go through with the process.

They're just not ready at that point in time, and those rapists should be retain so that if they change their mind, that they will be able to pursue justice and hold that rate less accountable. We were able to accomplish. We had three legislative changes that we were attempting to bring about in arkansas. One of them passed, were not given up on the other two, we will be back to arkansas.

absolutely. I have some other action items, if I may. We absolutely, I appreciate any donations where a grass roots organization, and think that you can donate as much as a cup of coffee.

That would be great. Everything helps. That wonderful. I would absolutely watch joices tedx talk, the feedback that I get from people, and especially recently we've been working with a lot of cults, is is so enthusiastic.

And we talk about how transform ative IT is for them to learn the true definition, consent, and how that is really assisted on healing journeys for them. We do have that cartoon for children, so that's something fun to share. And I also say that adults can learn a thing or two from that as well.

Joyce book, if you want to get a deeper dive into everything. I I absolutely recommended for anybody who's interested in consent connectors, people who are passionate about consent. IT is a must read.

I also want to mention our petition. We have a petition asking for support for consent definition legislation. We would love to see that go viral.

If you could sign that and share that, that would be fantastic. We would really appreciate that. And then they would also use our hashtag. We use the hashtag F, G, K, I, A, freely given acknowledgement, inform agreement, and then the hashtag qualified consent.

And finally, I would ask anybody to think about the problems that we ve outlined with some of these concepts that are going on now. I'm enthusiastic consent, yes means yes, no means no. Affirmative consent if you would think about those, and then perhaps replace those hash tracks with F, G, K, I, A and cautious ed consent because any sort of yes means yes, or words and conduct concepts are absolutely victim blaming and shaming.

They are looking to the victim to determine whether not a crime is taking place. We know that is completely backwards. And one of our goals, of course, is to protect victims from the horrible ripping apart that they receive from society, from long enforcement, from our judicial system. And defining consent is freely give a knowledgeable, informed agreement, will absolutely turn the tide, and that respect .

so so much. This is incredibly valuable to our supporters as well as myself. I cannot thank you both enough for the work that you do.

I hope that, that listeners will get fired up and get involved in whatever capacity they're able and feel comfortable. I love what you said, joyce. It's not if, it's when when we define consent. And I thank you both for being huge advocates in this movement and the support that you provide survivors and everything you're doing on a daily basis to move this forward. Because until this changes nothing.

changes of bid against rate, a wonderful expression. SHE said that we changed nothing until we change our laws.

absolutely. We've had efforts like me too, in times up and design us further awareness. But what we need is a solution, and the solution is a legislative one. It's to qualify consent in our laws, and that's what we are fighting for. And I would also like to add if anybody would like to contact their legislators in an effort to get the legislature ball rolling in their state, they can contact osp I at the website, and we would be happy to assist them and guide them and store them in that process. We're always looking to meet more and to get legislate of action started in different states.

I will link to their website and how you can donate to cans efforts and join myself in donating towards their efforts. IT is so, so important um and we really need groups like can to bring the legal action and change that we discuss every week that is so needed. Uh for survivors of these crimes, I always like to ask, do you have any other points that you want to touch, honor anything you want to go back to revisit .

the forcing amendment of the united states grand assault, equal protection under the law and if the one word of that determines guilt or innocence is not clearly defined and clarified, then how do we possibly get equal protection? Every jury has to make up the rules individually in their own deliberations. You can have one jury on one side of the hallway with a similar cases, another jury on the other side of the hallway.

And you can have two very, very different outcomes. So the finding consent is going to create the kind of equal justice. The the service.

Yeah, I just want to return again to your listeners, to the people whose stories have been featured on your podcast. I want to take away they're guilt and shame. I want to take away their I want to take away the beating up that they do upon themselves and to remind them that nothing that you said or did contributed to your abuse and you saying, yes, you're not in your head, you you're going along to get along, you're not leaving that does not constitute consent. And I want you to before to fight and strengthen by knowing them to you.

Both are legends. I look up to you both so much in the work you're doing, and I look forward to to continuing to support your work and finding more ways we can partner together in the future. Thank you so, so much.

Thank you for having us.

Thanks for ample fing. Our mission.

Thank you so much for listening until next time. Stay safe, friends. Something was wrong is a broken cycle media production created and hosted by me, Tiffany rees.

If you like to support the show further, you can share episodes with your loved ones, leave a positive review, or follow something was wrong on instagram at something was wrong podcast. Our theme song was composed by glad rags. Check out their album wonder under thank you so much.

Hello hello.

If you like something was wrong, you can listen early and ad free right now by joining wondering plus in the wonderful APP or on apple podcast, prime members can listen. Add free on amazon music before you go tell us about yourself by filling out a short survey at wonder dot com slash survey.

Did you know that after world war two, the U. S. Government quietly brought former nazi scientists to a in a covered Operation to advanced military technology, or that in the nineteen fifties, the U.

S. Army conducted a secret experiment by releasing bacteria over sanford cisco to test how a biological attack might spread without alerting the public. These might sounds like conspiracy theories, but they're not their well documented government Operations that have been hidden away in classified files for decades.

I'm local mona, a marine core reconvert, and i've always had a thing for digging into the unknown. It's what LED me to start. My new podcast rejected declassified mysteries in its, I explore hidden troops and reveal some eye opening events like covered to experiments, secret Operations that those in power are, try to keep bury, follow reduction, be classified mysteries with me, luca mona, on the wondering APP. Or wherever you get your podcast to listen, add free, join wander plus in the wondering APP.