Consent Form Football: Fill & Download for Free

The credits of the following pictures goes to ChiRu Photography, the best photographers of IISc and the pictures are being posted with their prior consent. Follow their page for doze of awesome clicks!Now IISc!DiwaliMusical performanceFootball GroundFlash MobSwimmingDramaHockeyCampusCampusCampusCampusCampusCampusCampusCampusCampusMain BuildingCampusDance PerformancePoetry SessionsFireflies!Open DayAnd finally me!

It is remarkably difficult to make a law that defines a “gang” in such a manner that it encompasses what we consider to be a “gang” and yet does not cover activities that we do not wish to ban.Some years ago a group of Indiana legislators came up with a proposal for a law that would criminalize gangs based on the fact that many gangs have initiation rituals that involve consensual batteries, and proposed to use this as a marker to define a gang. This was chugging along great until someone pointed out that the law would make the Indiana University football team a “criminal gang”. The act of playing football consists of a great many physical contacts that would be criminal batteries except for the fact that the players have consented to those contacts. Because the football team is a group of people larger than whatever the number in the proposed statue (five, as I recall) and they routinely engaged in acts that would be criminal except for consent (in this case, practicing and playing football), they met the proposed definition of a “gang”. Clearly, this is not a workable definition.Now, perhaps you are willing to abolish football—and all other team contact sports—in order to deal with gangs. But most people are not willing to do so.We already have laws that make it illegal for people to conspire to commit crimes and to assist others in the commission of crimes. When one member of a gang commits a crime and the others assisted him or her in so doing, all of the people who participated in the crime can be prosecuted for their involvement. But we do not prosecute for mere association in the United States.

The answer is not because of what other people are saying. It wasn’t because he wanted to protect his reputation or because he struggled to find women willing to sleep with him. In fact, one of his victims stated that had he asked, she would have willingly had sex with him.The answer is that rape is about power and control, specifically in Cosby’s case. Cosby got off, sexually, on raping helpless women who didn't consent. If they had consented, he wouldn’t have enjoyed it as much. It’s as simple as that.Now there are plenty of people who are not rapists who enjoy this sort of thing and role-play it quite well. Just because you’re turned on by the idea of forcing someone doesn’t make you a bad person, but Bill Cosby acted on those urges.People don’t understand that when men are taught that having sex and “getting women” is what makes you powerful, that drive to seem powerful and manly supersedes any sexual desires. The stories of rapists unable to get aroused at all and needing injections or drugs to rape their victims is another example of this. It isn’t about sexual gratification, but about having power over someone who is helpless.We hear this exact same argument so much, from famous rapists like Cosby to the high school football star who would “never rape someone because he can get any girl in school he wants.” The narrative is that rape is about sex. The truth is, rape is about toxic masculinity and wanting to feel powerful. Sometimes it’s by overtly raping someone (as in Cosby’s case) and sometimes it is about men being told that they become “manly” when they have sex, and so if they have sex with someone they become more of a man. The desire to feel strong and manly supersedes anything else, including the consent of their potential partners. Being able to say you had sex is what is important, not the sex itself.Cosby got off on raping women, not having sex with them. The fact that people would consent to have sex with him is irrelevant.