Dear Sen. Krawiec, Use Some of That Lard – Concerning the “No Means No” Non-law

Dear Sen. Krawiec,

We need you to use some of that lard.

Remember that tweet you sent earlier this year about the Women’s March in Washington D.C.?


Not your best moment.

But since you equated lard with brains and the fact that much lard was actually sent to you directly, it might be time to use some of it to grease a pan and help sponsor a bill that could do away with something that many of those women who were at that Women’s March were protesting: a woman’s right to choose.

Specifically Senate Bill 553 (

Two days ago the News & Observer published a report entitled “‘NC is the only state where no doesn’t mean no’: Law says women can’t back out of sex.” In it Abbie Bennett talked about the State v. Way case that:

…set a precedent – ruling that a woman cannot revoke consent after intercourse begins, meaning that even if a woman said “no,” the intercourse would not be ruled rape.

The Supreme Court ruled that “if actual penetration is accomplished with the woman’s consent, the accused is not guilty of rape, although he may be guilty of another crime because of his subsequent actions.”

So for the next 38 years, women in North Carolina who allegedly agree to sex but change their minds or say “no” during intercourse aren’t protected by laws against rape (

That Supreme Court was the N.C. Supreme Court.

Bennett goes further,

State Sen. Jeff Jackson of Mecklenburg County thinks that’s absurd.

“Legislators are hearing more and more about women who have been raped and are being denied justice because of this crazy loophole,” Jackson told The Fayetteville Observer. “North Carolina is the only state in U.S. where no doesn’t mean no.”

I think it would be very interesting to hear your take on this matter.

In fact, you could even tweet it. I am sure that “Twitter Lesson was learned” in the past few months.