By Phil Cook

There is a well-orchestrated government-backed effort underway to allow women who participate in any sexual activity with a man to charge him with sexual assault or rape – whenever they choose to do so. Every man, married or dating, is at risk.

This unprecedented attack on dating teenage boys and all men began with an April 2011 Department of Education directive. The directive was issued without prior notice or opportunity for public comment: “[I]n order for a school’s grievance procedures to be consistent with Title IX standards, the school must use a preponderance of the evidence standard (i.e., it is more likely than not that sexual harassment or violence occurred).”

In October 2011, Caleb Warner was allowed to return to the University of North Dakota after being victimized by the university’s low standard of evidence. The accuser had filed claims of sexual assault with both the University and the municipal police department. Two investigations resulted — the university’s according to the preponderance standard, and the police’s according to the usual “clear and convincing” standard — and they could not have turned out more differently.

Warner was found guilty by his university and banned from campus after a swift investigation. Meanwhile local police reviewed the very same evidence, determined that Warner’s accuser was lying, and charged her with filing a false report.

Don’t think it could happen to any male you know attending college? Think again. Vice President Joe Biden has launched an active campaign in support of the Department of Education’s new directive.

The character Val in the Marilyn French novel, “The Women’s Room,” said, “All men are rapists.”  If the definitions are broadened sufficiently, it becomes true. This might be seen as the somewhat laughable assertions of a radical feminist fringe, but the U.S. government is acting on their behalf.

It’s no coincidence that the FBI has recently changed its definition of what rape is. The previous definition was in place for eighty years: “The carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will” The Uniform Crime Report Subcommittee has changed that definition to: “penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”

Has she had a drink or two of alcohol or used a drug? Then she’s “incapable of consent” even if she voluntarily became inebriated.

Los Angeles attorney and NCFM Vice President Marc Angelucci says, “Think about what the new definition of “rape” means. Every exploratory “hands-on” teenager in the back seat of a car or on a sofa in the parents’ basement is now at risk of being branded a “rapist”.  They kiss. His hand touches (“penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part”).  She does nothing (“without the consent” means he has the burden to get consent; she doesn’t have to express lack of consent). He stops touching.  Too late. The hand committed rape and the only question is whether she will press charges. By changing the definition at the FBI data collection level, all jurisdictions will come under pressure to change their underlying statutes to make the crime fit the Federal definition.”

Philip W. Cook is a board member of Stop Abusive and Violent Environments (SAVE), www.saveservices.org and the author of the forthcoming book, When Women Sexually Abuse Men-The Hidden Side of Rape, Sexual Assault, Stalking and Harassment (Summer 2012-Praeger).   He is the author of Abused Men-The Hidden Side of Domestic Violence (Praeger-2^nd edition 2009).