Once Donald Trump announced that Betsy DeVos was going to be his Education Secretary - a few months before I finished the manuscript - I had a pretty good idea of what was going to happen. He was going to overturn as much of what Barack Obama did, and the attendant social progress, as he could.

It's true that a dangerous combination of certainty and ignorance often shows up around sex and consent on campus. People on all sides of the issue have such strong feelings about it that they're blinded to the facts.

Harvey Weinstein is a monster. And what campus victims are talking about has a lot more gray in it - many more complexities.

After studying dozens of sexual assault cases, it is clear to me that the "he said/she said" aspect is a big part of what makes them fraught. Many experts agree with this. But that same fraught nature is reflected in both legal standards of consent and philosophical theories of consent.

Once Donald Trump announced that Betsy DeVos was going to be his Education Secretary - a few months before I finished the manuscript - I had a pretty good idea of what was going to happen. He was going to overturn as much of what Barack Obama did, and the attendant social progress, as he could.

As a journalist, I try to be as fact-based and objective as possible, though I'm also aware that objectivity is an illusion. This way of moving through the world is what separates journalists from activists.

If we agree that universities need to monitor sexual violence in various locations, and that they will require students to hew to a narrower set of rules than the wider world, how do we deal with putting these ideas into the brains of teenagers who have been schooled in the disgusting gender norms of our American culture for the previous eighteen years? This is the essential conundrum. Can we teach these relatively young dogs new tricks? I believe that we can.